Election impact on muni bonds, tax policy, and the future of public finance

Transcription:

Transcripts are generated using a combination of speech recognition software and human transcribers, and may contain errors. Please check the corresponding audio for the authoritative record.

Mike Scarchilli (00:05):
Hi everyone and welcome to the Bomb Buyer Podcast, your trusted source for insights into the world of municipal finance. I’m Mike Scarchilli, editor-in-Chief of the Bond Buyer, and today we bring you a special episode covering the recent election results and their potential impact on the municipal bond market. In this episode, our senior infrastructure reporter, Caitlin Devitt, is joined by our team of expert reporters for an in-depth analysis of election outcomes across the nation from changes in congressional power dynamics to state and local bond measures. As Congress looks likely to address major tax reforms next year with provisions of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act set to expire. The implications for municipal finance could be profound. Our team dives into the election’s, impact on tax policy, leadership changes and key congressional committees, and the potential threats and opportunities these shifts may bring to the muni market. From national level updates to regional highlights, this episode provides a comprehensive look at where the municipal finance landscape may be headed following the 2024 election. So without further ado, let’s get into this special election episode.

Caitlin Devitt (01:19):
Hi, welcome to our Special Elections podcast at The Bond Buyer. I’m Caitlin Devitt, infrastructure reporter, and I’m here with many of our reporters. But first is Scott Sowers, our man in Washington, one of our men in Washington, and Scott and I are going to chat about the national rundown. All elections are important of course, but this one is especially important for the municipal bond market. That’s because Congress next year is expected to take up tax reforms, tax reform as many provisions in the 2017 Tax Cut and Jobs Act, which was Donald Trump’s signature legislation are set to expire. So the tax debate is going to be probably substantial, especially for Republicans control all of Congress and will no doubt impact the municipal industry. The impact ranges from demand for municipal bonds to borrowing costs for cities and states. The big ticket item we’re watching is any moves to nibble away at or fully eliminate the tax exemption.

(02:20):
Many in the market think it’s going to be vulnerable as lawmakers look for revenue to offset the cost of the TCJA provisions amid what’s expected to also be a record deficit. So on Tuesday, Trump won the White House. Republicans took the Senate. As of this morning, we’re recording it on Thursday, Nov. 7, Senate elections in Arizona, Nevada, and Pennsylvania had not been called, but so far Republicans have a 52 seat majority in the Senate and on the house side. As of today, there remain 31 uncalled races among the called races, Republicans hold the 210 to 194 advantage. Most polls give Republicans the edge in final races, but it’s going to take us a few more days to figure that out. As we wrote about this week, a sweep by the GOP poses more risks to the muni market because it’s expected to bring more significant action than a divided government would. So we wait and see leadership of the Congressional committees are important, is important to the municipal market, especially on those committees that we watch closely. That’s something that Scott has been covering for the last few months. So Scott, let’s take a look at a few of the scenarios.

(03:35):
So if Democrats take the House, what happens to the house ways and means, which is of course where all tax policy originates?

Scott Sowers (03:47):
Hi Caitlin. The general consensus is that Richard Neal, who is currently the Ranking Member of Ways and Means, would take over that position. He’s been there a long time and as you know, he’s considered to be a steady ally of the muni world.

Caitlin Devitt (04:04):
Yes. And he was the helm previously, so he would be retaking that seat. So that would be interesting. What about transportation, infrastructure?

Scott Sowers (04:15):
Transportation and infrastructure? If the Democrats take over, it would probably be Rick Larson, who’s the Democrat from the state of Washington, a staunch supporter of the Biden administration, and he’s also been a strong supporter of reauthorizing the bipartisan infrastructure law. He’s been talking about that for months. So I would think that he would be a good choice in terms of what the municipal bond market would like to see.

Caitlin Devitt (04:54):
He’s the ranking member now, correct? Sort of as you just alluded to there. The next Congress is also going to be taking up the next Surface Transportation Reauthorization Act, so that’s going to be a big deal. So he would play a huge role in that. What about financial services?

Scott Sowers (05:16):
I’m assuming it would be Ranking Member Maxine Waters. She’s from California, obviously outspoken and very liberal. The few times that I’ve sat in on their hearings, the issue that comes up over and over again is the whole Basel end game debate, which is targeted at making banks hold more in reserves. The Republicans don’t like it. The Democrats seem to be sort of neutral about it, but I’ve even heard people on the Federal Reserve who aren’t quite on board with the whole thing.

Caitlin Devitt (06:02):
Yeah, I’ve heard some Democrats who are not on board with the whole thing either. That’s pretty controversial. It seems like they’ve backed off a little bit too, and the regulators have backed off a little bit amid heavy opposition from the banks on that. Alright, so what about if Republicans take the House, which as I said earlier is kind of the expectation, what’s going to happen at Ways and Means?

Scott Sowers (06:26):
Yeah, I would assume that Jason Smith would retain the seat he was installed. I can’t remember who. He was not the heir apparent originally. There was somebody else who was supposed to take it over, someone who had been on the committee longer than him, but he got the nod because he was a big supporter of President Trump and also quite outspoken in terms of not anything from the Biden administration. He has been sort of the focal point for all the debates over what’s going to happen with the TCJA because as you already mentioned, any kind of major tax proposal is going to go through Ways and Means. And assuming the Republicans do stay in control, he’s going to be the guy leading that group. He has set up 10 tax teams. This started, I think it was in April, of Republican only members of the committee to examine the various provisions of the TCJA and come up with solutions or plans as to what they’re going to keep and what they’re going to get rid of. Some of those provisions have bipartisan support from both sides, especially the deduction for individual income taxpayers. But the controversial stuff, of course, is always about SALT, which we can get into later if you want to, but unless something crazy happens, it’s going to be more of the Jason Smith show.

Caitlin Devitt (08:12):
Yeah, and I’ve seen reports that he says he wants to, one of his priorities is to move fast with those tax teams, which I think are unlike in the past. Those tax teams I think are just partisan. I think it’s just Republicans making those up. That’s right. All right, so let’s talk Senate Banking. That was a big upset, three-term Ohio Sen. Sharon Brown is out. What’s next for Senate Banking committee?

Scott Sowers (08:40):
Well, it’s going to be Tim Scott, I would assume he’s the ranking member and also very much a staunch Trump supporter. The other thing that happened on that committee is John Tester is out. He sat on that as well, and he lost his bid in Montana to, what’s his name? You had just sent me some stuff earlier that Tim Scott is going to advocate for housing measures, which I thought was very interesting. I was trying to wade through the position points. I’m always trying to read between the lines and see what it is that they’re really trying to do. And the one thing that stuck out to me was in terms of the housing, he wants to eliminate the qualification of mobile homes, having to have a chassis on the bottom of them. This is kind of what defines this is what make mobile homes. Mobile homes is they got wheels on the bottom of them, and that’s a law. They have to have the chassis to qualify as mobile homes. And the reason this is important is it ties back into building codes. If something’s called a mobile home, then the building codes aren’t as stringent as a home that is not mobile. So the production home builders in the country are always trying to soften the building codes so they can build houses cheaper. And so I’m assuming that the mobile home thing is tied back to that, but unless something unexpected to happened, it’s going to be Tim Scott assuming the Republicans retain.

Caitlin Devitt (10:36):
Interesting. Yeah, housing was a big issue in the election for sure on both sides. That’s going to be something that I would imagine the new administration’s going to want to take up. So what about Senate Finance? That’s going to play a big role next year for sure. It’s an important committee.

Scott Sowers (10:53):
Senate Finance is currently chaired by Ron Wyden, and if the balance of power switches, it’ll be Mike Crapo and he’s from Idaho and he is considered to be no stranger to fixed income.

Caitlin Devitt (11:13):
Yeah, that’ll be an interesting choice. And I know that he said, I’ve read some reports that he’s floated this idea that because they would be extending the TCJA provisions would just be an extension of current law. Perhaps they don’t need to find the roughly $4 to $5 trillion it would cost to offset those provisions because it’s simply an extension of current law. So that’s a potential workaround. You’ll see how much traction that gets, but if it does get a lot of traction if they’re able to do it, that of course might lessen any threat to the tax exemption. Also on the committee side, I’d add that Environment and Public Works as a committee, it’s important to our market. It looks like Shelly Moore Capito from West Virginia said to take over. So if there’s a reconciliation bill or an effort to unwind some of the Inflation Reduction Act spending, which has been a bone of contention for Republicans, she’s going to take the lead on that. So Scott, you mentioned SALT. Trump, it was kind of interesting. The salt cap was passed the TCJA and then Trump sort of flipped a little bit during the campaign and said he was kind of in favor of maybe lifting that or tinkering with it. Tell us a little bit about what you expect to see with salt.

Scott Sowers (12:28):
So the most clear direction I have on SALT from Jason Smith, he did an interview on CNBC, this is probably two weeks ago, and they asked him point blank what are going to do about SALT? And he said at the time that it would be retained and that they could see raising the cap on it and also eliminating the marriage penalty because right now it’s limited to, I think it’s $10,000 is the cap on the deduction, and that is whether you’re single or whether you’re married. So if there’s two of it, you can’t claim 20, you can only claim 10, which they consider to be a marriage penalty.

(13:16):
I listened to a bunch of tax people talk about the future of SALT and are they going to lift it, are they going to eliminate it? Are they going to extend it? And there doesn’t seem to be much of a consensus, but everybody seems to agree, well, except for what’s his name, that this is a major revenue generator for the federal government and there’s no way they can get rid of it unless they find something else to replace it with something that also generates that much revenue, which takes you back to the fear of losing the tax exemption for muni bonds. But the most reasonable predictions that I’ve heard, knowing how things go in Washington, D.C., is nothing will happen with the SALT cap. It’ll be extended because no one will be able to agree on what to do. So they’ll do nothing and just keep it as it is.

Caitlin Devitt (14:16):
Alright, interesting prediction. Okay, well the muni bond lobby has its work cut out for it next year. We know they’ve been gearing up for it, so we’re looking forward to that. Thank you, Scott. Looking forward to your reporting on the new administration as it gets settled. And now let’s turn to the regions. Let’s start in the Northeast with our reporter Christina Baker.

Christina Baker (14:35):
Hi, thanks for having me. Thanks. Yeah. So the Northeast only had around $1.3 billion of bond proposals on the ballot this year, very few of which came from the biggest issuers in the region. The election results obviously haven’t been finalized yet, but with most of the votes counted, we can see that almost every measure passed electorally. The Northeast also wasn’t very exciting. Every governor and treasurer election went to the incumbent or the incumbents party, and neither party flipped a state legislature. So far, Pennsylvania and Maine are still counting ballots for local races. So one of the chambers in one of those states might flip.

(15:24):
We can start in Rhode Island for the bond elections. A statewide bond referendum hasn’t failed in Rhode Island since 2006 and November 5th was no different. Voters approved a little over $343 million in four separate elections for things like higher education, housing, parks, and arts and culture. Providence, Rhode Island, also passed a $400 million deal for schools by almost a 90% margin. Maine was the other state with statewide bond referenda. They had three deals of $10 million, $25 million and $30 million. All three passed with a little bit over half of the vote, and the biggest issuance they approved was $30 million for developing and maintaining hiking trails, which fun fact was publicly and financially supported by LL Bean in Vermont. The biggest deal was in Colchester where voters approved a $115 million issuance for facility improvements for its schools. And if we go south to Maryland, Baltimore had $250 million of bonds on its ballot, broken up into four different issuances, all of which were approved with well over 80% of the vote.

(16:36):
The proceeds will go towards schools, affordable housing, community and economic development and infrastructure projects. Pennsylvania had almost no bonds on its ballot, but there was a $3 million bond issuance in a Bucks County township that would benefit a pool complex. And it is notable because it is the only Northeast bond deal so far that voters denied on November 5th as far as I know. Now, the federal election results do have interesting implications for the northeast. I’m going to use New York as an example. The MTA was supposed to start congestion pricing tolls this summer and New York Governor Kathy Hochul exploited a procedural quirk to prevent those tolls from going into effect, creating a $16 billion budget gap in the MTAs current capital plan. Now, Hochul said she was putting the tolls on pause, but she refused to say how long that pause might last. And the congestion pricing plan had been in the work since the Trump administration and his administration refused to approve it.

(17:48):
So if Hochul continues to hold up the plan into the new year, which he has signaled she might do, Trump may intervene and kill congestion pricing once and for all and the MT A will lose that source of revenue for the indefinite future. Meanwhile, the MTAs Next Capital Plan, which starts next year, has more than a $30 billion budget gap. And Tuesday’s election pretty much confirmed that that gap will have to be filled by the state legislature rather than the federal government. Many transit systems and infrastructure projects across the country and in the Northeast are in a similar situation. SEPTA, for instance, is waiting on funding from Pennsylvania state legislature and they have no idea whether they’re going to get it and they’re now realizing that they are in dealing with the federal government that is much less friendly than the one that they had for the last four years. So next we will hear from Robert Slavin in the southeast.

Robert Slavin (18:53):
Thanks, Christina. Three of the five biggest bond referendums in the Southeast United States passed on Tuesday. Voters approved bonds are sets of bonds in Nashville, Tennessee, Charlotte, North Carolina, and Fairfax County, Virginia. They’ve rejected them and carry North Carolina and Lancaster County. South Carolina voters approved the Southeast biggest bond proposal. Nashville’s $2.1 billion revenue bond that will help finance the choose how you move transportation project by a 66% to 34% margin. The plan aims to improve safety on the city streets, offer public transportation 24 hours a day, 365 days a year for the first time in the city’s history. Upgrade two thirds of the city’s intersections to smart signals so drivers spend less time at red lights and complete a walk and bike network carry North Carolina voters rejected the second largest proposal proposed set of bonds one a $516 million parks and recreation bond and the other a $30 million housing bond.

(20:01):
Nearly 60% of Lancaster County voters voted against a $588 million general obligation bond measure for a school district. Charlotte voters approved three bonds, 67% approved transportation bonds totaling $283 million, 64% approved housing bonds totaling $100 million and 71% approved $62 million of neighborhood improvement bonds. Finally, 66% of Fairfax County voters approved $180 million in transportation bonds and 70% of them approved $126 million in public safety project bonds and other news of interest to bond holders, North Carolina and Puerto Rico elected new governors Tuesday, North Carolina elected Democrat Josh Dy, who is replacing Democrat Roy Cooper. Puerto Rico elected a new progressive party member, Jennifer Gonzalez Colon to replace fellow NPP member Pedro Pierluisi as governor. New progressive party support statehood Puerto Rico Gonzalez Colum is a Republican whereas Pierluisi is a Democrat, but it remains to be seen if the switch in leadership at the helm changes Puerto Rico policy. The NPP seems to have gained a majority of seats in both legislative chambers. This should make things easier for Gonzalez Colon compared to Perisi who has had to deal with chambers dominated by an opposition party. Next my colleague Jennifer Shea will present the Midwest.

Jennifer Shea (21:37):
Thank you, Robert. And now we go to a commercial break. Welcome back. So I’ll start by discussing some battles for control of state legislatures and then highlight a few bond referendums and other ballot measures. Worth noting. There are some Midwest states that have strong one party rule like Ohio’s Republican trifecta or the Democratic trifecta in Illinois. Trifectas do appear to lead to savings for local government issuers and lower yields in the secondary market. According to a paper presented at a Brookings conference this summer and covered in The Bond Buyer. However, other states are more mixed in Wisconsin, for example, leading up to the election, we saw a months long power struggle between Democratic governor and the state legislature’s Republican controlled joint finance committee. The committee had refused to release funding for things like biting PFAS, contamination boosting healthcare access in western Wisconsin after hospital closures there and funding conservation projects. In July, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled that the joint finance Committee had subsumed the executive power.

(22:47):
This election also followed the release of new legislative maps drawn by Evers and passed by the General Assembly after 14 years of Republican majorities In 2024, control of the legislature was a toss up. Republicans held onto power Tuesday, winning control of the state Senate and taking 53 of the assemblies. 99 districts in Minnesota power sometimes has been shared between Republicans and the Democratic Farmer Labor Party. Although the DFL won a trifecta in 2022 polls before this election showed control of the Minnesota House was up for grabs. Minnesotans were voting on all 134 seats this election. The Minnesota Senate was evenly divided after a DFL. State Senator resigned to run for Congress in June and her former seat was the only one on the ballot this November after Tuesday’s vote. The State House was evenly tied for the first time since 1978, but two races are likely to go to a recount.

(23:46):
So control of the house is still unclear. The DFL party held onto control of the state Senate 34 to 33 winning the special election for that empty seat in Michigan. Democrats won a trifecta in 2022, but Republicans needed to flip only two seats to rest control of the State House. Back this year, all 110 seats were on ballots in 2024. On Tuesday, Republicans retook power in the State House flipping four districts previously held by Democrats, but Democrats will keep their slim majority in the state Senate. There were plenty of bond referendums this year in the Midwest, at least 158 total Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, and Illinois led the list. Omaha had six city bond measures on the ballot. None of them required a tax increase. The $333 million of general obligation bonds would be used to finance new vehicles and gear for first responders. Improved parks, upgrade storm sewers and reduced flood risks, speed up street repairs, complete road projects, and built downtown police and fire stations as well as expand the city’s convention center.

(24:49):
All six bond measures passed and then there was the $183 million Green Bay Area Public Schools general obligation bond referendum. It was among the largest school referendums in state history and the district’s largest in at least two decades. The referendum passed 66% to 34%. It will not bring a property tax increase. District officials told local news outlets that the cost of the new debt was offset by the district paying off outstanding debt in Illinois. The top bond measures were the $155 million bond referendum for Lake County Forest preserves, which passed and the $420 million Indian Prairie School District Bond referendum. The Indian Prairie School District Bond did not involve a tax hike because a tax rate that was set to expire was equal to the tax required for the new bond. The school district is in Aurora, about 42 miles southwest of Chicago. That referendum also passed. Speaking of Chicago.

(25:44):
City of residents on Tuesday chose the first elected school board members for Chicago Public Schools. The final school board will be a hybrid with Mayor Brandon Johnson, appointing 11 of the 21 total seats. The school board race, which became a spending contest between the Chicago Teachers Union and Political Action Committees devoted to school choice, was largely a defeat for the CTU, which won only four seats. So a few other ballot measures. In Illinois, there was a statewide advisory referendum on a so-called Millionaires Tax with the revenue to be used for property tax relief. This follows an attempt in 2020 led by governor JB Pritzker to join 34 other states in passing a progressive income tax. Illinois has a flat income tax to this day because that referendum failed. However, this year’s advisory referendum passed North Dakota’s measure four to end the property tax in the state failed South Dakota’s initiated Measure 28 to remove the state sales tax of 4.2% from food drinks.

(26:40):
And anything sold for human consumption except and prepared foods also failed. The broad language of the measure drew a diverse coalition of opposition, including the South Dakota Municipal League and several chambers of commerce. Minnesota’s Amendment won to reauthorize the environment and Natural Resources trust fund, which is funded by lottery proceeds and create a new community grants program passed. And in Ohio, the central Ohio Transit Authority had a sales tax levy on local ballots that would raise the sales tax in Columbus from 7.5% to 8% with COTA receiving 1% of the sales tax revenue rather than the 0.5% it previously got. The measure was projected to bring in $8 billion for transit in central Ohio and it passed. And I think that’s all the time I have. Back to you, Caitlin.

Caitlin Devitt (27:29):
Thanks Jennifer. I’m going to provide an update on the Southwest, which was provided by our reporter Karen Pierog. Tuesday’s election brought mixed results for issuers in the southwest. The biggest failure occurred in Houston where about 58% of voters rejected a two-part $4.4 billion bond proposal. The public school district put on the ballot to fund construction and technology projects. Opposition was fueled in part by an unpopular state takeover of the school system in 2023 due to academic issues, state appointed superintendent Mike Miles called the bonds defeat unfortunate and wrong and said the politics of adults beat out the needs of children. The bond proposal was the first since 2012 by Texas’s largest public school system, which serves more than 180,000 students in 274 schools. A bond proposal for Frisco Independent School District also fizzled at the ballot box. But voters in the Round Rock District approved $932 million of a nearly $1 billion bond proposal.

(28:38):
A barrage of school bond sales in 2023 helped make Texas the biggest municipal bond volume state for the first time since 1981. Public school bonds are rated AAA through the state’s permanent school fund. Bond guarantee program results were also mixed for Texas schools seeking an increase in their maintenance and operations property tax rate due to stagnant state funding and rising costs. Voters in Austin’s district, which is facing a $92 million deficit approved a rate hike. Meanwhile, Texas governor Greg Abbott told reporters on Wednesday that the election gave him enough legislative votes to finally pass the school choice program. In the 2025 session. After years of failed attempts, the Republican governor contended there will be separate pots of state funding for public education and for vouchers, Dallas voters narrowly approved a city charter amendment that has financial implications. Proposition U requires the city to appropriate at least 50% of annual revenue increases over the previous year to fund public safety pensions boost police starting pay and maintain a police force of at least 4,000 full-time sworn officers compared to about 3,100.

(29:48):
Currently the Dallas budget is already strained. After the city council adopted a plan to ramp up contributions to the police and fire pension system to actuarily determined levels over five years to comply with the Texas law, interim city manager Kimberly Bor. Tolbert issued a statement that said Dallas will continue to weigh its options as it waits for certified election results. Colorado Public Schools were seeking nearly $6.7 billion of bonds according to the Colorado School Finance Project, which reported that voters rejected just over a billion of the debt winners at the ballot box included Aurora Public Schools with 1 billion of bonds and Denver public schools with 975 million Denver voters were split on hiking the city’s sales tax rate, approving a 0.34% increase for Denver Health, Colorado’s sole safety net healthcare provider, but turning down a 0.5% increase to fund affordable housing potentially with bonds. In Utah, two top rated issuers were requesting bonds.

(30:48):
The Salt Lake City School Board School Board of Education, $730 million of bonds won easily while Salt Lake County’s $570 million. Bond proposals to consolidate its two existing jails in a new facility was trending toward defeat. In Arizona’s Maricopa County, voters agreed to continue dedicating revenue from a half cent sales tax to transportation projects for the next 20 years. Fitch ratings warned last year that expiration of the tax could result in a downgrade for regional public transportation authority debt backed by a first lien. On one third of the tax revenue, Tempe voters passed three bond questions totaling $581.5 million. All four bond questions totaling about $290 million on New Mexico statewide ballot passed the latest capital outlay report from the State’s Legislative Finance Committee found nearly $6 billion in unspent capital funding, including $1.6 billion in severance tax bonds for public school construction. And Oklahoma voters defeated state question $8.33, which would’ve allowed property owners to petition their municipality to create bond issuing public infrastructure. Districts. Similar districts in Texas and Colorado have led to billions of dollars for bonds being authorized sometimes by only one voter. And back to you, Jennifer.

Jennifer Shea (32:11):
Thank you, Caitlin. And now here’s an update written by Keely Webster. The Bond Buyer, senior reporter covering the West coast in the far west California takes center stage with some massive bond measures on the ballot. Although a proposal to create a $20 billion multi-county housing bond to a building in the Bay Area was pulled before the election, there is still a robust slate and most of it appears to be winning. According to preliminary results, voters were asked to consider bonds this year in 908 ballot referendums. According to data compiled by The Bond Buyer, California leads the pack with almost half of the total under consideration, $72.1 billion in 286 measures in early results. California’s massive propositions two and four authorizing $10 billion in bonds for K to 12 schools. And climate change mitigation appear to be winning. Proposition two had secured 57% of the vote while Proposition four had secured 58%.

(33:12):
The Los Angeles Unified School District is also on pace to secure voter approval for $9 billion in bonds. San Diego Community College district voters are on track to approve $3.5 billion of bonds. San Jose Unified School District will be able to sell $1.15 billion for facility upgrades. The majority of California voters vote by mail. So bond and tax measures are often not certified as approved for more than a month after election night. Last year, proposition one, a $6.4 billion mental health bond measure didn’t secure victory until nearly a month after the March 5th election. That measure didn’t create a new funding stream, but rather diverted an existing so-called Millionaires tax to create more slots for people seeking mental health or substance abuse treatment and to pay for supportive housing for mentally ill homeless people. California’s proposition five, which would have lowered the threshold on housing bonds from a two-thirds to a simple majority failed in a 56% to 44% vote.

(34:15):
The only treasurer’s race in the Far West lands in Oregon, Elizabeth Steiner, Oregon’s first female treasurer vested her state senate colleague Brian Quist. In two’s election, Steiner, a democrat captured 50% of the vote, 45% Quist according to preliminary results. Steiner 61, a medical doctor has served in the Oregon Senate since 2012. Co-chairing the Joint Ways and Means committee, which writes the state budget. Western states including Alaska, Oregon, Idaho, Nevada, Colorado, Arizona, Montana, and South Dakota, all shot down ranked choice voting. But Washington, D.C. voters approved the concept in Alaska. The measure to repeal ranked choice voting, which had been established in 2020 is leading but has yet to be decided. Proponents of all party primaries had choice voting say they are non-partisan and benefit all voters, especially independents who are otherwise not able to vote in primaries. But opponents say the concept is confusing. And with that, thanks very much to our listeners. This wraps up the Bond Buyer’s election update.

Mike Scarchilli (35:24):
We hope you found this special election episode of The Bond Buyer Podcast, insightful, a big thank you to all our reporters for providing this detailed analysis on how recent election results could shape the future of the muni market.

Here are some key takeaways from today’s discussion. One, with tax reform back on the congressional agenda, the muni market may face renewed scrutiny, particularly on the tax exemption. As our team discussed, the potential for revenue focus reforms puts a spotlight on the market, makes advocacy efforts more crucial than ever. Two leadership changes in critical committees from Senate banking to house ways and means may bring both risks and opportunities. Committee heads with a history of supporting infrastructure and muni finance are in place, but shifts in priorities could alter fund flows, regulatory oversight, and the muni market’s role in broader infrastructure efforts. Finally, at the local level, the election delivered a mix of outcomes for bond measures across the country. With notable successes and setbacks from education and transit to housing and climate initiatives, voters approved a wide range of local bond proposals, which reflects the evolving priorities of communities across the us.

Thanks again for listening to this episode of The Bond Buyer Podcast. If you enjoyed this episode, please hit like and subscribe on your favorite podcast platform and check out our content at www.bonbuyer.com/subscribe for continued coverage of municipal finance. Until next time, I’m Mike Scarchilli signing off.