Unionville advisers recommend short window to authorize bonds; April resolution and mid‑April market sale proposed

Financial advisers and the district’s underwriter presented a preliminary financing plan for the Unionville‑Chadds Ford School District’s long‑range facility projects at the March 11 work session and urged the board to authorize a parameters resolution in mid‑April to access current municipal market conditions.

A PFM adviser said the municipal yield curve and recent rate movement make borrowing attractive now and outlined a plan that would provide roughly $14 million in net proceeds in late May if the board adopts a parameters resolution (a maximum principal and maximum interest rate) and the financing team proceeds. The advisers noted IRS arbitrage rules that require reasonable expenditure of proceeds (generally 85% within three years) and that a small‑issuer exception can allow some positive arbitrage retention for smaller borrowings.

Advisers described a structure that layers principal where existing debt drops off to maintain flexibility for future capital needs; they proposed a 14‑year wrap structure but presented scenarios for shorter or longer durations. Trustees asked about refinancing timing for prior bonds (the presentation noted 2016 bonds are callable in 2026) and about the district’s practical borrowing limits. Presenters said the district’s debt profile and a strong credit rating support favorable pricing but emphasized standard diligence (credit rating call with Moody’s and underwriting due diligence) and paperwork timelines.

Key near‑term dates presented: a parameters resolution would be ready for the board on April 15, a market sale was tentatively placed on April 17, and proceeds would arrive in late May or early June after state approvals and closing steps. Advisers clarified they were not asking for action that night but requested the board consider the April parameters resolution to preserve market windows.

Board members emphasized balancing short‑term interest‑rate opportunities against long‑term debt service and flexibility, and asked staff to return recommended parameters and legal language for the April meeting.

Quote: “The interest‑rate environment right now for municipal bonds is attractive,” one adviser said, urging timely action.

Next steps: staff will finalize draft resolution language and financing parameters for the April 15 meeting; Moody’s and underwriting due diligence will follow if the board adopts parameters.