Day Pitney remains committed to providing quality legal counsel, while protecting our clients and employees, and transforming our communities into more just, equal and equitable spaces. For more information, please visit our COVID-19 Resource Center | Racial Justice and Equity Task Force.
On February 7, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) provided a legal bulletin setting forth the views of the Office of Municipal Securities (the Office) regarding the application of the antifraud provisions of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder (collectively, the antifraud provisions) with respect to public statements made by issuers of municipal securities.[1] The Office indicated it issued the bulletin in response to questions raised about the application of antifraud provisions to statements of municipal securities issuers.
The antifraud provisions apply to the purchase and sale of municipal securities in the primary and secondary markets. They prohibit an issuer from making any untrue statement of a material fact or omitting to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading. The primary elements in determining whether there has been a violation of these provisions are scienter and materiality.
Scienter
Scienter involves the intent to deceive, manipulate or defraud. However, the courts and the SEC have stated that scienter may be satisfied by a showing of recklessness. Recklessness is an extreme departure from the standards of ordinary care and involves the danger of misleading market participants known to the person making the statement, or so obvious that the official must have been aware of the possibility of misleading the market participants
Materiality
Under the antifraud provisions, a fact is material if there is a substantial likelihood that the information would have been viewed by the reasonable investor as having significantly altered the total mix of information available to an investor. Determining whether a statement is material is based on an analysis of facts and circumstances (a total mix analysis). The Office noted that it believes all statements of a municipal securities issuer that are reasonably expected to reach investors and trading markets are subject to the antifraud provisions even if the issuer is in compliance with its continuing disclosure undertakings. However, the total mix analysis may affect the materiality of a public statement made by an issuer and may depend on whether access to accurate, timely and comprehensive information about an issuer is "uneven and inefficient" rather than regularly available to investors through the MSRB's EMMA system or another investor-based communication vehicle such as an investor website.
The Office further noted that "information reasonably expected to reach investors" may be in the form of public announcements, press releases, interviews with media representatives and discussions with groups. The fact that the information is not published for purposes of informing the securities markets does not alter the mandate that it not violate the antifraud provisions. Information reasonably expected to reach investors includes the following:
Information on Websites
Public Reports Delivered to Other Governmental Bodies
Statements Made by Issuer Officials
"Officials" include those who may be viewed as having knowledge regarding the financial condition and operation of the issuer, and statements may include:
Finally, the Office noted that proper disclosure policies and procedures, when consistently implemented, can benefit an issuer in its compliance with the antifraud provisions, and it encouraged issuers to adopt appropriate policies.
The attorneys in Day Pitney's Municipal Finance group routinely counsel clients on addressing compliance with the antifraud provisions and drafting disclosure policies and procedures. Please feel free to contact any of the attorneys listed to the right of this alert if you would like to discuss this alert, compliance with the antifraud provisions or drafting a disclosure policy.
[1] The Bulletin can be found here. Note that the statements in the bulletin represent the views of the Office and the bulletin is not a rule, regulation or statement of the SEC and has no legal force or effect.
Day Pitney Alert
Day Pitney Alert
Day Pitney Alert
Day Pitney Alert
Day Pitney Press Release
On November 22, Connecticut Governor Dannel P. Malloy announced that he is appointing Jay Nolan to serve as his appointee on the state's recently created Municipal Accountability Review Board.
Day Pitney LLP has once again been recognized as Connecticut's number one bond counsel firm by volume, serving as bond counsel on issues in Connecticut totaling approximately $1.7 billion in 2016, according to The Bond Buyer, a daily newspaper serving the municipal bond industry.
Day Pitney Press Release
Hartford, Conn., May 26, 2016 - Day Pitney LLP represented the State of Connecticut as lead bond counsel and disclosure counsel in a general obligation refunding bond sale of $501.4 million. The sale resulted in saving of $75.5 million in debt service costs over the life of the refinanced bonds. The Nappier administration has an active debt refunding program which has saved taxpayers $1.1 billion to date.