rinancinu
w m -^ "WBTT-  ^ ^J
olid Waste
in Small ( ommnnilirs

-------

-------
     FINANCING SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT

           IN SMALL COMMUNITIES
   This report (SW-57ts) was written by

              ERIC R. ZAUSNER
  U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Solid Waste Management Programs
                  1971

-------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Oovcrnment Printing Office
                  Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price 25 cents
                         Stock Number 5502-0022

-------
                         FJNANCING SOLID WASTE  MANAGEMENT

                               IN SMALL COMMUNITIES


                                Eric  R. Zausner*


         The solid waste management problems of our  urban  areas  are  becoming

     recognized, and considerable effort is being made  to design  and  implement

     better methods of waste  management there.  Their large size  and  many

     sources of funds facilitate the use of  internally  available  managerial

     talent or outside consultants to  aid  in planning and decision  making.

          In some  respects, however, the problems of  the small  community

     are  even more pressing.   In addition  to technical  problems,  there  are
i
     financial difficulties related to the acquisition  of funds to  construct

     and  operate"!"  facilities.

         There are many  reasons why small communities  are  having financial

     problems.  Public demand for better service and  more stringent legislation

     has  greatly  increased  the need for more sophisticated  and  expensive waste

     handling facilities.   This coupled with the competition for  funds  by

     numerous other sources (schools,  police organizations, etc.) has resulted

     in an acute  lack of  funds to finance  solid waste collection  and  disposal

     facilities.   There are many financial techniques available,  but  their
          "Formerly  Chief,  Management  Sciences  Section,  Operational  Analysis
     Branch,  Division of  Technical  Operations,  Bureau  of Solid  Waste Manage-
     ment.
          ^The  financial  aspects  of actual  disposal  operations  are discussed
     in An Accounting System  for  Sol-id Waste Management  in  Smalt  Communit-ies 3
     Public Health Service  Publication No.  2035-

-------
specific advantages or disadvantages to small communities must be made




clear.  Failure to do this can result in excessive costs or perhaps worse--




failure to acquire the funds needed.




     This paper will discuss the three major financing techniques (pay-




as-you-go, leasing, and long-term borrowing) as they apply to small




communities.   More indirect methods, such as private contracting or




grants utilization, may also partially solve problems but are not con-




sidered within the scope of this report.






                              Pay-As-You-Go






     Since this is one of the most widely used and understood techniques




available, only a brief discussion of its most salient features and




limitations vis-a-vis small communities will be undertaken.




     Although commonly labeled "pay-as-you-go," this technique is in




reality "pay before you go."  The funds required to finance new facilities




must be accumulated before the installations are constructed.  Regardless




of whether a user charge or a general fund contribution is employed, the




money must be accumulated from past operations.  Herein lies one of this




method's major drawbacks for the small community.  To a large degree,




the problems of financing a solid waste management system have developed




rather suddenly, and accumulated funds for present and future needs may




be nonexistent.  Unfortunately, "pay-as-you-go" usually cannot be started




today to buy needed facilities tomorrow.  Herein lies the problem for




many  large cities.  In many small communities, however, waste collection




and disposal  facilities are not really capital intensive.  Sanitary




landfill can be used rather than incineration.  Similarly, large numbers

-------
of packer and/or transfer trucks are not usually required.  Therefore




the capital requirements may not be large; and a readjustment or




initiation of user charges to accumulate future replacement funds, in




conjunction with an immediate influx of money from the general fund




(to purchase equipment needed now) can succeed in making "pay-as-you-go"




a viable technique.  To keep the method self-supporting, however, several




measures must be taken.




     1.  User charges must be periodically updated to offset  increasing




expenses and equipment needs.




     2.  The planning required to maintain the user charge system should




be handled at the overall municipal management level, where adequate




talent can be afforded.  As an alternative, a consultant can be re-




tained to perform the preliminary work and to effect periodic updatings.




     3.  If the administration of the user charge proves burdensome and




expensive, the problem can be solved by having the fee appear on utility




bills.




     A.  A strong and well documented public information campaign must




precede any upward adjustments in user charge rates or general fund




contributions.  If this is not done, funds may be diverted to other




municipal operations at the expense of solid waste management.  By their




nature, fire trucks or police cars are more attractive than garbage




vehicles.




     In small  communities experiencing rapid increases in population




or industrial  growth (and consequently higher waste generation rates),




the "pay-as-you-go" method may not prove practical.  It forces present

-------
citizenry to pay for facilities designed for future demands.  If the




waste generation surges, straight user charge financing may place a




severe burden on the population.  The people must then not only pay for




their own operating costs but also quickly accumulate the funds needed




for the construction of large and possibly expensive facilities.  Under




these circumstances, user charges may become too high, and other methods




of financing would be more effective.  In this case, general fund




contributions or another form of financing can be used to pay for all




or most of the initial costs.  Future user charges can then support




annual operating expenses and debt amortization.






                                  Leasing






     For the purposes of this paper, leasing and leasing with an option




to buy will be considered together, even though they may differ with




regard to contractual agreements, equity, contract life, and many other




features (legal as well as practical).




     Leasing is an external financing technique that can make the "pay-




as-you-go" method workable.  In effect, a facility is acquired now by




a private firm, but municipal payments are postponed until after con-




struction and are spread over an extended period.  This technique is,




therefore, particularly useful  in financing expensive facilities when




they are intended for use by future citizenry;  they are too expensive




to acquire outright;  lack of time prohibits the accumulation of the




funds requi red.




      In addition to being a simple way of postponing and spreading cash




requirements,  leasing has other advantages for  the small community.

-------
The legal work involved is far less than that required to effect a




bond issue, and voter approval is not usually needed prior to entering




into a lease agreement.  On the other hand, leasing is generally more




expensive than long-term bond financing.  This does not mean its use




should not be considered--especial ly if municipal credit is poor or




bonds are difficult or impossible to issue.  Since annual costs are




reduced  if long-term leases are entered into, these should be sought




if allowed by local  or State statutes.




     Leasing may also become more economical as private industry




shows more interest and as competition increases.  Many companies now




lease their mobile equipment, and interested municipalities might




investigate using this technique.  In fact, the purchasing economies




available through a large corporation might make the leasing of




collection trucks more economical than purchase for a small municipality,




In addition, new financing techniques may soon make economical leasing




available for complex and expensive facilities as well.  At least




one company is currently offering municipalities this alternative.




     If  leasing is arranged with another nonprofit municipal agency,




decreased borrowing costs and increased buying power may result.  For




instance, a central  garage agency could finance the purchase of police




cars, fire trucks, road maintenance equipment, and waste collection




vehicles and lease them to the municipal operating agencies.  The




revenues from the leases could be used to meet interest and principal




repayment for a revenue bond issue (as discussed below).  Although




not widely used, this financing technique can have application in




certain situations that small communities may face.

-------
                           Long-Term-Bocrowing







     Long-term borrowing is the final and most widely used method of




financing capital outlays.  More than 50 percent of all capital




expenditures made by State and local governments in the last 10 years




were financed through long-term borrowing.  The two bond instruments




currently in use are general obligation bonds and revenue bonds.  Each




has its advantages and disadvantages for small communities.




     General obligation bonds are the most commonly used instrument.




Because the full faith and credit of the issuing community are behind




them,  their resulting low risk makes interest costs less than for




revenue bonds.  A revenue bond pledges only that the income from




specific operations will be used to meet interest and principal




repayments.  The possibility of default is, therefore, greater, and




the interest rates are higher.  General obligation bonds may occasionally




be more expensive than comparable revenue bonds, but this situation  is




unlikely to occur in small communities for several reasons.  First,




the investing public knows very little about the facilities used in




processing solid wastes, and they have not been financed with revenue




bonds very often.  This makes it difficult for the investor to




determine the risk characteristics  involved.  This uncertainty can




cause such bonds to carry high interest rates and face a poor market.




Also, the feasibility study and other data required to issue a revenue




bond tend to be difficult and expensive for a small community to




obtain.  The cost of obtaining this specialized information is largely




independent of  the size of the bond  issue and is usually prohibitive




for small communities with small revenue bond issues.

-------
     Conversely, the data required to issue a general obligation bond




for solid waste facilities have probably been compiled to support general




bond issues for schools, sewage treatment plants, etc.  This  informa-




tion is usable virtually unchanged.  Separate and detailed engineering




analyses, which have high fixed costs, are not required to document a




general obligation bond issue.  For a small community going it alone,




its fund requirements would, therefore, rarely be large enough to make




revenue bond financing economical.  If, however, practical or legal




constraints prohibit the use of general obligation bonds, revenue




bonds or perhaps leasing would have to be considered.




     Several participating communities that form an authority to handle




waste collection and disposal may be of sufficient size to utilize




revenue bonds effectively.  User charges paid by the participating




communities would generate the income needed to meet revenue bond re-




quirements.  Or, as mentioned previously, a central garage or other




combination of activities in one small municipality might be  large




enough to allow revenue bond financing.




     Regardless of the bond instrument used, the interest rates of




small communities exceed those of larger ones (Table 1).  For example,




depending on the bond rating, interest costs for communities of under




10,000 people in 1965 varied from 3.169 to 3.659 percent; in contrast,




communities with between 10,000 and 250,000 residents incurred interest




costs (depending on the bond rating)  that varied between 3-093 and




3-501.

-------
                                      TABLE 1

                 AVERAGE ANNUAL INTEREST RATES ON BONDS  IN SMALL-
                      AMD MEDIUM-SIZE MUNICIPALITIES  IN  1965
Bond type
A
B*
Unrated
Average matur
Under 10,000
population
3.169
3.376
3.434
i ty 1-9 yrs
10,000-250,000
population
3.093
3.184
3.289
Average matur i
Under 10,000
population
3-335
3.503
3.659
ty 10-19 yrs
10,000-250,000
popu lat ion
3-233
3.386
3-501
     "Bonds rated Aaa, Aa,  A, Baa,  Ba,and B by Investment Bankers Association
of America.
          There are several reasons why small communities consistently face

     higher borrowing costs.  Because they usually issue a small  dollar volume

     of bonds at infrequent intervals, the relatively fixed overhead costs

     associated with preparing and marketing the issue result in  higher costs

     per dollar issued.  This is true for both bond instruments,  but more

     pronounced with regard to revenue bonds.  In addition, these small

     issues are unattractive to large investors because they are  not easily

     traded and are usually not rated by major investment advisory services.

     Moody's Investor Service and Standard and Poor's do not rate issues  if

     the size of the issuing community is below a certain level.   Furthermore,

     Moody's does not rate bonds of a government subdivision unless its total

     debt outstanding exceeds $600,000; Standard and Poor's does  not do so

     unless the figure is at least $1 million.  The issues of many small

     communities are, therefore, never rated, regardless of their quality,

-------
and this results in higher interest rates.  The number of "A" and "B"




rated and of unrated bonds issued by small- and medium-size communities




between 1961 and 1965 clearly indicates that, on an average, over 50




percent of all  issues offered by small municipalities were unrated, while




only about 10 percent of those from medium size communities were not




rated (Table 2).






                              TABLE 2




       NUMBER OF ISSUES FOR SMALL AND LARGE COMMUNITIES (1961-1965)"
Under 10,000 population
Year

1961


1962


1963


1964


1965

Bond type
A
B
Unrated
A
B
Unrated
A
B
Unrated
A
B
Unrated
A
B
Unrated
Number of
issues
186
141
322
127
125
361
134
145
481
178
144
448
115
125
440
Percent of
total
29
22
49
21
21
58
18
19
63
23
19
58
17
18
65
10,000-250,000 population
Number of
i ssues
1086
1137
153
912
889
146
1018
1135
144
946
918
197
945
959
225
Percent of
total
46
47
7
46
45
9
44
49
7
46
44
10
44
45
11
     "Source:   Investment Bankers Association of America.






     In addition to the factors mentioned, small communities usually do




not have,  and  can rarely afford to hire, the talent needed to supply

-------
detailed financial  and legal  advice.  Many also fail  to recognize the




importance of hiring experienced consultants who know the intricacies




of the bond market.   This increases the chances of poor decisions and




costly mistakes being made and results in higher borrowing costs.




     With nowhere else to go, a small  community may be forced to market




its issue locally.   This can be expensive for several reasons.  There




may be only a limited number of individuals whose income tax bracket




is high enough to take advantage of the issue's tax exempt status.  The




yield must, therefore, be increased to make the issue more competitive




with non-tax exempt issues which are attractive to less tax conscious




investors.  The supply of local funds  may also vary widely and differ




substantially from the national market.  Poor timing can be very




expensive when floating an issue in the local market.





                     Recommendations for Bond Issues





     Long-term borrowing has its problems and resultant costs for small




communities, but the technique will continue to be used.  The following




list of guides is presented, therefore, to help minimize excessive




interest costs, obtain the best terms, and successfully market the issue.




     1.  Accurate financial, demographic, and economic data must be




available to potential investors.  The information should be  routinely




collected and clearly tabulated.  The  longer the period covered, the




more readily an investor can ascertain the risks involved.   It is usually




a  lack of information, not undesirable or poor data, that raises an




investor's  risk assessment.  If no data are available, they should be
                                   10

-------
reconstructed from existing records and steps taken to assure that similar




information  \s routinely collected.




     2.  A long-range financial plan should be formulated for the whole




community as well as its solid-waste-related activities.  Borrowing should




be coordinated--fewer but larger issues can save money.  Refinancing can




also be cheaper  if it is combined with a new issue, because fixed overhead




costs will drop.  In addition, a financial plan will allow adequate time




to prepare issues for sale and to wait until market conditions are




favorable.




     3.  The costs of marketing during unfavorable periods will be borne




for the life of  the issue.  If the bond is tendered locally, the market




there should be  carefully compared to the national market.  Large differences




may warrant offering the issue elsewhere.




     4.  Favorable features of the community issuing the bond should be




well publicized  to offset adverse factors such as municipal size or the




lack of a rating by bond services.




     5.  Experienced consultants should be employed.  Financial and legal




counsel can more than pay for itself in improved legal contracts, terms,




rate setting, and marketing.  If a revenue bond is to be issued, a really




competent consulting engineer should be retained to make the feasibility




study,because its acceptance by investors will  be directly related to the




consultant's stature in the field.




     6.  Utilize fully any free technical assistance available at State




and Federal  levels.   The amount of technical assistance available in




analyzing, selecting,  and preparing bond issues varies from State to
                                    11

-------
State and should be determined in each instance.   In some cases, a State




review is required.  Federal  assistance has been  available chiefly through




the public facilities loan program, as amended in 1961.  This  program author-




izes the establishment of a technical  advisory service to assist in  financial




evaluations.  The Office of Solid Waste Management Programs  can also provide




assistance in evaluating financing techniques and related problems.




     7.  Credit assistance programs should also be reviewed for their




applicability.  Under the facility loan program,  the Department of Housing




and Urban Development is authorized to purchase the securities and ob-




ligations of or make loans to cities,  towns, and  counties with less than




50,000 residents if they cannot secure credit at  "reasonable terms and




conditions" from private lending organizations.  These loans can be made




for up to 100 percent of the project's cost and up to ^0 years duration.




Loans can be made for a variety of public work projects, including water




and sewer systems and possibly solid waste systems. The Farmers Home




Administration  (FHA) makes loans to public agencies and nonprofit corpora-




tions primarily serving rural areas to develop waste treatment systems.




The FHA also offers assistance in assessing economic feasibility and




financing techniques.   In addition, the Economic Development Administra-




tion, Department of Commerce, is offering or will soon offer technical




assistance  in strengthening the bond  issues of smaller communities.






                         Summary and  Conclusions






      Financing  a solid waste management program  in small communities  is




possible with one or more of the techniques discussed.   Operating costs
                                    12

-------
are most easily met through general fund contributions or a direct user




charge.  The latter allows some freedom in setting rates and independence




from other municipal operating requirements.




     Selecting the financing technique most suited to capital expenditures




Is not as clear cut but is certainly the most critical part of the problem.




The decision probably depends on the types of facilities required and the




urgency and magnitude of the purchase.  The small community does not need




a large number of collection vehicles or much landfill equipment so it




can probably accumulate money from user charges or the general fund.




If this is not possible, leasing is a usable but possibly more expensive




alternative.




     On the other hand, when the facilities required are complex and




relatively expensive, revenues from user charges or the general fund may




not be adequate.  This could be particularly true if there is insufficient




time to plan for the accumulation of funds or if the facilities are to




be large enough to meet future demands.  In these cases, long-term




borrowing may be the only practical alternative.




     When long-term borrowing is necessary, the general obligation bond




instrument is probably the easiest to prepare and market and the cheapest




in terms of interest.  The revenue bond has some advantages, but a small




community rarely requires facilities large enough to make such financing




economical.  If a solid waste authority comprising several  municipalities




is utilized, revenue bond financing can be attractive.




     There are other considerations which usually enter into the selection




of a financing technique.  Political as well as legal  constraints may force
                                   13

-------
municipal officials to select certain methods over apparently more economical

or desirable ones.  For instance, a widespread dislike of user charges might

force them to use general funds to operate solid waste collection and

disposal facilities.  In another  instance, statutory  limits on bond

indebtedness might restrict the use of general obligation bonds.  In

fact, legal limits on interest rates might preclude bond financing entirely.

Nonetheless, if long-term financing is anticipated, experienced consultants,

technical assistance, and possibly credit assistance  should all be fully

uti1i zed.

     In conclusion, financing techniques are available and  if flexibility

is maintained and all options are objectively and professionally evaluated,

a practical and economical financial plan can be designed and implemented.

As a result, the funds needed to  construct and operate good solid waste

collection and disposal facilities can be obtained.


                              BIBLIOGRAPHY


Clark,  R. M.,  and R. 0. Toftner.  Financing municipal solid waste
     management systems.  Journal of the Sanitary Engineering Division,
     Proc.  ASCE, 96(SA4) :885-892, Aug. 1970.

National Association of Counties  Research Foundation.  Solid waste
     management--financing.  Guide No. 6.  Washington, [1969.]  [18 p.]

State and local public facility needs and financing;  study  prepared  for
     the Subcommittee on Economic Progress of the Joint  Economic Committee,
     Congress of the United States,  v.  1 and 2.  Washington, U.S. Govern-
     ment Printing Office, Dec.  1966.  [1146 p.]
                                                                 yo362
                                                          U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1971 O—427-416

-------