1. The Use of Online Technological Resources for Enhanced Disclosure

2. Legal Landscape for Muni Disclosure –Municipal securities exempt from registration requirements of 1933 Act and reporting requirements of 1934 Act –Municipal securities not exempt from anti-fraud provisions –SEC Rule 15c2-12 indirectly regulates municipal issuers When underwriting, dealers must ensure that municipal issuers agree to provide information to MSRB on a continuing annual basis Issuers enter into continuing disclosure agreements to satisfy that requirement

3. Types of Continuing Disclosures under 15c2-12 –Annual financial and operating data –Audited financial statements (if available) –Event-based notices –Notification of late filings or failure to file required information –Typically a filing deadline and once-per year undertaking

4. Where can you find disclosure information? –Before July 1, 2009 Nationally Recognized Municipal Securities Information Repository (NRMSIRs) –Standard & Poor’s Securities Evaluations –DPC Data Inc. –Bloomberg Municipal Repository –FT Interactive Data Corp State Information Depositories (SIDs) www.ohiosid.comwww.ohiosid.com Central Post Office www.disclosureusa.org –July 1, 2009 & After EMMA www.emma.msrb.orgwww.emma.msrb.org

5. Criticisms of Municipal Market Disclosure –More frequent and complete financial information from corporations –Concerns of “culture” of non-compliance –Absence of uniform disclosure protocols –Lack of publicly available information MCDC Initiative

6. Appetite for Voluntary Disclosure –EMMA now accommodates voluntary disclosures for bank loans and alternative financings –Price discovery tool and trade data on EMMA website –Increasingly sophisticated investor portals on municipality websites

7. Benefits of Increased Disclosure –Liquidity –Greater market access –Stronger market demand –Decreased volatility

8. Ohio’s Checkbook Initiative –Drill-down, detailed information is more current than audited financial statements –Supplementary to required disclosures –Provides high level of context for spending data –State checkbook: www.ohiocheckbook.comwww.ohiocheckbook.com –Local government checkbooks –Pension fund checkbooks

9. Moving towards Continuous Disclosure Charlie Francis Director, Government Finance Solutions, OpenGov Use of Online Technological Resources for Enhanced Disclosure © OpenGov, Inc. - 2016

10. Charlie Francis has more than forty years of local government financial management experience in both the public and private sector, including twenty years of experience as a Chief Financial Officer. cfrancis@opengov.com Charlie Francis Director & Subject Matter Expert in Government Finance Solutions © OpenGov, Inc. - 2016

11. Framework For Determining A U.S. Local Government Rating Indicative Rating ›Institutional framework ›Economy ›Management ›Financial Measures –Budgetary flexibility –Budgetary performance –Liquidity ›Debt and contingent liabilities Overriding Factors ›Positive overriding factors ›Negative overriding factors

13. Institutional Framework Fiscal policy framework System support Intergovernmental funding

15. Economy Demographic Economic Wealth and Income Economic Development

16. Management Revenue and expenditure assumptions Budget amendments and updates Long term financial planning Long term capital planning Investment management policies Debt management policies Reserve and liquidity policies

17. Financial Measures Budgetary flexibility Budgetary performance Liquidity

18. Debt & Contingent Liabilities Debt burden Pension liabilities Other post-employment benefits.

19. What Entities Are Doing Now Colorado

20. Next Generation for Continuous Disclosure

21. Q & A

22. MUNICIPAL DISCLOSURE INVESTOR PERSPECTIVE Nicole Byrd 2016 NFMA Board

23. National Federation of Municipal Analysts (www.nfma.org) Founded in 1983 Not-for-profit 501 (c)(6) organization Represents analysts from all facets of the industry Roughly 1,400 current members

24. NFMA Goals Educational enrichment Improved disclosure Promote professionalism in credit analysis Advocacy role

25. Municipal Disclosure Survey Better understand member views of the state of disclosure Provide member data to support NFMA responses regarding disclosure Released survey a few months ago 200+ NFMA members responded

26. About 25% of respondents are satisfied with current level of disclosure

27. But…EMMA has greatly improved access to disclosure

28. Importance of disclosures to NFMA members

29. Comments on disclosure, themes More timely disclosure More uniformity/consistency in presentation of financial information Ability to extract data (currently pdfs or worse) Availability of unaudited interim financials (nothing new, what currently exists) Disclosure of activities/events that impact credit quality (e.g. new debt, whatever form) Consistent view on what constitutes a material event Improve clarity of notices (plain English) Notice of material event resolution Make information available publicly (rating agencies vs. investors)

30. No content below the line State Debt Management Network Webinar – October 27 th, 2016 Robin Prunty Head of Analytics and Research US Public Finance Copyright © 2016 by S&P Global. All rights reserved.

31. No content below the line Agenda Private & Confidential 31 1.Discuss our recently published article - “How Quality And Timeliness Of Information Is Incorporated in the U.S. Public Finance’s Rating Process” published 10/26/16. 2.Discuss how ratings may be affected by lack of timely information 3. How disclosure is viewed from a credit perspective

32. No content below the line How Quality And Timeliness Of Information Are Incorporated Into the U.S. Public Finance Rating Process Private & Confidential 32 1)What is the policy relating to information quality? S&P Global Ratings monitors and updates public credit ratings on an ongoing basis. We require sufficient information in both quality (received from a reliable source on a timely basis) and quantity to maintain our ratings. 2)How does S&P Global Ratings obtain information utilized during the rating process? S&P Global Ratings relies on issuers and their agents and advisors for the accuracy and completeness of the information submitted in connection with credit ratings and the surveillance of credit ratings. We typically expect to receive such information within three months of initial request, but this timeline could be shorter or longer if circumstances warrant.

33. No content below the line How Quality And Timeliness Of Information Are Incorporated Into the U.S. Public Finance Rating Process Private & Confidential 33 3) If information is not received on a timely basis can the rating be affected? “S&P Global Ratings may raise, lower, suspend, place on CreditWatch, or withdraw a credit rating, and assign or reverse an outlook at any time, in S&P Global Ratings’ sole discretion.” 4) How is timely information from an obligor viewed from a credit perspective? For USPF issuers and obligors, we view proactive disclosure and dissemination of information as a positive management characteristic.

34. No content below the line Thank you Robin Prunty Managing Director T: 212.438.2081 robin.prunty@spglobal.com 34

35. No content below the line Copyright © 2016 by Standard & Poor’s Financial Services LLC. All rights reserved. No content (including ratings, credit-related analyses and data, valuations, model, software or other application or output therefrom) or any part thereof (Content) may be modified, reverse engineered, reproduced or distributed in any form by any means, or stored in a database or retrieval system, without the prior written permission of Standard & Poor’s Financial Services LLC or its affiliates (collectively, S&P). The Content shall not be used for any unlawful or unauthorized purposes. S&P and any third-party providers, as well as their directors, officers, shareholders, employees or agents (collectively S&P Parties) do not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, timeliness or availability of the Content. S&P Parties are not responsible for any errors or omissions (negligent or otherwise), regardless of the cause, for the results obtained from the use of the Content, or for the security or maintenance of any data input by the user. The Content is provided on an “as is” basis. S&P PARTIES DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ANY WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR USE, FREEDOM FROM BUGS, SOFTWARE ERRORS OR DEFECTS, THAT THE CONTENT’S FUNCTIONING WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED OR THAT THE CONTENT WILL OPERATE WITH ANY SOFTWARE OR HARDWARE CONFIGURATION. In no event shall S&P Parties be liable to any party for any direct, indirect, incidental, exemplary, compensatory, punitive, special or consequential damages, costs, expenses, legal fees, or losses (including, without limitation, lost income or lost profits and opportunity costs or losses caused by negligence) in connection with any use of the Content even if advised of the possibility of such damages. Credit-related and other analyses, including ratings, and statements in the Content are statements of opinion as of the date they are expressed and not statements of fact. S&P’s opinions, analyses and rating acknowledgment decisions (described below) are not recommendations to purchase, hold, or sell any securities or to make any investment decisions, and do not address the suitability of any security. S&P assumes no obligation to update the Content following publication in any form or format. The Content should not be relied on and is not a substitute for the skill, judgment and experience of the user, its management, employees, advisors and/or clients when making investment and other business decisions. S&P does not act as a fiduciary or an investment advisor except where registered as such. While S&P has obtained information from sources it believes to be reliable, S&P does not perform an audit and undertakes no duty of due diligence or independent verification of any information it receives. To the extent that regulatory authorities allow a rating agency to acknowledge in one jurisdiction a rating issued in another jurisdiction for certain regulatory purposes, S&P reserves the right to assign, withdraw or suspend such acknowledgement at any time and in its sole discretion. S&P Parties disclaim any duty whatsoever arising out of the assignment, withdrawal or suspension of an acknowledgment as well as any liability for any damage alleged to have been suffered on account thereof. S&P keeps certain activities of its business units separate from each other in order to preserve the independence and objectivity of their respective activities. As a result, certain business units of S&P may have information that is not available to other S&P business units. S&P has established policies and procedures to maintain the confidentiality of certain non-public information received in connection with each analytical process. S&P may receive compensation for its ratings and certain analyses, normally from issuers or underwriters of securities or from obligors. S&P reserves the right to disseminate its opinions and analyses. S&P's public ratings and analyses are made available on its Web sites, www.standardandpoors.com (free of charge), and www.ratingsdirect.com and www.globalcreditportal.com (subscription), and may be distributed through other means, including via S&P publications and third-party redistributors. Additional information about our ratings fees is available at www.standardandpoors.com/usratingsfees. Australia Standard & Poor's (Australia) Pty. Ltd. holds Australian financial services license number 337565 under the Corporations Act 2001. Standard & Poor’s credit ratings and related research are not intended for and must not be distributed to any person in Australia other than a wholesale client (as defined in Chapter 7 of the Corporations Act). STANDARD & POOR’S, S&P and RATINGSDIRECT are registered trademarks of Standard & Poor’s Financial Services LLC. 35 Private & Confidential