articles Ratings /ratings/en/research/articles/230412-u-s-local-governments-credit-brief-maryland-counties-and-municipalities-means-and-medians-12689248 content esgSubNav
In This List
COMMENTS

U.S. Local Governments Credit Brief: Maryland Counties And Municipalities Means And Medians

COMMENTS

U.S. Housing Finance Agencies 2023 Medians: Fiscal Stability Reigns For Now With Some Uncertainty On The Horizon

COMMENTS

Table Of Contents: S&P Global Ratings Credit Rating Models

COMMENTS

Five Takeaways From U.S. Public Finance In 2024: Uneven Credit Trends Emerge Amid Rising Uncertainty

COMMENTS

U.S. Not-For-Profit Higher Education Outlook 2025: The Credit Quality Divide Widens


U.S. Local Governments Credit Brief: Maryland Counties And Municipalities Means And Medians

Overview

Maryland county and municipality (or local government [LGs]) credit conditions remain stable and strong, in S&P Global Ratings' view, supported by robust economic growth, particularly associated with the Washington-Arlington-Alexandria and Baltimore-Columbia-Towson metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs), below-average unemployment, above-average wealth and income metrics, and typically very strong reserves.

S&P Global Ratings expects Maryland LGs' credit quality will remain stable over the next year. Management teams in Maryland generally adhere to formalized policies and procedures, supporting stability in financial performance. In addition, although a number of LGs in Maryland have coastal exposure from either the Atlantic Ocean, Chesapeake Bay, or the Potomac River, historically this risk has been mitigated by strong management teams with considerable resilience planning and policies.

Personal income in Maryland currently stands at $69,817 per capita or 109% of the national level, which is among the highest in the nation. In addition to generally strong economic conditions, Maryland counties and municipalities benefit from the lack of state restrictions on increasing property tax rates, providing significant revenue-raising flexibility.

S&P Global Ratings maintains credit ratings on 19 counties and 12 municipalities in the State of Maryland. All Maryland counties and more than 80% of the state's municipalities have high investment-grade ratings ('AA-' or above). In addition, 43% of Maryland LGs are rated 'AAA'. Since Jan. 1, 2022, there have been no upgrades or downgrades, demonstrating considerable stability in this sector. Two LGs were placed on CreditWatch with negative implications, one of which was due to lack of timely information, and remains on CreditWatch. We resolved the other CreditWatch placement by affirming the rating and assigning a stable outlook.

What We Are Watching In 2023 And Beyond

image

In 2022, most Maryland LGs experienced strong economic recoveries following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, which is a function of resilient, mature, and diverse economic activity within the state. This resiliency, combined with typically conservative budgeting and strong overall financial policies and practices, has generally led to sizable reserve increases. In particular, property tax revenue growth has been fueled by a strong residential real estate market, with steady price appreciation.

Income tax revenues also remained strong for Maryland LGs. Income tax rates in in the state are set by counties and Baltimore City, and income tax revenues are shared with cities and towns. Although unemployment rates increased during the pandemic, these temporary increases to local unemployment rates were offset by large stimulus payments, which in turn increased resident incomes and consumption levels, thereby bolstering tax revenues. Likewise, corporations have seen increased revenues spurred by federally strengthened consumer spending.

Maryland's 0.6% average annual population growth over the past decade should continue to spur economic growth longer term. In addition, the state and local governments within Maryland, along with school systems and other agencies, were allocated approximately $12.3 billion in American Rescue Plan Act funds, which will be spent over the next couple of years. Specifically, the state was allocated $9.5 billion, while LGs were allocated $2.8 billion. We believe this federal stimulus will help municipalities ward off the impacts of a potential recession on revenues and capital spending.

Spotlight On Environmental, Social, Governance Factors

image

Maryland LGs, particularly those located along or near the coast, face a host of climate risks throughout the year. According to Office for Coastal Management, 72% of Maryland residents live in coastal areas including 3,190 miles of shoreline. Some of the environmental issues the state faces include polluted stormwater runoff in Chesapeake Bay, the nation's largest estuary; sea-level rise, particularly for Maryland's southern counties; flooding; and extreme hurricane events intensified by warming Atlantic Ocean waters. In our view, LGs are likely to face increasing expenses from implementing resiliency efforts to combat these climate risks.

Although just two states border Chesapeake Bay (Maryland and Virginia), the bay's watershed--or the area that drains into the bay--covers parts of six states, consisting of Delaware, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia, as well the District of Columbia (DC). According to the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, significant measures are necessary to reduce pollutants and restore the bay. The Chesapeake Clean Water Blueprint, a roadmap for improving the bay's water quality and environment, calls for the six states and DC to reach milestones by 2025 to achieve significantly reduced levels of pollution. Each of the states and DC have committed to various milestones. However, the 2022 State of the Bay Report indicates progress to date has been insufficient and these states and DC are not on track to reduce pollution to levels needed for a healthy bay by 2025.

Furthermore, Maryland suffered a setback in efforts to reduce pollutants given operational challenges at two of the state's largest wastewater treatment plants located in Baltimore. We understand the State of Maryland filed a lawsuit against Baltimore pertaining to inadequately treated wastewater discharged into the Chesapeake Bay, resulting in a number of regulatory violations. We understand both state and city management have taken steps to remediate operational vulnerabilities.

Some scientific reports indicate sea-level rise in Chesapeake Bay could surpass two feet by the year 2050 because of melting glaciers and ice caps and increasing temperatures. Sea-level rise allows for storms to creep further inland, thereby eroding land. To combat this erosion, we understand the Army Corps of Engineers works with LGs in the state and continuously undertakes a host of dredging and beach renourishment projects.

We currently view social risks for Maryland LGs as neutral. The state maintains above-average income and wealth levels compared with those of the nation, as well as moderate population growth averaging nearly 9% each decade since 1990. We understand that, according to state projections, population growth is expected to continue in the long term, but at a slower rate, averaging an estimated 4%-5% each decade through 2040. Although the state's unemployment rate is currently slightly above the national level, historically over the past decade Maryland's unemployment rate has remained closely tied to the national level.

We view governance factors as strong and as an opportunity for Maryland LGs, which have considerable revenue-raising ability and can increase tax rates without voter approval. We note the state as well as its LGs maintain a strong S&P Global Ratings' institutional framework score, indicating the legal and practical environment in which the state and LGs operate is strong. Furthermore, the vast majority of Maryland LGs maintain either a good or strong FMA, indicating governments maintain formalized and well-embedded financial practices and policies, in addition to strong internal controls. Lastly, retirement expenses and liabilities are typically very affordable with manageable liabilities.

Table 1

Maryland counties: Medians
Rating
AAA AA+ AA-
Projected per capita EBI (%) 119 90 83
Market value per capita ($) 137,323 102,456 79,368
Available general fund (%) 21 35 30
General fund performance (%) 3.2 7.9 4.6
Cash and expense (%) 38 39 49
Carrying charge (%) 6.7 6.0 6.3
Pension ARC + OPEB as % expense 4.1 3.7 2.6
EBI--Effective buying income. ARC--Annual required contribution. OPEB--Other postemployment benefits.

Chart 1

image

Table 2

Maryland counties: Financial Management Assessment
Rating
Score (%) AAA AA+ AA-
Strong 91 100 0
Good 9 0 100

Table 3

Maryland counties rating list--General obligation
As of March 30, 2023
This list was prepared by individuals on behalf of the USPF Group of S&P Global Ratings and is current as of March 30, 2023. For the most up to date, accurate, and complete information on any credit ratings referenced in this list, please visit www.standardandpoors.com.
Organization Rating Outlook
Allegany Cnty AA- Stable
Anne Arundel Cnty AAA Stable
Baltimore Cnty AAA Stable
Calvert Cnty AAA Stable
Caroline Cnty AA- Stable
Carroll Cnty AAA Stable
Cecil Cnty AA+ Stable
Charles Cnty AAA Stable
Dorchester Cnty AA- Watch Neg
Frederick Cnty AAA Stable
Harford Cnty AAA Stable
Howard Cnty AAA Stable
Montgomery Cnty AAA Stable
Prince George's Cnty AAA Stable
Queen Annes Cnty AAA Stable
St Marys Cnty AA+ Stable
Washington Cnty AA+ Stable
Wicomico Cnty AA+ Stable
Worcester Cnty AA+ Stable

Table 4

Maryland municipalities: Medians
Rating
AAA AA+ AA A+ A
Projected per capita EBI (%) 149 115 65 54 67
Market value per capita ($) 178,283 136,217 75,844 32,461 53,858
Available general fund (%) 50 52 33 379 40
General fund performance (%) 4.0 10.3 1.6 15.1 9.0
Cash and expense (%) 109 76 53 259 21
Carrying charge (%) 4.5 5.6 4.3 2.8 11.6
Pension ARC + OPEB as % expense 4.2 9.5 10.3 2.3 7.2
EBI--Effective buying income. ARC--Annual required contribution. OPEB--Other postemployment benefits.

Chart 2

image

Table 5

Maryland municipalities: Financial Management Assessment
Rating
Score (%) AAA AA+ AA A+ A
Strong 100 20 50 0 0
Good 0 80 50 0 0
Standard 0 0 0 100 100

Table 6

Maryland municipalities rating list--General obligation
As of March 30, 2023
This list was prepared by individuals on behalf of the USPF Group of S&P Global Ratings and is current as of March 30, 2023. For the most up to date, accurate, and complete information on any credit ratings referenced in this list, please visit www.standardandpoors.com.
Organization Rating Outlook
Aberdeen AA+ Stable
Annapolis AA+ Stable
Baltimore Mayor & City Council AA Stable
Bowie AAA Stable
Cheverly Twn AA+ Stable
Cumberland Mayor & City Council A Stable
Frederick City AA+ Stable
Hagerstown AA Stable
Mayor and City Council of Ocean City AA+ Stable
Mayor and Council of Rockville AAA Stable
Salisbury AA Stable
Westernport Twn A+ Stable

This report does not constitute a rating action.

Primary Credit Analyst:Timothy W Barrett, Washington D.C. + 1 (202) 942 8711;
timothy.barrett@spglobal.com
Secondary Contacts:Kaiti Vartholomaios, New York + 1(212) 438 0866;
kaiti.vartholomaios@spglobal.com
Jennifer K Garza (Mann), Dallas + 1 (214) 871 1422;
jennifer.garza@spglobal.com
Research Contributor:Akash J Pandey, CRISIL Global Analytical Center, an S&P affiliate, Mumbai

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. Rating-related publications may be published for a variety of reasons that are not necessarily dependent on action by rating committees, including, but not limited to, the publication of a periodic update on a credit rating and related analyses.

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 nonpublic 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.spglobal.com/ratings (free of charge), and www.ratingsdirect.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.spglobal.com/usratingsfees.

 

Create a free account to unlock the article.

Gain access to exclusive research, events and more.

Already have an account?    Sign in