CAUBO Annual ConferenceCONSORTIA BORROWING
Saskatoon,Saskatchewan
JUNE 12, 2004
Agenda
• OSBFC Story - Our Team
• OSBFC’s Process
• Benefits of OSBFC
• Costs
3
“SIGNIFICANT FINANCIAL BENEFITS TO THE SECTOR”
$200,000,000$200,000,000(conservatively!!!)
4
“ROWING WITH THE PEOPLE”25 BOARDS
25 CEO’S
25 CFO’S
235 TRUSTEES
7 INVESTMENT BANKS
3 LEGAL FIRMS
2 MINISTRY’S
ONTARIO FINANCING AUTHOURITY
SO FAR……..
5
HOW DID WE GET STARTED?April 1998 – RESTRUCTURING OF BOARDS
Seed $ from Ministry of Education
Set up Catholic School Board Services Corporation; spun off OSBFC
Initiatives: Purchasing Construction, Facility & Energy Utilities Employee Benefits IT Consultants
6
Our Story - Our TeamFinancing Structure Description
Ontario School Boards Financing Corporation (“OSBFC”) was formed as a vehicle to issue debt on behalf of Ontario School Boards
OSBFC is a non-share capital, not-for-profit, special purpose corporation Each participating Board issues a debenture to OSBFC representing its debt
obligation The amount of the underlying debenture issued by each participating Board
is based on that Board’s capital requirements The liability of each Board is only for amounts owing under its own
debenture. There is no joint and several liability The underlying debenture for each participating Board ranks pari passu with
all other debentures and financial instruments issued by that Board OSBFC sells Ownership Interests that represent undivided co-ownership
interests in the debentures issued by the participating boards
7
Participating School Boards
OSBFC
Investors
Custodian
Debentures
DepositedDebentures
Ownership Interests
Semi-AnnualPayments on Debentures
Semi-Annual Payments
Net Proceeds of Offering
Net Proceeds of Offering
Our Story - Our TeamFinancing Structure Diagram
8
Series 2003 OfferingCredit Ratings
Prior to the 2003 offering, OSBFC obtained a third rating from Moody’s
– Three ratings are preferred by investors for frequent and large issuers OSBFC offerings enjoy the following strong credit ratings:
CIBC World Markets works with OSBFC and participating school boards to obtain and maintain the highest possible ratings
9
Our Story - Our Team
OFAPETER
HOWARTHCSBSA
Peter Derochie - President (Simcoe Muskoka Catholic District School Board)John Sabo - Vice President (York Catholic District School Board)Cathy Dempsey - Secretary-Treasurer (Halton Catholic District School Board)David Visser - Director (Durham Catholic District School Board)Terry Miller - Director (Dufferin-Peel Catholic District School Board)Paul McMahon - Director (Toronto Catholic District School Board)
MILLER THOMSON
MINISTRYOF
FINANCE
MINISTRY OF
EDUCATION
CIBCWORLDMARKETS
McMILLAN BINCH
DAVIES WARD PHILLIPS & VINEBERG
UNDERWRITING SYNDICATE:CIBC World Markets - LeadRBC-Dominion SecuritiesNational BankScotia Capital MarketsBMO Nesbitt BurnsLaurentian BankTD Securities
10
OSBFC Board of Directors GOVERNING BODY
CONTRACTING ORGANIZATION – Dealers, Lawyers, Trustee, Fund Manager, Executive Director
APPROVES FINANCING TERMS, STRUCTURE, PROJECTS
AUTHOURIZES THE EXECUTIVE (any 2) TO “PULL THE PIN”
REPRESENTS INTERESTS OF ALL PARTICIPANTS
11
OSBFC Executive DO THE DEAL AS APPROVED BY EACH TEAM FACILITATE/APPROVE THE PARTICIPANTS
ACCESSDRIVE TO CONSENSUS TO MEET ALL NEEDSMARKET OSBFCLIASE WITH BOARDS, MINISTRY OF
EDUCATION, OFA, SYNDICATE, LAWYERSNEGOTIATE CONTRACTSASSESS PERFORMANCE OF DEALS,
PARTICIPANTS & PARTNERSRESPOND TO INVESTOR QUERIESSTRATEGIZE & RUN THE DAY TO DAY!
12
OSBFC Participants Team
HAVE MET CREDIT QUALITY
ESTABLISH VOLUME
SET TERM(S), STRUCTURE,TIMING
AUTHOURIZE OSBFC EXECUTIVE TO COMPLETE TRANSACTION WITHIN PARAMETERS
TELL OUR STORY!!
REALIZE SIGNIFICANT BENEFITS AND RISK SHARING
13
OTHER OSBFC PROGRAMS
POOLED MONEY MARKET INVESTMENTS
POOLED SINKING FUND & INVESTMENT FUND MANAGEMENT
INTER-BOARD BORROWING & INVESTING
EXPLORING A LEASING PROGRAM
14
Our Story - Our TeamThe originating school boards had a number of key objectives to meet when assessing financing alternatives:
Cost To minimize all-in funding costs for participating boards To minimize cross subsidies between participating boards
Minimization of Risk To ensure that participating boards are responsible only for their own debt To ensure that debt servicing requirements are consistent with grant
payments from the Province To minimize refinancing risk
15
Our Story - Our Team Flexibility
To avoid restrictive covenants To minimize constraints on raising additional debt to meet future capital
requirements To maintain flexibility to add new boards To enable participating boards to access the market as quickly as possible
and with relative ease of execution
Legal and Regulatory To ensure consistency with the current legal and regulatory framework To ensure a default by one participant has no effect on the other participants
16
Summary of OSBFC Issue Participation by School Board 25 school boards (17 Catholic, 8 Public) have participated in OSBFC pools
III. The OSBFC Story
School Board
I ssue 2000-A1 2000-A2 2001-A1 2001-A2 2001-A3 2002-A1 2002-A2 2003-A1 2003-A2C oupon 7.20% 6.30% 5.90% 6.25% 6.55% 5.70% 5.90% 5.30% 5.80%Term (years) 25 10 10 15 25 15 25 10 25Bluewater DSB - - - - - - - $15,290 $19,731 $35,021Brant/Haldimand Norfolk C DSB - - $6,112 - $18,888 - - - - 25,000C sdc du C entre-Est de l'Ontario - - - - - - - 6,130 7,910 14,040C sdc des Aurores boreales - - - - - - - 4,958 6,398 11,355C sd du Nord-Est de l'Ontario - - - - - - - 6,112 7,888 14,000Dufferin-Peel C DSB $60,650 $57,596 27,842 - 86,045 $103,134 - - - 335,268Durham C DSB 21,754 48,571 - - - - - - - 70,325Durham DSB - - - - - 70,000 - - - 70,000C DSB of Eastern Ontario 9,445 9,555 - - - 1,318 $11,180 6,989 9,019 47,506Halton C DSB 22,097 36,808 19,889 - 61,466 - - 3,842 4,958 149,060Halton DSB - - - - - - - 21,830 28,170 50,000Hamilton-Wentworth C DSB 10,937 11,063 1,269 - 3,922 2,637 22,363 8,845 11,415 72,451Huron Perth C DSB - - - - - - - 2,401 3,099 5,500London DC SB - - 9,149 - 28,273 - - 4,803 6,197 48,422Niagara C DSB - - 5,867 - 18,133 2,729 23,146 4,245 5,477 59,597Peel DSB - - - $150,000 - - - - - 150,000S imcoe Muskoka C DSB 14,914 68,155 - - - 2,824 23,945 - - 109,838Sudbury C atholic DSB - - - - - - - 4,771 6,156 10,927Toronto C DSB 6,463 6,537 - - - 11,858 100,552 38,956 50,271 214,637Upper C anada DSB - - - - - - - 10,915 14,085 25,000Upper Grand DSB - - - - - 2,145 18,192 16,950 21,873 59,160Waterloo C DSB 3,828 3,872 12,383 - 38,268 - - - - 58,350Wellington C DSB - - 6,733 - 20,807 3,354 28,446 - - 59,340Windsor-Essex C DSB - - - - - - 32,177 24,013 30,987 87,177York C DSB 49,912 103,088 10,757 - 33,243 - - 18,952 24,457 240,409
Total $200,000 $345,245 $100,000 $150,000 $309,045 $200,000 $260,000 $200,000 $258,091 $2,022,381
Outstanding Amount by I ssue ($000) Total OSBFC Borrowings by School
Board
17
Availability Size Cost Terms Rating
Bank FinancingGood for short termborrowing of smallamounts
Typically sufficientfor small to mediumsize borrowingrequirements
Can be relativelyexpensive if longerterm financing isrequired
May have morestringent terms andconditions thanbond marketfinancing
Rating typicallynot required
Financingthrough theMunicipality
Dependent onwillingness ofMunicipality
Dependent onrelative issuerequirements ofMunicipality
Low if Municipalrating is higher thanthe School Boardrating
Terms andconditions set bythe Municipality
Rating of theMunicipality used
IndependentBond Issue
Good, depending onamount required
Available range from$20 million to $200million
Issue size of lessthan $75 million willresult in a liquiditypremium
Limited terms andconditions, generalobligation of theschool board
One or two likelyto be required
OSBFC
Good, likely to be twoissues annually overthe short to mediumterm
Participating issuescan have sizerequirements from$10 million to $200million
Large size resultsin sharing of costsand a lower spreaddue to liquidity
Limited terms andconditions, generalobligation of theschool board
Two required
Alternate Financing Approaches Comparison of various long-term financing approaches
18
Alternate Financing Approaches Comparison of financing approaches
19
Alternate Financing Approaches One consideration for school boards is whether to develop a “pooled
approach” or a “go it alone” approach Over the past year, school boards in Ontario have demonstrated the viability
of both approaches: 25 school boards have raised debt through a pooled approach 3 school boards have raised debt through individual debt issues Many have “gone alone” to banks etc.
The choice of a pooled financing approach vs. individual financings will be influenced by:
Financing objectives Size of financings Relative cost Risk minimization Financing flexibility Work effort required
20
Benefits of OSBFC
Multiple Member Benefits of Pooled Financing Most competitive terms and conditions Costs distributed over many participating members
Process Benefits of Pooled Financing Efficient Process
Centralized negotiations Centralized documentation Limited time and resources committed by individual participating members
Individual participating member credit ratings not necessary Only OSBFC, the special purpose funding corporation, is rated
Established framework for subsequent issues Orderly, well understood risk profile Ease of subsequent debt issues Reduced costs of subsequent issues
21
Benefits of OSBFC
Size Benefits of Pooled Financing Ability to negotiate attractive issuance costs
Legal fees Marketing costs Underwriting commissions
Increased liquidity Wider investor base Individual investors able to purchase larger amounts Lower spreads
Regular issuance Borrow only for current capital requirements Borrow in small or large amounts on attractive terms Participate only in subsequent issues if new capital is required
Intermediary Cost Benefits of Pooled Financing No fees payable to municipalities for issuing debt on behalf of participating
member
22
Benefits of OSBFC A pooled financing results in a number of important benefits, including:
Provides participants with modest financing requirements an opportunity to efficiently access the capital markets
Provides participants with economies of scale by spreading issue costs among multiple parties
Creates a special purpose vehicle that can be used by different groups of participants at different times to access the capital markets
Pooled issues are generally more attractive to investors as the larger issue size results in better market liquidity and therefore tighter spreads
Enables investors to diversify their exposure to a particular market segment amongst multiple issuers, while only investing in a single instrument
In general, the pooled financing concept works best for groups of participants that have the following characteristics
Each participant’s borrowing requirements cannot be optimally achieved independently
Each participant has similar strong credit quality Consensus among participants on financing structure
23
Benefits of OSBFC
Benefits for Investors The OSBFC debt issues have many attractive features for investors:
Strong credit ratings Strong provincial support of educational funding and OSBFC financing
structure Large issue size provides good liquidity Pooled structure enables investors to diversify risk among participating
school boards Amortizing structure or sinking fund reduces refinancing risk OSBFC debt issues are the benchmarks for school board financings
24
Syndicate In order to create a liquid market for the OSBFC bonds, a syndicate of
investment dealers is required
On a go forward basis, it’s expected that the syndicate will be adjusted based on those dealers that can add the most value
25
Costs Objective of pooled financing is achieve the lowest rate of interest for school
board debenture and to minimize all-in funding costs for participating school boards
The most significant expenses are: Commission fees Legal fees Rating agency costs Printing costs
Commission fees are calculated as a percentage of the total debenture issue Legal fees are shared equally and were 50% lower in the second issue
(savings will depend on the number of boards participating) Rating agency fees are shared equally and totaled approximately $90,000 on
the first issue and zero for the second issue Printing costs were 50% lower in the second issue and were shared equally All-in funding costs for OSBFC Issue #1 amounted to approximately 1.04% Time commitments for each board to structure and bring an issue to market
have not been included; however, pooling structure should reduce aggregate time commitment
Contacts
27
Questions and Answers