Standard & Poor's raises Pittsburgh's credit rating three steps
Standard & Poor's, citing Pittsburgh's restored structural balance in operations and rising reserve funds, has raised the city's general credit rating three steps to A.
The new grade is S&P's sixth-highest level and matches the city's score from Fitch Ratings. Moody's Investors Service ranks the city A1, one step higher.
“The city has demonstrated a proven ability to maintain an enhanced credit profile featuring improved financial management and planning, consistently favorable budget performance, and strong reserves and liquidity,” Andrew Teras, an S&P credit analyst in Boston, said in a statement on Thursday to Bloomberg News.
Marissa Doyle, a spokeswoman for Mayor Luke Ravenstahl, could not be reached for comment.
Teras cited the involvement of the Intergovernmental Cooperation Agency, a state oversight board formed in 2004, and the city's coordinator under Pennsylvania's Act 47 program, which aids financially distressed municipalities. He said Pittsburgh has favorable long-term prospects because of a deep and diverse economy.
The city has balanced its budgets for the past six years, reduced debt to about $450 million and raised its credit rating from junk-bond status, though it still has a $1 billion employee pension liability.
The Act 47 recovery team has recommended that the state Department of Community Development grant the city financial independence. The ICA would retain state authority to approve city budgets.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.