DEBT REPORT AS OF JUNE 30, 2005 Presented to Augmented Audit, Business, and Technology Committee Office of the Chief Financial Officer April 20, 2006 Los Angeles Unified School District

DEBT REPORT AS OF JUNE 30, 2005 Presentation to Board of Education Charles A. Burbridge, Chief Financial Officer April 25, 2006 Los Angeles Unified School District

3 Debt Report  Required annually pursuant to Debt Management Policy.  Being submitted to the Board and District taxpayers for the first time.  Covers debt performance as of June 30,  Includes a wide variety of topics.

4 Topics Included in Debt Report  Bonded debt limitation.  Outstanding and unissued debt (G.O. Bonds and COPs).  Tax rate performance of issued G.O. bonds.  Interest cost of District debt.  Municipal debt market profile, including institutional investors who own District debt.  Credit rating performance.  Debt ratios, including performance against various debt benchmarks.

5 Highlights of Debt Report  District’s planned issuances of remaining K, R and Y bonds will not exceed our bonded debt limitation.

6 Highlights of Debt Report (cont’d)  Prudent debt management practices have resulted in lower projected tax rates paid by our G.O. bond taxpayers than originally estimated* Bond Measure Average Tax Rate Over Life of Bonds (Estimated at Time of Bond Election) Average Tax Rate Over Life of Bonds (Projected as of June 30, 2005)Difference** BB ($2.4 BN)$40.29$28.83$(11.46) K ($3.35 BN)$52.99$37.97$(15.02) R ($3.87 BN)$33.26$31.82$(1.44) *Tax rates are expressed as dollars per $100,000 of assessed valuation. **A negative number means that the tax rate is expected to be lower than originally projected, which means a lower tax burden for our taxpayers.

7 Highlights of Debt Report (cont’d)  District’s G.O. Bond credit ratings are “high quality” by Moody’s and S&P LAUSD’s Ratings

8 Highlights of Debt Report (cont’d)  District’s interest costs tend to be lower than market benchmark

9 Highlights of Debt Report (cont’d)  The Debt Report for Fiscal Year compares District’s debt ratios to other large highly rated issuers (a combination of counties, cities and school districts) per the Debt Management Policy District is well within policy targets and ceilings