Archive for the ‘Chapter 9’ Category

Jeb Bush & Newt Gingrich Push for State Bankruptcy Code Provision

Thursday, January 27th, 2011

This is a very interesting article by Jeb Bush and Newt Gingrich on why Congress should enact a new Bankruptcy Code chapter to allow states to file bankruptcy. One of the interesting things about the article is who it is written by. There have been other scholars to opine that states should be allowed to file bankruptcy, e.g., David Skeel. But this is the first time I have seen conservative pundits with a significant following express the same opinion. Usually, conservatives are seen as opposed to bankruptcy.

The article addresses probably the biggest financial obstacle faced by state governments: union agreements and the associated pension obligations. When times were good, states entered into lavish union agreements. Now that we are in a fiscal downturn, those agreements are unsustainable. The question is how to get out of them. Apparently, Messrs. Bush and Gingrich believe that the best method is to allow those states to file bankruptcy.

Chapter 9, Municipal Bankruptcy, has worked well for several municipalities that had the same problem, although on a smaller scale, and it appears there is a growing chorus of those who believe that it will work well for states.

How to Let States File Bankruptcy

Friday, January 21st, 2011

Allowing states to file bankruptcy raises a host of questions and issues. This article from the New York Times addresses some of them.  One issue is that states are sovereign and could just refuse to honor particular contracts. But if they do, their bond ratings get lower, which costs them more money in the long run. Of course, filing a bankruptcy could lead to a really low bond rating. But, right now, there is no legal mechanism equivalent to declaring bankruptcy for a state.

David Skeel, a well-respected bankruptcy professor, opined that Congress should give states a way to go bankrupt. Professor Skeel seems to rather lightly dismiss the constitutional concerns:

Start with the issue of constitutionality. The main objection to
bankruptcy for states is that it would interfere with state
sovereignty—the Constitution’s protections against federal meddling in
state affairs. The best known such barrier is the Tenth Amendment, but
the structure of the Constitution as a whole is designed to give the
states a great deal of independence. This concern is easily addressed.
So long as a state can’t be thrown into bankruptcy against its will,
and bankruptcy doesn’t usurp state lawmaking powers,
bankruptcy-for-states can easily be squared with the Constitution. But
the solution also creates a second concern. If the bankruptcy framework
treads gingerly on state prerogatives, as it must to be constitutional,
it may be exceedingly difficult for a bankruptcy court to impose the
aggressive measures a state needs to get its fiscal house in order.

He may be right about this, but it seems to me that sovereignty is a little more complex than that. But let’s say we get past sovereignty. How would it work?

We now have more than 70 years of experience with a special chapter of
the bankruptcy code—now called Chapter?9—which permits cities and other
municipal entities to file for bankruptcy. For decades, this chapter
did not get a great deal of use. But since the successful 1994 filing
for bankruptcy by Orange County, California, after the county’s bets on
derivatives contracts went bad, municipal bankruptcy has become
increasingly common. Vallejo, California, is currently in bankruptcy,
and Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, is mulling it over. The experience of
these municipal bankruptcies shows how bankruptcy-for-states might
work, what its limitations are, and why we need it now.

Once concern I would have is the complexity of state finances to be handled in the bankruptcy court. The complexity of state bankruptcy seems that it would dwarf municipal bankruptcies. On the other hand, the GM bankruptcy was pretty complex in itself and there have been a lot of complex bankruptcies in recent years. Maybe this would be something a bankruptcy judge could handle.

I guess we will see if anything comes to fruition.

Amendments to California Chapter 9 Bill

Wednesday, May 26th, 2010

As I previously noted, the California Senate is considering a bill that would limit the right of municipalities to file for bankruptcy protection. The primary movers behind the bill are public employee unions, who were none too happy with the result of the Vallejo bankruptcy case. The bill originally provided that cities had to get approval from a commission to file a bankruptcy and the commission had the power to limit or condition the ability to file Chapter 9, including potentially, a requirement that the union contracts not be rewritten. The appointees to the commission would almost unanimously have been labor-friendly, so Chapter 9 as a negotiating tool would have been gone. The bill, however, has now been amended to allow municipalities to override the commission’s decision. This sounds to me, a lot like a credit counseling requirement for cities. Punch your ticket before you file. Once you have your decision from the commission, you can overrule it and file the case. The only benefit to anyone would be the increased fees to attorneys representing the municipality at the commission hearing and any party who is collecting on a judgment and would be helped by the delay.

And, in an interesting twist, the Local Government Committee Chairman (Dave Cox, who voted against the bill in committee) asked to have the bill sent back to committee to consider these amendments.

Bill would limit municipal bankruptcies in California

Tuesday, April 20th, 2010

The almost unfettered power that unions possess in California takes one’s breath away. One place that is not the case is in Chapter 9, a.k.a., municipal bankruptcy. In Chapter 9, a city can renegotiate union contracts in a fair and open forum. But the California Senate is trying to limit the right of municipalities, including hospitals and water districts, to file Chapter 9.

The Senate Local Government Committee on Monday approved legislation that would require cities to first secure permission from an obscure appointed state agency before they could file for bankruptcy.

That panel would have the authority to force cities and local districts, including those providing water service and hospital care, to slash budgets elsewhere before seeking bankruptcy protection.

“It’s a bad idea,” Jay Goldstone, the city of San Diego’s chief operating officer, said in an interview. “The state should not be dictating whether a local government does or does not qualify for bankruptcy. … That’s what the courts should be for.”

* * *

Coincidentally, Goldstone is one of the appointees to the California Debt and Investment Advisory Commission, which would be granted the new oversight power. The commission now provides local governments with advice and technical assistance on debts and investments.

Bankruptcy is not a job for the commission, Goldstone said.

“This just adds another bureaucratic layer at a time when we probably need less bureaucracy, not more,” he said.