e10vk
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND
EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C.
20549
Form 10-K
|
|
|
(Mark One)
|
|
|
þ
|
|
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
|
|
For the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2007
|
or
|
o
|
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
|
|
For the transition period
from to
|
Commission file number:
000-24843
AMERICA FIRST TAX EXEMPT
INVESTORS, L.P.
(Exact name of registrant as
specified in its Agreement of Limited Partnership)
|
|
|
Delaware
|
|
47-0810385
|
(State or other jurisdiction
of
incorporation or organization)
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)
|
|
|
|
1004 Farnam Street, Suite 400
Omaha, Nebraska
(Address of principal
executive offices)
|
|
68102
(Zip Code)
|
(402) 444-1630
(Registrants telephone
number, including area code)
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the
Act:
Beneficial Unit Certificates representing assignments of
limited partnership interests in
America First Tax Exempt Investors, L.P. (the
BUCs)
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the
Act:
None
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known
seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities
Act. Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file
reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15
(d) of the
Act. Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed
all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding
12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant
was required to file such reports, and (2) has been subject
to such filing requirements for the past
90 days. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers
pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K
(§229.405 of the chapter) is not contained herein, and will
not be contained, to the best of the registrants
knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements
incorporated by reference in Part III of this
Form 10-K
or any amendment to this
Form 10-K. þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large
accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated
filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of
large accelerated filer, accelerated
filer, and smaller reporting company in
Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Large accelerated filer
o
|
|
Accelerated filer
þ
|
|
Non-accelerated
filer o
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
|
|
Smaller reporting
Company o
|
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company
(as defined in
Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange
Act. o
The aggregate market value of the registrants BUCs held by
non-affiliates based on the final sales price of the BUCs on the
last business day of the registrants most recently
completed second fiscal quarter was $108,373,683.
DOCUMENTS
INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
None
PART I
Forward-Looking
Statements
This report (including, but not limited to, the information
contained in Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations) contains
forward-looking statements that reflect managements
current beliefs and estimates of future economic circumstances,
industry conditions, America First Tax Exempt Investors,
L.P.s (the Partnership) performance and
financial results. All statements, trend analysis and other
information concerning possible or assumed future results of
operations of the Partnership and the investments it has made
constitute forward-looking statements. Beneficial Unit
Certificate (BUC) holders and others should
understand that these forward-looking statements are subject to
numerous risks and uncertainties, and a number of factors could
affect the future results of the Partnership and could cause
those results to differ materially from those expressed in the
forward-looking statements contained herein. These factors
include general economic and business conditions such as the
availability and credit worthiness of prospective tenants, lease
rents, operating expenses, the terms and availability of
financing for properties financed by the tax-exempt mortgage
revenue bonds owned by the Partnership, adverse changes in the
real estate markets from governmental or legislative forces,
lack of availability and credit worthiness of counter parties to
finance future acquisitions and interest rate fluctuations and
other items discussed under Risk Factors in
Item 1A of this report.
The Partnership was formed on April 2, 1998 under the
Delaware Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act for the purpose
of acquiring, holding, selling and otherwise dealing with a
portfolio of federally tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds which
have been issued to provide construction
and/or
permanent financing of multifamily residential properties.
Interest on these bonds is excludable from gross income for
federal income tax purposes. As a result, most of the income
earned by the Partnership is exempt from federal income taxes.
Our general partner is America First Capital Associates Limited
Partnership Two (AFCA 2), whose general partner is
The Burlington Capital Group LLC (Burlington). Since
1984, Burlington has specialized in the management of investment
funds, many of which were formed to acquire real estate
investments such as tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds, mortgage
securities and multifamily real estate properties.
As of December 31, 2007, the Partnership owned 20
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds which were issued to finance
16 apartment properties located in the states of Florida,
Indiana, Iowa, South Carolina, Texas, Nebraska, Kansas and
Kentucky containing a total of 2,448 rental units and
460 rental units under construction and a 142-bed student
housing facility in Nebraska. Each of these mortgage revenue
bonds provides for the payment of fixed-rate base interest to
the Company. Additionally, 10 of the 20 bonds also provide for
the payment of contingent interest based upon net cash flow and
net capital appreciation of the underlying real estate
properties. As a result, these mortgage revenue bonds provide
the Company with the potential to participate in future
increases in the cash flow generated by the financed properties,
either through operations or from their ultimate sale. Ten of
the 17 properties which collateralize the bonds owned by the
Partnership are managed by America First Properties Management
Company L.L.C., an affiliate of the Partnership. Management
believes that this relationship provides greater insight and
understanding of the underlying property operations and the
propertys ability to meet debt service requirements to the
Partnership.
The amount of interest income earned by the Partnership from its
investment in tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds is a function of
the net operating income generated by the properties
collateralizing the tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds. Net
operating income from a multifamily residential property depends
on the rental and occupancy rates of the property and the level
of operating expenses. Occupancy rates and rents are directly
affected by the supply of, and demand for, apartments in the
market areas in which a property is located. This, in turn, is
affected by several factors such as local or national economic
conditions, the amount of new apartment construction and
interest rates on single-family mortgage loans. In addition,
factors such as government regulation, inflation, real estate
and other taxes, labor problems and natural disasters can affect
the economic operations of a property. Therefore, the return to
the Partnership depends upon the economic performance of the
multifamily residential properties which collateralize the
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds. For this reason, the
Partnerships investments are dependent
1
on the economic performance of such real estate and may be
considered to be in competition with other income-producing real
estate of the same type in the same geographic areas.
The Partnership may invest in other types of tax-exempt
securities that may or may not be secured by real estate. These
tax-exempt securities must be rated in one of the four highest
rating categories by at least one nationally recognized
securities rating agency and may not represent more than 25% of
our assets at the time of acquisition. The Partnership may also
make taxable mortgage loans secured by multifamily properties
which were financed by tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds that
the Partnership holds. The Partnership generally does not seek
to acquire direct interests in real property as long term or
permanent investments. The Partnership may, however, acquire
direct interests in real property in order to position itself
for a future investment in tax-exempt bonds. Additionally, it
may acquire apartment complexes securing its revenue bonds or
taxable mortgage loans through foreclosure in the event of a
default.
As of December 31, 2007, the Partnership had a direct
ownership interest in six Ohio limited partnerships that own
four apartment properties located in Ohio and two apartment
properties located in Kentucky containing a total of
544 rental units. The Partnership expects to ultimately
restructure these properties by providing tax-exempt bond
financing to new owners through a sale of the individual
properties. All six of these properties are managed by America
First Properties Management Company L.L.C., an affiliate of the
Partnership. Management believes that this relationship provides
greater insight and understanding of the underlying property
operations and the propertys ability to meet debt service
requirements to the Partnership.
Business
Objectives and Strategy
Overview
The Partnership was formed for the primary purpose of acquiring,
holding, selling and otherwise dealing with a portfolio of
federally tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds which have been
issued to provide construction
and/or
permanent financing of multifamily residential apartments. The
Partnerships business objectives are to: (i) preserve
and protect its capital; (ii) provide regular cash
distributions to BUC holders; and (iii) provide a potential
for an enhanced federally tax-exempt yield as a result of a
participation interest in the net cash flow and net capital
appreciation of the underlying real estate properties financed
by the tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds.
We are pursuing a business strategy of acquiring additional
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds on a leveraged basis in order
to (i) increase the amount of tax-exempt interest available
for distribution to our BUC holders; (ii) reduce risk
through asset diversification and interest rate hedging; and
(iii) achieve economies of scale. We are pursuing this
growth strategy by investing in additional tax-exempt mortgage
revenue bonds and related investments, taking advantage of
attractive financing structures available in the tax-exempt
securities market and entering into interest rate risk
management instruments. We may finance the acquisition of
additional tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds through the
reinvestment of cash flow, the issuance of additional BUCs, or
securitization financing using our existing portfolio of
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds. Our operating policy is to
use securitizations or other forms of leverage to maintain a
level of debt financing between 40% and 60% of the total fair
value of our assets.
In connection with our growth strategy, we are also assessing
opportunities to reposition our existing portfolio of tax-exempt
mortgage revenue bonds. The principal objective of this
repositioning initiative is to improve the quality and
performance of our revenue bond portfolio and, ultimately,
increase the amount of cash available for distribution to our
BUC holders. In some cases, we may elect to redeem selected
tax-exempt bonds that are secured by multifamily properties that
have experienced significant appreciation. Through the selective
redemption of the bonds, a sale or refinancing of the underlying
property will be required which, if sufficient sale or
refinancing proceeds exist, will entitle the Company to receive
payment of accrued contingent interest on its bond investment.
In other cases, we may elect to sell bonds on properties that
are in stagnant or declining markets. The proceeds received from
these transactions would be redeployed into other tax-exempt
investments consistent with our investment objectives. We may
also be able to use a higher-quality investment portfolio to
obtain higher leverage to be used to acquire additional
investments.
2
Another goal of our repositioning strategy is to allow for the
preparation of financial statements that more accurately reflect
the nature of the Company as a tax-exempt bond fund rather than
as an owner of apartment properties. As of December 31,
2007, generally accepted accounting principles, in particular
Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB)
Interpretation No. 46R (FIN 46R), require
us to present the financial results of eight of the properties
financed with tax-exempt bonds owned by us on a consolidated
basis with our financial results. The consolidation of
underlying apartment properties under FIN 46R results
mainly from the participation interest in the net cash flow and
net capital appreciation from the payment of both base interest
and contingent interest under the mortgage revenue bonds issued
to finance the consolidated properties. By repositioning the
investment portfolio into tax-exempt mortgage bonds which do not
result in consolidation of the underlying property, we will be
able to present our financial results in what we believe is a
more understandable and transparent manner.
In executing our growth strategy, we expect to invest primarily
in bonds issued to provide affordable rental housing, but may
also consider bonds issued to finance student housing projects
and housing for senior citizens. The four basic types of
multifamily housing revenue bonds which we may acquire as
investments are as follows:
1. Private activity bonds issued under Section 142(d)
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the
Code);
2. Bonds issued under Section 145 of the Code by
not-for-profit entities qualified under Section 501(c) 3 of
the Code;
3. Essential function bonds issued by a public
instrumentality to finance an apartment property owned by such
instrumentality; and
4. Existing 80/20 bonds that were issued under
section 103(b)(4)(A) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954.
Each of these bond structures permits the issuance of tax-exempt
bonds to finance the construction or acquisition and
rehabilitation of affordable rental housing. Under applicable
Treasury Regulations, any affordable apartment project financed
with tax-exempt bonds must set aside a percentage of its total
rental units for occupancy by tenants whose incomes do not
exceed stated percentages of the median income in the local
area. In each case, the balance of the rental units in the
apartment project may be rented at market rates. With respect to
private activity bonds issued under Section 142(d) of the
Code, the owner of the apartment project may elect, at the time
the bonds are issued, whether to set aside a minimum of 20% of
the units for tenants making less than 50% of area median income
(as adjusted for household size) or 40% of the units for tenants
making less than 60% of the area median income (as adjusted for
household size). Multifamily housing bonds that were issued
prior to the Tax Reform Act of 1986 (so called 80/20
bonds) require that 20% of the rental units be set aside for
tenants whose income does not exceed 80% of the area median
income, without adjustment for household size.
We expect that many of the private activity housing bonds that
we evaluate for acquisition will be issued in conjunction with
the syndication of Low Income Housing Tax Credits under
Section 42 of the Code (LIHTCs) by the owner of
the financed apartment project. Additionally, to facilitate its
investment strategy of acquiring additional tax-exempt mortgage
bonds secured by multifamily apartment properties (MF
Properties), the Partnership may acquire ownership
positions in the MF Properties. The Partnership expects to
ultimately restructure the property ownership through a sale of
the MF Properties and a syndication of LIHTCs.
Investment
Types
Tax-Exempt Mortgage Revenue Bonds. The Company
invests in tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds. The amount of
interest income earned by the Company from its investment in
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds is a function of the net
operating income generated by the properties collateralizing the
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds. Net operating income from a
multifamily residential property depends on the rental and
occupancy rates of the property and the level of operating
expenses.
Other Tax-Exempt Securities. The Company may
invest in other types of tax-exempt securities that may or may
not be secured by real estate. These tax-exempt securities must
be rated in one of the four highest rating categories by at
least one nationally recognized securities rating agency and may
not represent more than 25% of our assets at the time of
acquisition.
3
Taxable Mortgage Loans. The Company may also
make taxable mortgage loans secured by multifamily properties
which were financed by tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds that we
hold.
Real Estate. While the Company generally does
not seek to acquire equity interests in real property as long
term or permanent investments it may acquire apartment complexes
securing its revenue bonds or taxable mortgage loans through
foreclosure in the event of a default. In addition, as part of
its growth strategy, the Company may acquire direct or indirect
interests in apartment complexes in order to position itself for
a future investment in tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds issued
to finance the acquisition or substantial rehabilitation of such
apartment complexes by a new owner. A new owner would typically
seek to obtain LIHTCs in connection with the issuance of the new
tax-exempt bonds, but if LIHTCs had previously been issued for
the property, such a restructuring could not occur until the
expiration of a
15-year
compliance period for the initial LIHTCs. The Company may
acquire an interest in such MF Properties prior to the end of
the LIHTC compliance period. After the LIHTC compliance period,
the Company would expect to sell such MF properties to a new
owner which could syndicate new LIHTCs and seek tax-exempt bond
financing on the property which the Company could acquire. Such
restructurings will generally be expected to occur within
36 months of the acquisition by the Company of an interest
in a MF Property. The Company will not acquire LIHTCs in
connection with these transactions.
Effect
of Adoption of FIN 46R on Financial Reporting
The Partnership is required to consolidate the assets,
liabilities, results of operations and cash flows of certain
entities that meet the definition of a variable interest
entity (VIE) into the Partnerships
financial statements under the provisions of FIN 46R.
Management has determined that eight of the entities which own
multifamily apartment properties financed by the
Partnerships tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds are VIEs.
Because management determined that the Partnership is the
primary beneficiary of each of these VIEs pursuant to the terms
of each tax-exempt mortgage revenue bond and the criteria within
FIN 46R, the Partnership consolidated the assets,
liabilities and results of operations of these VIEs
multifamily properties into the Partnerships financial
statements. Transactions and accounts between the Partnership
and the consolidated VIEs, including the indebtedness underlying
the tax-exempt mortgage bonds secured by the properties owned by
the VIEs, have been eliminated in consolidation.
All financial information in this
Form 10-K
presented on the basis of Accounting Principles Generally
Accepted in the United States of America (GAAP), is that of the
Partnership and the VIEs on a consolidated basis. We refer to
the Partnership, its wholly owned subsidiary America First LP
Holding Corp (Holding Corp), and the consolidated
VIEs throughout this
Form 10-K
as the Company. We refer to the Partnership and
Holding Corp, without consolidation of the VIEs, as the
Partnership.
Financing
Strategy
We have financed acquisitions of additional revenue bonds
through a securitization transaction offered through the Merrill
Lynch proprietary residual interest tax-exempt securities and
puttable floating option tax-exempt receipts P-Float
program. In a securitization transaction, we deposit a
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bond into a trust which issues two
types of securities, senior securities (P-Floats)
and subordinated residual interest securities
(RITES). The P-Floats are floating-rate securities
representing a beneficial ownership interest in the outstanding
principal and interest of the tax-exempt mortgage revenue bond
credit-enhanced by Merrill Lynch (or a Merrill Lynch affiliate)
and sold to institutional investors. The interest rate paid on
the P-Floats reflects a spread over the Securities Industry and
Financial Market Association (SIFMA, formerly the
BMA) floating rate index. We receive the net
proceeds from the sale of the P-Floats and may use these funds
to make additional investments. The RITES are issued to us and
represent a beneficial ownership interest in the remaining
interest on the underlying tax-exempt mortgage revenue bond. We
maintain a call option on the senior P-Float securities and this
allows us to collapse the trusts and retain a level of control
over the underlying revenue bond. The call price of a P-Float is
equal to its par amount plus 10% of any increase in the market
value of the underlying revenue bonds. We account for these
transactions as secured borrowings, and they, in effect, provide
us with variable-rate financing. Accordingly, we record these
senior certificates as debt financing, the revenue bonds as
investment securities held in trust, and the RITES as other
assets. There are certain risks associated with the use of
P-Floats which are discussed in more detail
4
in Item 1A Risk Factors and Item 7A
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market
Risks and elsewhere in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
In addition to the P-Float program the Partnership may utilize
other forms of borrowing. Such borrowings may include mortgage
loans secured by owned real estate and revolving lines of credit.
Recent
Developments
Effects
of Recent Changes in Credit Markets.
The credit issues experienced recently by the single-family
subprime mortgage industry have affected interest rates and
availability of credit generally. Although the consequences of
these events and their impact on our ability to pursue our plan
to grow through investments in additional tax-exempt bonds
secured by first mortgages on affordable multifamily housing
projects are not fully known, we do not anticipate that our
existing assets will be adversely affected by these events. The
Company does not issue mortgage loans secured by mortgages on
single-family residential properties or acquire securities
backed by single-family mortgage loans.
We believe that if there are continued defaults on subprime
single family mortgages and a general contraction of credit
available for single family mortgage loans, additional demand
for affordable rental housing may be created and, as a result,
may have a positive economic effect on apartment properties
financed by the tax-exempt bonds held by the Partnership. We
believe the current tightening of credit may also create
opportunities for additional investments consistent with the
Partnerships investment strategy because it may result in
fewer parties competing to acquire tax-exempt bonds issued to
finance affordable housing. There can be no assurance that we
will be able to finance additional acquisitions of tax-exempt
bonds through either additional equity or debt financing.
Developments
Affecting P-Float Financing
Historically, our primary leverage vehicle has been the Merrill
Lynch P-Float program. Recent credit losses and credit rating
downgrades at Merrill Lynch have resulted in a significant
increase in Merrill Lynchs cost of borrowing under the
P-Float program since December 31, 2007. This is reflected
in an increased spread over the SIFMA rate payable on the
P-Floats. The increased spread over SIFMA has resulted in a
significantly higher interest rate on the Partnerships
P-Float financing. As discussed in Item 7A, Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risks, the
Partnerships effective interest rate on its P-Float
borrowings has increased approximately 1.25% to 2.0% from
November 30, 2007 to February 29, 2008. A 1.5%
increase in the Partnerships effective interest rate, on
an annualized basis, would result in approximately
$1.1 million of additional interest expense on the
Partnerships existing P-Float financing. This additional
interest expense will lower the Partnerships cash
available for distribution (CAD).
In addition, if the interest rate on the P-Floats rises to a
level where the interest received on the underlying tax-exempt
bonds is not sufficient to pay all interest due on the P-Floats,
the P-Float may be terminated and the underlying tax-exempt
mortgage revenue bonds may be sold in order to satisfy the
obligations on the P-Floats. Due to these developments with our
P-Float debt, we do not expect to have access to additional debt
financing through the Merrill Lynch P-Float program for the
foreseeable future and this is expected to limit our ability to
acquire additional tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds on a
leveraged basis.
While the Partnership currently intends to maintain annual
distributions of $0.54 per BUC, a reduction in CAD could result
in a reduction in the distributions paid by the Partnership on
its BUCs in the future. We are currently evaluating alternative
financing vehicles to replace our P-Float debt in order to
reduce our interest expense and in order to have access to new
leverage financing for additional tax-exempt mortgage bonds on
reasonable terms. We have not entered into any agreements with
respect to any such alternative debt financing and there can be
no assurances that we will be able to do so.
Line
of Credit
In January 2008, the Partnership entered into a
$5.0 million line of credit. The line of credit is
available for new investments and general working capital
purposes. It is secured by certain mortgage revenue bonds and
bears interest at a variable rate of prime minus 0.5% per annum.
5
Beneficial
Unit Certificate activity
In December 2007, the Partnership announced that Burlington had
adopted a prearranged trading plan (the Plan) with
RBC Dain Rauscher (RBC) under which RBC will acquire
BUCs in open market purchases made from time to time for the
account of Burlington beginning January 1, 2008. Burlington
may acquire up to $2.0 million of BUCs under the Plan.
Burlington is the general partner of the Companys general
partner. As a result, the Plan was established in accordance
with the guidelines specified by
Rule 10b5-1
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
In January 2007, the Company filed a Registration Statement on
Form S-3
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
SEC) relating to the sale of up to
$100.0 million of its BUCs. The Company intends to issue
BUCs from time to time under this Registration Statement to
raise additional equity capital as needed to fund investment
opportunities. Raising additional equity capital for deployment
into new investment opportunities is part of our overall growth
strategy outlined above Pursuant to this Registration Statement,
in April 2007 the Company issued, through an underwritten public
offering, a total of 3,675,000 BUCs at a public offering price
of $8.06 per BUC. Net proceeds realized by the Company from the
issuance of the additional BUCs were approximately
$27.5 million, after payment of an underwriters
discount and other offering costs of approximately
$2.1 million. The proceeds were used to acquire additional
tax-exempt revenue bonds and other investments meeting the
Partnerships investment criteria and for general working
capital needs.
Investment
activity
In February 2008, the Company acquired $4.5 million of
tax-exempt
housing bonds issued to finance the construction of the Woodlyn
Village Apartments, a 59 unit apartment complex in
Maplewood, Minnesota. The bonds represent 100% of the bond
issuance, were purchased at par, and earn interest at a fixed
annual rate of 6.0% with
semi-annual
interest payments. The stated maturity date of the bonds is
November 1, 2042.
In January 2008, the Company acquired $7.9 million of
tax-exempt housing bonds issued to finance the construction of
the Bridle Ridge Apartments, a 152 unit apartment complex
in Greer, South Carolina. The bonds represent 100% of the bond
issuance, were purchased at par, and earn interest at a fixed
annual rate of 6.0% with semi-annual interest payments. The
stated maturity date of the bonds is January 1, 2043.
In October 2007, the Company acquired $10.8 million of
tax-exempt housing bonds issued to finance Runnymede Apartments,
a 252 unit apartment complex located in Austin, Texas. The
bonds represent 100% of the bond issuance, were purchased at
par, and earn interest at a fixed annual rate of 6.0% with
semi-annual interest payments. The stated maturity date of the
bonds is October 1, 2042.
In June 2007, the Company acquired $5.5 million
Series A and $0.4 million Series B tax-exempt
housing bonds issued to finance the construction of the
Prairiebrook Village Apartments, a 72 unit apartment
complex in Gardner, Kansas. The bonds represent 100% of the bond
issuance, were purchased at par, and earn interest at an annual
rate of 6.0% for the Series A and 8.0% for the
Series B with semi-annual interest payments. The stated
maturity date of the bonds is June 1, 2047. On
February 11, 2008, the bond trustee notified the owner and
developer of Prairiebrook Village that they were not in
compliance with certain sections of the bond indenture. The
occurrence and continuation of this non-compliance could become
an event of default. The Partnership is currently working with
the trustee, developer, and owners of the project to develop an
action plan. Should the non-compliance become an event of
default, the Partnership will evaluate all remedies at its
disposal including foreclosure on the mortgage securing the
bonds. If appropriate, the Partnership will seek to recover all
funds still on deposit with the trustee, sell all assets owned
by the project and pursue owner and developer guarantees. The
Partnership anticipates that, should it have to exercise its
remedies, amounts recovered will be sufficient to repay the par
amount of the bonds.
In June 2007, America First LP Holding Corp. (Holding
Corp.), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Partnership,
acquired the 99% limited partner interests in six Ohio limited
partnerships (the Property Partnerships) for a cash
purchase price of approximately $9.2 million plus assumed
debt and other liabilities of approximately $15.7 million.
Each Property Partnership owns a multifamily apartment property,
of which four are located in Ohio and two are located in
Kentucky. The cash portion of the purchase price was funded by
cash on
6
hand. In connection with the acquisition, the Property
Partnerships refinanced their existing debt with an aggregate
loan of approximately $19.9 million. The interest rate on
this mortgage is variable and is calculated as one month LIBOR
plus 1.55%. As of the transaction date, LIBOR was 5.32% and the
interest on the mortgage was 6.87%. As of December 31,
2007, one month LIBOR was 4.86% and the interest on the mortgage
was 6.41%. The mortgage matures in July 2009. The Company has
guaranteed the payment of certain exceptions from the
nonrecourse provisions and certain environmental obligations,
should they arise, in connection with the loan. The 1% general
partner interests in the six Property Partnerships were acquired
by Atlantic Development GP Holding Corp., a party unaffiliated
with the Partnership, with the proceeds of an approximately
$62,000 loan from Holding Corp. These 1% general partner
interests are reflected in the Companys consolidated
financial statements as minority interests.
In May 2007, the Company acquired $15.1 million
Series A and $0.6 million Series B tax-exempt
housing bonds issued to finance the construction of the Woodland
Park Apartments, a 236 unit apartment complex in Topeka,
Kansas. The bonds represent 100% of the bond issuance, were
purchased at par, and earn interest at an annual rate of 6.0%
for the Series A and 8.0% for the Series B with
semi-annual interest payments. The stated maturity date of the
bonds is November 1, 2047. The apartment complex is
currently under construction. Based on the construction
schedule, finished units are expected to be available for
leasing starting in May 2008 with a final completion of the
project expected by May 2009.
In May 2007, the Company acquired $4.9 million of
tax-exempt housing bonds issued to finance the construction of
the Gardens of DeCordova Apartments, a 76 unit apartment
complex in Granbury, Texas. The bonds represent 100% of the bond
issuance, were purchased at par, and earn interest at an annual
rate of 6.0% with semi-annual interest payments. The stated
maturity date of the bonds is May 1, 2047. The apartment
complex is currently under construction with an estimated
completion date of November 2008 with some units available for
rent prior to that date.
In May 2007, the Company acquired $4.7 million of
tax-exempt housing bonds issued to finance the construction of
the Gardens of Weatherford Apartments, a 76 unit apartment
complex in Weatherford, Texas. The bonds represent 100% of the
bond issuance, were purchased at par, and earn interest at an
annual rate of 6.0% with semi-annual interest payments. The
stated maturity date of the bonds is May 1, 2047. The
apartment complex is currently under construction with an
estimated completion date of November 2008.
The Company has determined that the underlying entities that own
the Bridle Ridge Apartments, Runnymede Apartments, Prairiebrook
Village Apartments, Woodland Park Apartments, the Gardens of
DeCordova Apartments, and the Gardens of Weatherford Apartments
which are financed by bonds owned by the Partnership do not meet
the definition of a VIE and accordingly, their financial
statements are not required to be consolidated into the
Companys consolidated financial statements under
FIN 46R.
Management
and Employees
The Partnership is managed by its general partner, America First
Capital Associates Limited Partnership Two (AFCA 2).
The Partnership has no employees, executive officers or
directors. Certain services are provided to the Partnership by
employees of Burlington, which is the general partner of AFCA 2,
and the Partnership reimburses Burlington for its allocated
share of these salaries and benefits. The Partnership is not
charged, and does not reimburse Burlington, for the services
performed by executive officers of Burlington.
Competition
The Partnership competes with private investors, lending
institutions, trust funds, investment partnerships and other
entities with objectives similar to the Partnership for the
acquisition of tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds and other
investments. This competition could reduce the availability of
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds for acquisition and reduce the
interest rate that issuers pay on these bonds.
Because the Partnership holds tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds
secured entirely by multifamily residential properties and holds
an interest in the MF Properties, the Partnership may be
considered to be in competition with other residential real
estate in the same geographic areas. In each city in which the
properties collateralized by the Partnerships tax-exempt
mortgage revenue bonds owned by the Partnership or MF Properties
are located, such
7
properties compete with a substantial number of other
multifamily properties. Multifamily properties also compete with
single-family housing that is either owned or leased by
potential tenants. To compete effectively, the apartment
properties financed or owned by the Partnership must offer
quality apartments at competitive rental rates. In order to
maintain occupancy rates and attract quality tenants, the
Partnerships apartment properties may also offer rental
concessions, such as free rent to new tenants for a stated
period. These apartment properties also compete by offering
quality apartments in attractive locations and that provide
tenants with amenities such as recreational facilities, garages
and pleasant landscaping.
Environmental
Matters
The Partnership believes that each of the MF Properties and the
properties collateralizing its tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds
is in compliance, in all material respects, with federal, state
and local regulations regarding hazardous waste and other
environmental matters and is not aware of any environmental
contamination at any of such properties that would require any
material capital expenditure by the underlying properties and
therefore the Partnership for the remediation thereof.
Tax
Status
The Partnership is classified as a partnership for federal
income tax purposes and accordingly, it makes no provision for
income taxes. The distributive share of the Partnerships
income, deductions and credits is included in each BUC
holders income tax return.
The Partnerships subsidiary, Holding Corp, is a
C corporation for income tax purposes and files a
separate income tax return. Therefore, the Partnership is only
subject to income taxes on this investment to the extent it
receives dividends from Holding Corp.
The VIEs consolidated with the Partnership for GAAP reporting
purposes are separate legal entities who record and report
income taxes based upon their individual legal structure which
may include corporations, limited partnerships and limited
liability companies. The Partnership does not presently believe
that the consolidation of VIEs for reporting under GAAP will
impact the Partnerships tax status, amounts reported to
BUC holders on IRS
Form K-1,
the Partnerships ability to distribute tax-exempt income
to BUC holders, the current level of quarterly distributions or
the tax-exempt status of the underlying mortgage revenue bonds.
General
Information
We are a Delaware limited partnership. Our general partner is
America First Capital Associates Limited Partnership 2, whose
general partner is Burlington. Since 1984, Burlington has
specialized in the management of investment funds, many of which
were formed to acquire real estate investments such as
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds, mortgage securities and
multifamily real estate properties. Burlington maintains its
principal executive offices at 1004 Farnam Street,
Suite 400, Omaha, Nebraska 68102, and its telephone number
is
(402) 444-1630.
We do not have any employees of our own. Employees of
Burlington, acting through our general partner, are responsible
for our operations and we reimburse Burlington for the allocated
salaries and benefits of these employees and for other expenses
incurred in running our business operations. In connection with
the operation of the Company, our general partner is entitled to
an administrative fee in an amount equal to 0.45% per annum of
principal amount of the revenue bonds, other tax-exempt
investments and taxable mortgage loans held by the Partnership.
Nine of the tax-exempt revenue bonds held by the Partnership
provide for the payment of this administrative fee to the
general partner by the owner of the financed property. When the
administrative fee is payable by a property owner, it is
subordinated to the payment of all base interest to the
Partnership on the tax-exempt revenue bond on that property. Our
Agreement of Limited Partnership provides that the
administrative fee will be paid directly by the Partnership with
respect to any investments for which the administrative fee is
not payable by the property owner or a third party. In addition,
our Agreement of Limited Partnership provides that the
Partnership will pay the administrative fee to the general
partner with respect to any foreclosed mortgage bonds.
8
Our general partner or its affiliates may also earn mortgage
placement fees in connection with the identification and
evaluation of additional investments that we acquire. Any
mortgage placement fees will be paid by the owners of the
properties financed by the acquired mortgage revenue bonds out
of bond proceeds. The amount of mortgage placement fees, if any,
will be subject to negotiation between the general partner or
its affiliates and such property owners.
America First Properties Management Company, L.L.C.
(Properties Management) is an affiliate of
Burlington that is engaged in the management of apartment
complexes. Properties Management currently manages the six MF
Properties and ten of the properties whose tax-exempt bonds are
held by the Partnership and earns a fee paid out of property
revenues. Properties Management may also seek to become the
manager of apartment complexes financed by additional mortgage
bonds acquired by the Company, subject to negotiation with the
owners of such properties. If the Company acquires ownership of
any property through foreclosure of a revenue bond, Properties
Management may provide property management services for such
property and, in such case, earn a fee payable out of property
revenues.
Our sole limited partner is America First Fiduciary Corporation
Number Five, a Nebraska corporation. BUCs represent assignments
by the sole limited partner of its rights and obligations as a
limited partner.
Information
Available on Website
The Companys annual reports on
Form 10-K,
quarterly reports on
Form 10-Q,
current reports on
Form 8-K
and press releases are available free of charge at www.ataxz.com
as soon as reasonably practical after they are filed with the
SEC. The information on the website is not incorporated by
reference into this
Form 10-K.
The financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of
the Partnership are affected by various factors, many of which
are beyond the Partnerships control. These include the
following:
The
receipt of interest and principal payments on our tax-exempt
mortgage revenue bonds will be affected by the economic results
of the underlying multifamily properties.
Although our tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds are issued by
state or local housing authorities, they are not obligations of
these governmental entities and are not backed by any taxing
authority. Instead, each of these revenue bonds is backed by a
non-recourse loan made to the owner of the underlying apartment
complex and is secured by a first mortgage lien on the property.
Because of the non-recourse nature of the underlying mortgage
loans, the sole source of cash to pay base and contingent
interest, if applicable, on the revenue bond, and to ultimately
pay the principal amount of the bond, is the net cash flow
generated by the operation of the financed property and the net
proceeds from the ultimate sale or refinancing of the property.
This makes our investments in these mortgage revenue bonds
subject to the kinds of risks usually associated with direct
investments in multifamily real estate. If a property is unable
to sustain net cash flow at a level necessary to pay its debt
service obligations on our tax-exempt mortgage revenue bond on
the property, a default may occur. Net cash flow and net sale
proceeds from a particular property are applied only to debt
service payments of the particular mortgage revenue bond secured
by that property and are not available to satisfy debt service
obligations on other mortgage revenue bonds that we hold. In
addition, the value of a property at the time of its sale or
refinancing will be a direct function of its perceived future
profitability. Therefore, the amount of base and contingent
interest that we earn on our mortgage revenue bonds, and whether
or not we will receive the entire principal balance of the bonds
as and when due, will depend to a large degree on the economic
results of the underlying apartment complexes.
The net cash flow from the operation of a property may be
affected by many things, such as the number of tenants, the
rental rates, operating expenses, the cost of repairs and
maintenance, taxes, government regulation, competition from
other apartment complexes, mortgage rates for single-family
housing and general and local economic conditions. In most of
the markets in which the properties financed by our bonds are
located, there is significant competition from other apartment
complexes and from single-family housing that is either owned or
leased by potential tenants. Low mortgage interest rates make
single-family housing more accessible to persons who may
otherwise rent apartments.
9
In the event of a default on a mortgage revenue bond (or a
taxable loan on the same property), we will have the right to
foreclose on the mortgage or deed of trust securing the
property. If we take ownership of the property securing a
defaulted revenue bond or taxable loan, we will be entitled to
all net cash flow generated by the property. However, such
amounts will no longer represent tax-exempt interest to us.
The
value of the properties is the only source of repayment of our
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds.
The principal of most of our tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds
does not fully amortize over their terms. This means that all or
some of the balance of the mortgage loans underlying these bonds
will be repaid as a lump-sum balloon payment at the
end of the term. The ability of the property owners to repay the
mortgage loans with balloon payments is dependent upon their
ability to sell the properties securing our tax-exempt mortgage
revenue bonds or obtain adequate refinancing. The mortgage
revenue bonds are not personal obligations of the property
owners, and we rely solely on the value of the properties
securing these bonds for security. Similarly, if a tax-exempt
mortgage revenue bond goes into default, our only recourse is to
foreclose on the underlying multifamily property. If the value
of the underlying property securing the bond is less than the
outstanding principal balance and accrued interest on the bond,
we will suffer a loss.
In the event a property securing a tax-exempt mortgage revenue
bond is not sold prior to the maturity or remarketing of the
bond, any contingent interest payable from the net sale or
refinancing proceeds of the underlying property will be
determined on the basis of the appraised value of the underlying
property. Real estate appraisals represent only an estimate of
the value of the property being appraised and are based on
subjective determinations, such as the extent to which the
properties used for comparison purposes are comparable to the
property being evaluated and the rate at which a prospective
purchaser would capitalize the cash flow of the property to
determine a purchase price. Accordingly, such appraisals may
result in us realizing less contingent interest from a
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bond than we would have realized had
the underlying property been sold.
There
are a number of risks related to the construction of multifamily
apartment properties that may affect the tax-exempt bonds issued
to finance these properties.
Four of the tax-exempt revenue bonds the Partnership currently
holds are secured by multifamily apartment properties which are
still under construction. The Partnership may acquire additional
tax-exempt revenue bonds issued to finance apartment properties
in various stages of construction. Construction of such
properties generally takes approximately 12 to 18 months.
The principal risk associated with construction lending is the
risk that construction of the property will be substantially
delayed or never completed. This may occur for a number of
reasons including (i) insufficient financing to complete
the project due to underestimated construction costs or cost
overruns; (ii) failure of contractors or subcontractors to
perform under their agreements, (iii) inability to obtain
governmental approvals; (iv) labor disputes, and
(v) adverse weather and other unpredictable contingencies
beyond the control of the developer. While the Partnership may
be able to protect itself from some of these risks by obtaining
construction completion guarantees from developers, agreements
of construction lenders to purchase its bonds if construction is
not completed on time,
and/or
payment and performance bonds from contractors, the Partnership
may not be able to do so in all cases or such guarantees or
bonds may not fully protect it in the event a property is not
completed. In other cases, the Partnership may decide to forego
certain types of available security if it determines that the
security is not necessary or is too expensive to obtain in
relation to the risks covered. If a property is not completed,
or costs more to complete than anticipated, it may cause the
Partnership to receive less than the full amount of interest
owed to it on the tax-exempt bond financing such property or
otherwise result in a default under the mortgage loan that
secures its tax-exempt bond on the property. In such case, the
Partnership may be forced to foreclose on the incomplete
property and sell it in order to recover the principal and
accrued interest on its tax-exempt bond and it may suffer a loss
of capital as a result. Alternatively, the Partnership may
decide to finance the remaining construction of the property, in
which event it will need to invest additional funds into the
property, either as equity or as a taxable loan. Any return on
this additional investment would not be tax-exempt. Also, if the
Partnership forecloses on a property, it will no longer receive
tax-exempt interest on the bond issued to finance the property.
In addition, the overall return to the Partnership from its
investment in such property is likely to be less than if the
construction had been completed on time or within budget.
10
There
are a number of risks related to the
lease-up of
newly constructed or renovated properties that may affect the
tax-exempt bonds issued to finance these
properties.
Four of the tax-exempt revenue bonds the Partnership currently
invests in are secured by affordable multifamily apartment
properties which are still under construction. The Partnership
may acquire additional tax-exempt revenue bonds issued to
finance properties in various stages of construction or
renovation. As construction or renovation is completed, these
properties will move into the
lease-up
phase. The
lease-up of
these properties may not be completed on schedule or at
anticipated rent levels, resulting in a greater risk that these
investments may go into default than investments secured by
mortgages on properties that are stabilized or fully
leased-up.
The underlying property may not achieve expected occupancy or
debt service coverage levels. While the Partnership may require
property developers to provide it with a guarantee covering
operating deficits of the property during the
lease-up
phase, it may not be able to do so in all cases or such
guarantees may not fully protect the Partnership in the event a
property is not leased up to an adequate level of economic
occupancy as anticipated.
There
is additional credit risk when we make a taxable loan on a
property.
Taxable mortgage loans which we make to owners of the properties
which secure mortgage revenue bonds held by us are non-recourse
obligations of the property owner. As a result, the sole source
of principal and interest payments on these taxable loans is the
net cash flow generated by these properties or the net proceeds
from the sale of these properties. The net cash flow from the
operation of a property may be affected by many things as
discussed above. If a property is unable to sustain net cash
flow at a level necessary to pay current debt service
obligations on our taxable loan on such property, a default may
occur. In addition, any payment of principal and interest on a
taxable loan on a particular property will be subordinate to
payment of all principal and interest (including contingent
interest) on the mortgage revenue bond secured by the same
property. As a result, there may be a higher risk of default on
the taxable loans than on the mortgage revenue bonds.
The
properties financed by our tax-exempt bonds are not completely
insured against damages from hurricanes and other major
storms.
Three of the multifamily housing properties financed by
tax-exempt bonds held by the Partnership are located in Florida
in areas that are prone to damage from hurricanes and other
major storms. Due to the significant losses incurred by
insurance companies on policies written on properties in Florida
damaged by hurricanes, property and casualty insurers in Florida
have modified their approach to underwriting policies. As a
result, the owners of these Florida properties now assume the
risk of first loss on a larger percentage of their
propertys value. If any of these properties were damaged
in a hurricane or other major storm, the losses incurred could
be significant and would reduce the cash flow available to pay
base or contingent interest on the Partnerships tax-exempt
bonds collateralized by these properties. In general, the
current insurance policies on these properties carry a 3%
deductible on the insurable value of the properties. The current
insurable value of the Florida properties is approximately
$52.2 million.
The
Company may be adversely impacted by economic factors beyond its
control and may incur impairment charges to its investment
portfolio.
The credit and capital markets have continued to deteriorate. If
uncertainties in these markets continue, the markets deteriorate
further or the Company experiences deterioration in the values
of its investment portfolio, the Company may incur impairments
to its investment portfolio which could negatively impact the
Companys financial condition, cash flows, and reported
earnings.
We may
suffer adverse consequences from changing interest
rates.
We have financed the acquisition of some of our assets using
variable-rate debt financing. The interest that we pay on this
financing fluctuates with a specific interest rate index. If the
interest rate index increases, our interest expense will
increase. This will reduce the amount of cash we have available
for distribution and may affect the market value of our BUCs.
11
An increase in interest rates could also decrease the value of
our tax-exempt mortgage bonds. A decrease in the value of our
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds could cause the debt financing
counterparty to demand additional collateral. If additional
collateral is not available, the debt financing could be
terminated and some or all of the bonds collateralizing such
financing may be sold to repay the debt. In that case, we would
lose the net interest income from these bonds. A decrease in the
value of our tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds could also
decrease the amount we could realize on the sale of our
investments and would decrease the amount of funds available for
distribution to holders of BUCs.
There
are risks associated with our participation in the P-Float
program.
In order to obtain debt financing, we have securitized many of
our tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds through the Merrill Lynch
P-Float program. Under this program, we deposit a tax-exempt
mortgage revenue bond into a trust which issues a senior P-Float
to an institutional investor and a residual interest to us. By
using the P-Float program for debt financing, we forego a
portion of the interest we would have received on our existing
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds. If we are unable to reinvest
the proceeds from this borrowing in investments that generate a
greater amount of interest, the amount of net interest income
that we receive may decline.
The trust pays interest on the P-Floats and the residual
interest from the interest payments received on the underlying
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bond. If the trust is unable to pay
the full amount of interest due on the
P-Float, a
default will occur. In addition, if the value of the mortgage
revenue bond and any other collateral declines below a specified
level, a default will occur. In such event, the trust could be
terminated and some or all of the bonds pledged as collateral
may be sold to satisfy the debt.
In this program, the senior interests sold are credit-enhanced
by Merrill Lynch or its affiliate. The inability of Merrill
Lynch or its affiliate to perform under the program or
impairment of the credit-enhancement may terminate the
transaction and cause us to lose the net interest income earned
as a result.
Recent credit losses and credit rating downgrades at Merrill
Lynch have caused Merrill Lynchs cost of borrowing to
increase significantly. These additional costs of borrowing are
passed on to the Partnership by Merrill Lynch on the
Partnerships P-Float debt. We do not expect to have access
to additional debt financing through the Merrill Lynch P-Float
program for the foreseeable future and there can be no
assurances that we will be able to arrange alternative sources
of financing. Additionally, there can be no assurances that our
existing P-Float debt will remain in place even with the
additional costs currently being assessed.
Our
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds are illiquid assets and their
value may decrease.
The majority of our assets consist of our tax-exempt mortgage
revenue bonds. These mortgage revenue bonds are relatively
illiquid, and there is no existing trading market for these
mortgage revenue bonds. As a result, there are no market makers,
price quotations or other indications of a developed trading
market for these mortgage revenue bonds. In addition, no rating
has been issued on any of the existing mortgage revenue bonds
and we do not expect to obtain ratings on mortgage revenue bonds
we may acquire in the future. Accordingly, any buyer of these
mortgage revenue bonds would need to perform its own due
diligence prior to a purchase. As a result, our ability to sell
our tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds, and the price we may
receive upon their sale, will be affected by the number of
potential buyers, the number of similar securities on the market
at the time and a number of other market conditions. As a
result, such a sale could result in a loss to us.
We
could be adversely affected if counterparties are unable to
fulfill their obligations under our derivative
agreements.
We have used interest rate swaps and caps to help us mitigate
our interest rate risks. However, these derivative transactions
do not fully insulate us from the interest rate risks to which
we are exposed. A liquid secondary market may not exist for any
instruments purchased or sold in those transactions, thus, we
may be required to maintain a position until exercise or
expiration, which could result in losses. Moreover, the
derivative instruments are required to be marked to market with
the difference recognized in earnings as interest expense which
can result in significant volatility to reported net income over
the term of these instruments. The counterparty to certain of
these agreements
12
has the right to convert them to fixed-rate agreements, and it
is possible that such a conversion could result in our paying
more interest than we would under our variable-rate financing.
The
rent restrictions and occupant income limitations imposed on
affordable housing properties may limit the revenues of such
properties.
All of the properties securing our tax-exempt mortgage revenue
bonds and the MF Properties are subject to certain federal,
state and/or
local requirements with respect to the permissible income of
their tenants. Since federal subsidies are not generally
available on these properties, rents must be charged on a
designated portion of the units at a level to permit these units
to be continuously occupied by low or moderate income persons or
families. As a result, these rents may not be sufficient to
cover all operating costs with respect to these units and debt
service on the applicable tax-exempt mortgage revenue bond. This
may force the property owner to charge rents on the remaining
units that are higher than they would be otherwise and may,
therefore, exceed competitive rents which may adversely affect
the occupancy rate of a property securing an investment and the
property owners ability to service its debt.
The MF
Properties and the properties securing our revenue bonds may be
subject to liability for environmental contamination and thereby
increase the risk of default on such bonds.
The owner or operator of real property may become liable for the
costs of removal or remediation of hazardous substances released
on its property. Various federal, state and local laws often
impose such liability without regard to whether the owner or
operator knew of, or was responsible for, the release of such
hazardous substances. The MF Properties and the properties that
secure our revenue bonds, or any additional revenue bonds we
acquire in the future, may contain contamination of which we are
not aware. The costs associated with the remediation of any such
contamination may be significant and may exceed the value of a
property, causing a loss for our subsidiary or, in the case of
properties securing our revenue bonds, the property owner to
default on the revenue bond secured by the property.
Direct
ownership of apartment properties will subject the Partnership
to all of the risks normally associated with the ownership of
commercial real estate.
The Partnership may acquire ownership of apartment complexes
financed by tax-exempt bonds held by it in the event of a
default on such bonds. Additionally, the Partnership has
acquired interests in MF Properties in order to facilitate the
eventual acquisition of tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds on the
properties. In either case, during the time the Partnership owns
an apartment complex, it will generate taxable income or losses
from the operations of such property rather than tax exempt
interest. In addition, the Partnership will be subject to all of
the risks normally associated with the operation of commercial
real estate including declines in property value, occupancy and
rental rates and increases in operating expenses. The
Partnership may also be subject to government regulations,
natural disasters and environmental issues, any of which could
have an adverse affect on the Partnerships financial
results and ability to make distributions to BUC holders.
We
have assumed certain potential liability relating to recapture
of tax credits on MF Properties.
The previous partners in the partnerships that own the MF
Properties have taken low income housing tax credits with
respect to the acquisition or rehabilitation of these
properties. In connection with the acquisition by Holdings of a
partnership interest in these partnerships, we have agreed to
reimburse the prior partners for any liabilities they incur due
to recapture of these tax credits to the extent the recapture
liability is due to the operation of the MF Properties after
Holdings acquired its interest therein in a manner inconsistent
with the laws and regulations relating to such tax credits.
Any
future issuances of additional BUCs could cause their market
value to decline.
We have the authority to issue additional BUCs representing
assigned limited partner interests in the Partnership, and we
plan to issue such BUCs from time to time. The issuance of
additional BUCs could cause dilution of the existing BUCs and a
decrease in the market price of the BUCs. If additional BUCs are
issued but the
13
Company is unable to invest the additional equity capital in
assets that generate tax-exempt income at levels at least
equivalent to our existing assets, Cash Available for
Distributions (CAD) may decline. A decline in CAD
may result in lower distributions to BUC holders and a lower
market price for our BUCs.
The
Company is not registered under the Investment Company
Act.
The Company is not required to register as an investment company
under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the
Investment Company Act) because it operates under an
exemption from these registration requirements. As a result,
none of the protections of the Investment Company Act
(disinterested directors, custody requirements for securities,
and regulation of the relationship between a fund and its
advisor) are applicable to the Company.
The
Company engages in transactions with related
parties.
Each of the executive officers of Burlington and four of the
managers of Burlington hold equity positions in Burlington. A
subsidiary of Burlington acts as our general partner and manages
our investments and performs administrative services for us and
earns certain fees that are either paid by the properties
financed by our tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds or by us.
Another subsidiary of Burlington provides
on-site
management for the MF Properties and for many of the multifamily
apartment properties that underlie our tax-exempt bonds and
earns fees from the property owners based on the gross revenues
of these properties. The shareholders of the limited-purpose
corporations which own five of the apartment properties financed
with tax-exempt bonds and taxable loans held by the Company are
employees of Burlington who are not involved in the operation or
management of the Company and who are not executive officers or
managers of Burlington. Because of these relationships, our
agreements with Burlington and its subsidiaries are
related-party transactions. By their nature, related-party
transactions may not be considered to have been negotiated at
arms-length. These relationships may also cause a conflict
of interest in other situations where we are negotiating with
Burlington.
BUC
holders may incur tax liability if any of the interest on our
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds is determined to be
taxable.
Certain of our tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds bear interest
at rates which include contingent interest. Payment of the
contingent interest depends on the amount of net cash flow
generated by, and net proceeds realized from a sale of, the
property securing the bond. Due to this contingent interest
feature, an issue may arise as to whether the relationship
between the property owner and us is that of debtor and creditor
or whether we are engaged in a partnership or joint venture with
the property owner. If the Internal Revenue Service
(IRS) were to determine that tax-exempt mortgage
revenue bonds represented an equity investment in the underlying
property, the interest paid to us could be viewed as a taxable
return on such investment and would not qualify as tax-exempt
interest for federal income tax purposes. We have obtained
unqualified legal opinions to the effect that interest on our
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds is excludable from gross
income for federal income tax purposes which opinions provide
that interest paid to a substantial user or
related person (each as defined in the Code) is not
exempt from federal income taxation. However, these legal
opinions have no binding effect on the IRS or the courts, and no
assurances can be given that the conclusions reached will not be
contested by the IRS or, if contested, will be sustained by a
court. In addition, the tax-exempt status of the interest paid
on our tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds is subject to
compliance by the underlying properties, and the owners thereof,
with the bond documents and covenants required by the
bond-issuing authority and the Code. Among these requirements
are tenant income restrictions, regulatory agreement compliance,
reporting requirements, use of proceeds restrictions and
compliance with rules pertaining to arbitrage. Each issuer of
the revenue bonds, as well as each of the underlying property
owners/borrowers, has covenanted to comply with procedures and
guidelines designed to ensure satisfaction with the continuing
requirements of the Code. Failure to comply with these
continuing requirements of the Code may cause the interest on
our bonds to be includable in gross income for federal income
tax purposes retroactively to the date of issuance, regardless
of when such noncompliance occurs. In addition, we hold residual
interests issued in securitization programs which hold
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds, such as the P-Floats/RITES
program, which entitle us to a share of the tax-exempt interest
of these mortgage revenue bonds. It is possible that the
characterization of the residual interest in the P-Floats/RITES
program could be challenged and the income that we
14
receive through these instruments could be treated as ordinary
taxable income includable in our gross income for federal tax
purposes. The rules dealing with federal income taxation are
constantly under review by persons involved in the legislative
process and by the IRS and the U.S. Treasury Department.
Changes to the tax law, which may have retroactive application,
could adversely affect us and our shareholders. It cannot be
predicted whether, when, in what forms or with what effective
dates the tax law applicable to us will be changed.
Not
all of the interest income of the Company is exempt from
taxation.
We have made, and may make in the future, taxable mortgage loans
to the owners of properties which are secured by tax-exempt
mortgage revenue bonds that we hold. Shareholders will be taxed
on their allocable share of this taxable interest income. In any
case that interest earned by the Company is taxable, a
shareholders allocable share of this taxable interest
income will be taxable to the shareholder regardless of whether
an amount of cash equal to such allocable share is actually
distributed to the shareholder.
If the
Company was determined not to be a partnership for tax purposes,
it will have adverse economic consequences for the Company and
its shareholders.
We are a Delaware limited partnership and have chosen to operate
as a partnership for federal income tax purposes. As a
partnership, to the extent we generate taxable income,
shareholders will be individually liable for income tax on their
proportionate share of this taxable income, whether or not we
make cash distributions. The ability of shareholders to deduct
their proportionate share of the losses and expenses we generate
will be limited in certain cases, and certain transactions may
result in the triggering of the Alternative Minimum Tax for
shareholders who are individuals.
If the Company is classified as an association taxable as a
corporation rather than as a partnership, we will be taxed on
our taxable income, if any, and all distributions made by us to
our shareholders would constitute ordinary dividend income
taxable to such shareholders to the extent of our earnings and
profits, which would include tax-exempt income, as well as any
taxable income we might have, and the payment of these dividends
would not be deductible by us. The listing of the Companys
BUCs for trading on the NASDAQ Global Market causes the Company
to be treated as a publicly traded partnership under
Section 7704 of the Code. A publicly traded partnership is
generally taxable as a corporation unless 90% or more of its
gross income is qualifying income. Qualifying income
includes interest, dividends, real property rents, gain from the
sale or other disposition of real property, gain from the sale
or other disposition of capital assets held for the production
of interest or dividends and certain other items. Substantially
all of the Companys gross income will continue to be
tax-exempt interest income on mortgage bonds. We believe that
all of this interest income is qualifying income, however, it is
possible that some or all of our income could be determined not
to be qualifying income. In such a case, if more than 10% of our
annual gross income in any year is not qualifying income, the
Company will be taxable as a corporation rather than a
partnership for federal income tax purposes. We have not
received, and do not intend to seek, a ruling from the IRS
regarding our status as a partnership for tax purposes.
|
|
Item 1B.
|
Unresolved
Staff Comments.
|
None
Each of the Partnerships tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds
is collateralized by a multifamily housing property. The
Partnership does not hold title or any other interest in these
properties, other than the first mortgages securing the bonds.
As a result of FIN 46R, the Company is required to
consolidate certain of the multifamily residential properties
securing its bonds because the owners of those properties are
treated as VIEs for which the Company is the primary
beneficiary. The Company consolidated eight multifamily housing
properties owned by VIEs located in Florida, Indiana, Iowa,
South Carolina and Kentucky as of December 31, 2007.
15
In addition to the properties owned by VIEs, the Company reports
the financial results of the MF Properties on a consolidated
basis due to the 99% limited partnership interests held by its
subsidiary in the partnerships that own the MF Properties. The
Company consolidated six MF Properties located in Ohio and
Kentucky as of December 31, 2007.
The following table sets forth certain information for each of
the consolidated properties as of December 31, 2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MF Properties
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
Buildings
|
|
|
Value at
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Square Feet
|
|
|
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
Property Name
|
|
Location
|
|
of Units
|
|
|
per Unit
|
|
|
Land
|
|
|
Improvements
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Eagle Ridge
|
|
Erlanger, KY
|
|
|
64
|
|
|
|
1,183
|
|
|
$
|
290,763
|
|
|
$
|
2,387,242
|
|
|
$
|
2,678,005
|
|
Meadowview
|
|
Highland Heights, KY
|
|
|
118
|
|
|
|
1,119
|
|
|
|
703,936
|
|
|
|
4,881,630
|
|
|
|
5,585,566
|
|
Crescent Village
|
|
Cincinnati, OH
|
|
|
90
|
|
|
|
1,226
|
|
|
|
353,117
|
|
|
|
4,312,153
|
|
|
|
4,665,270
|
|
Willow Bend
|
|
Hilliard, OH
|
|
|
92
|
|
|
|
1,221
|
|
|
|
580,130
|
|
|
|
3,006,278
|
|
|
|
3,586,408
|
|
Postwoods I
|
|
Reynoldsburg, OH
|
|
|
92
|
|
|
|
1,186
|
|
|
|
572,065
|
|
|
|
3,247,757
|
|
|
|
3,819,822
|
|
Postwoods II
|
|
Reynoldsburg, OH
|
|
|
88
|
|
|
|
1,186
|
|
|
|
576,438
|
|
|
|
3,272,331
|
|
|
|
3,848,769
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24,183,840
|
|
Less accumulated depreciation
(depreciation expense of approximately $459,000 in 2007)
|
|
|
(459,196
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2007
|
|
$
|
23,724,644
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VIEs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
Buildings
|
|
|
Value at
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Square Feet
|
|
|
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
Property Name
|
|
Location
|
|
of Units
|
|
|
per Unit
|
|
|
Land
|
|
|
Improvements
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Ashley Point at Eagle Crest
|
|
Evansville, IN
|
|
|
144
|
|
|
|
910
|
|
|
$
|
321,489
|
|
|
$
|
6,092,695
|
|
|
$
|
6,414,184
|
|
Ashley Square
|
|
Des Moines, IA
|
|
|
150
|
|
|
|
970
|
|
|
|
650,000
|
|
|
|
7,353,350
|
|
|
|
8,003,350
|
|
Bent Tree Apartments
|
|
Columbia, SC
|
|
|
232
|
|
|
|
989
|
|
|
|
986,000
|
|
|
|
11,226,011
|
|
|
|
12,212,011
|
|
Fairmont Oaks Apartments
|
|
Gainsville, FL
|
|
|
178
|
|
|
|
1,139
|
|
|
|
850,400
|
|
|
|
8,108,627
|
|
|
|
8,959,027
|
|
Iona Lakes Apartments
|
|
Ft. Myers, FL
|
|
|
350
|
|
|
|
807
|
|
|
|
1,900,000
|
|
|
|
17,032,120
|
|
|
|
18,932,120
|
|
Lake Forest Apartments
|
|
Daytona Beach, FL
|
|
|
240
|
|
|
|
1,093
|
|
|
|
1,396,800
|
|
|
|
10,724,810
|
|
|
|
12,121,610
|
|
Woodbridge Apts. of Bloomington III
|
|
Bloomington, IN
|
|
|
280
|
|
|
|
946
|
|
|
|
656,346
|
|
|
|
10,150,460
|
|
|
|
10,806,806
|
|
Woodbridge Apts. of Louisville II
|
|
Louisville, KY
|
|
|
190
|
|
|
|
947
|
|
|
|
519,520
|
|
|
|
7,422,933
|
|
|
|
7,942,453
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
85,391,561
|
|
Less accumulated depreciation
(depreciation expense of approximately $2.9 million in 2007)
|
|
|
(31,084,584
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2007
|
|
$
|
54,306,977
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Net Real Estate Assets at December 31, 2007
|
|
$
|
78,031,621
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item 3.
|
Legal
Proceedings.
|
There are no material pending legal proceedings to which the
Partnership is a party or to which any of the properties
collateralizing the Partnerships tax-exempt mortgage
revenue bonds are subject.
16
|
|
Item 4.
|
Submission
of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders.
|
No matter was submitted during the fourth quarter of the fiscal
year ended December 31, 2007 to a vote of the
Partnerships security holders.
PART II
|
|
Item 5.
|
Market
for the Registrants Common Equity, Related Security Holder
Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities.
|
(a) Market Information. BUCs represent assignments by the
sole limited partner of its rights and obligations as a limited
partner. The rights and obligations of BUC holders are set forth
in the Partnerships Agreement of Limited Partnership. BUCs
of the Partnership trade on the NASDAQ Global Market under the
trading symbol ATAXZ. The following table sets forth
the high and low sale prices for the BUCs for each quarterly
period from January 1, 2006 through December 31, 2007.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
1st Quarter
|
|
$
|
8.50
|
|
|
$
|
7.80
|
|
2nd Quarter
|
|
$
|
8.36
|
|
|
$
|
7.75
|
|
3rd Quarter
|
|
$
|
8.16
|
|
|
$
|
7.00
|
|
4th Quarter
|
|
$
|
8.04
|
|
|
$
|
6.35
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
1st Quarter
|
|
$
|
8.20
|
|
|
$
|
7.42
|
|
2nd Quarter
|
|
$
|
7.82
|
|
|
$
|
7.10
|
|
3rd Quarter
|
|
$
|
7.90
|
|
|
$
|
7.21
|
|
4th Quarter
|
|
$
|
8.14
|
|
|
$
|
7.70
|
|
(b) BUC Holders. The approximate number of BUC holders on
December 31, 2007 was 5,000.
(c) Distributions. Distributions to BUC holders were made
on a quarterly basis during 2007, 2006, and 2005 with a special
distribution in December 2005. Total distributions for the years
ended December 31, 2007, 2006, and 2005 were $6,801,000,
$5,312,000 and $7,937,000, respectively. The distributions paid
or accrued per BUC during the fiscal years ended
December 31, 2007, 2006, and 2005 were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the
|
|
|
For the
|
|
|
For the
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
Dec. 31,
|
|
|
Dec. 31,
|
|
|
Dec. 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Cash Distributions
|
|
$
|
0.5400
|
|
|
$
|
0.5400
|
|
|
$
|
0.8068
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See Item 7, Managements Discussion and Analysis
of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, for
information regarding the sources of funds that will be used for
cash distributions and for a discussion of factors which may
adversely affect the Partnerships ability to make cash
distributions at the same levels in 2008 and thereafter.
(d) Use of Proceeds from Issuance of Additional BUCs
Net proceeds realized by the Company from the issuance of the
additional BUCs in 2007 were approximately $27.5 million,
after payment of an underwriters discount and other
offering costs of approximately $2.1 million. The proceeds
were used to acquire additional tax-exempt revenue bonds and
other investments meeting the Partnerships investment
criteria, and for general working capital needs.
(e) Sales of Unregistered Securities. None
(f) Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities. None
17
|
|
Item 6.
|
Selected
Financial Data.
|
Set forth below is selected financial data for the Company as of
and for the years ended December 31, 2004 through 2007 and
for the Partnership as of and for the year ended
December 31, 2003. The information should be read in
conjunction with the Companys consolidated financial
statements and notes thereto filed in response to Item 8 of
this report. In addition, please refer to the discussions in
Item 1 and Item 7 regarding the adoption of
FIN 46R and its effects on the presentation of financial
data in this report on
Form 10-K.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of or
|
|
|
As of or
|
|
|
As of or
|
|
|
As of or
|
|
|
As of or
|
|
|
|
for the
|
|
|
for the
|
|
|
for the
|
|
|
for the
|
|
|
for the
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2007
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2006
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2005
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2004
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2003
|
|
|
Property revenues
|
|
$
|
16,280,151
|
|
|
$
|
14,187,135
|
|
|
$
|
13,891,556
|
|
|
$
|
13,034,770
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Real estate operating expenses
|
|
|
(10,057,506
|
)
|
|
|
(8,781,819
|
)
|
|
|
(8,515,626
|
)
|
|
|
(7,366,291
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expense
|
|
|
(4,165,117
|
)
|
|
|
(2,486,366
|
)
|
|
|
(2,740,703
|
)
|
|
|
(2,817,740
|
)
|
|
|
(48,155
|
)
|
Mortgage revenue bond investment income
|
|
|
3,227,254
|
|
|
|
1,418,289
|
|
|
|
1,061,242
|
|
|
|
923,108
|
|
|
|
8,769,052
|
|
Other bond investment income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,891
|
|
|
|
73,179
|
|
|
|
321,750
|
|
|
|
321,750
|
|
Other interest income
|
|
|
751,797
|
|
|
|
337,008
|
|
|
|
102,474
|
|
|
|
78,367
|
|
|
|
116,266
|
|
Gain on sale of securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
126,750
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for loan losses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,810,000
|
)
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(3,531,192
|
)
|
|
|
(2,106,292
|
)
|
|
|
(1,176,293
|
)
|
|
|
(1,179,896
|
)
|
|
|
(1,615,179
|
)
|
Hurricane related expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(771,666
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
(1,577,551
|
)
|
|
|
(1,575,942
|
)
|
|
|
(2,028,366
|
)
|
|
|
(1,484,598
|
)
|
|
|
(1,139,070
|
)
|
Minority interest
|
|
|
13,030
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations
|
|
$
|
940,866
|
|
|
$
|
996,904
|
|
|
$
|
794,213
|
|
|
$
|
737,804
|
|
|
$
|
4,594,664
|
|
Income (loss) from discontinued operations, (including gain on
sale of $11,667,246 and $18,771,497 in 2006 and 2005,
respectively)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,779,831
|
|
|
|
18,770,929
|
|
|
|
(424,860
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before cumulative effect of accounting change
|
|
|
940,866
|
|
|
|
12,776,735
|
|
|
|
19,565,142
|
|
|
|
312,944
|
|
|
|
4,594,664
|
|
Cumulative effect of accounting change
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(38,023,001
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
940,866
|
|
|
$
|
12,776,735
|
|
|
$
|
19,565,142
|
|
|
$
|
(37,710,057
|
)
|
|
$
|
4,594,664
|
|
Less: general partners interest in net income
|
|
|
99,451
|
|
|
|
1,627,305
|
|
|
|
1,021,216
|
|
|
|
72,436
|
|
|
|
45,947
|
|
Unallocated loss related to variable interest entities
|
|
|
(3,452,591
|
)
|
|
|
3,863,226
|
|
|
|
1,443,519
|
|
|
|
(44,953,615
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Limited partners interest in net income
|
|
$
|
4,294,006
|
|
|
$
|
7,286,204
|
|
|
$
|
17,100,407
|
|
|
$
|
7,171,122
|
|
|
$
|
4,548,717
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Limited partners interest in net income per unit (basic
and diluted):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations
|
|
$
|
0.34
|
|
|
$
|
0.74
|
|
|
$
|
0.58
|
|
|
$
|
0.52
|
|
|
$
|
0.46
|
|
Income (loss) from discontinued operations, (including gain on
sale of $1.91 per unit)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.16
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before cumulative effect of accounting change
|
|
|
0.34
|
|
|
|
0.74
|
|
|
|
1.74
|
|
|
|
0.52
|
|
|
|
0.46
|
|
Cumulative effect of accounting change
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.21
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income, basic and diluted, per unit
|
|
$
|
0.34
|
|
|
$
|
0.74
|
|
|
$
|
1.74
|
|
|
$
|
0.73
|
|
|
$
|
0.46
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributions paid or accrued per BUC
|
|
$
|
0.5400
|
|
|
$
|
0.5400
|
|
|
$
|
0.8068
|
|
|
$
|
0.5400
|
|
|
$
|
0.5400
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investments in tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds, at estimated
fair value
|
|
$
|
66,167,116
|
|
|
$
|
27,103,398
|
|
|
$
|
17,033,964
|
|
|
$
|
16,031,985
|
|
|
$
|
139,197,520
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate assets, net
|
|
$
|
78,031,621
|
|
|
$
|
56,209,929
|
|
|
$
|
56,593,086
|
|
|
$
|
58,243,113
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
164,879,008
|
|
|
$
|
100,200,189
|
|
|
$
|
111,574,124
|
|
|
$
|
118,147,479
|
|
|
$
|
155,553,817
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt
|
|
$
|
91,315,000
|
|
|
$
|
45,770,000
|
|
|
$
|
45,990,000
|
|
|
$
|
62,275,000
|
|
|
$
|
67,495,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of or
|
|
|
As of or
|
|
|
As of or
|
|
|
As of or
|
|
|
As of or
|
|
|
|
for the
|
|
|
for the
|
|
|
for the
|
|
|
for the
|
|
|
for the
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2007
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2006
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2005
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2004
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2003
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities
|
|
$
|
4,227,023
|
|
|
$
|
5,637,095
|
|
|
$
|
3,851,827
|
|
|
$
|
5,128,258
|
|
|
$
|
6,621,089
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities
|
|
$
|
(48,007,185
|
)
|
|
$
|
6,396,786
|
|
|
$
|
23,104,860
|
|
|
$
|
(5,264,436
|
)
|
|
$
|
(21,285,025
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities
|
|
$
|
50,125,180
|
|
|
$
|
(6,855,558
|
)
|
|
$
|
(25,975,424
|
)
|
|
$
|
(843,588
|
)
|
|
$
|
10,786,146
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Available for Distribution (CAD)(1)
|
|
$
|
6,062,931
|
|
|
$
|
7,876,824
|
|
|
$
|
14,919,367
|
|
|
$
|
6,086,921
|
|
|
$
|
6,813,368
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average number of BUCs outstanding, basic and diluted
|
|
|
12,491,490
|
|
|
|
9,837,928
|
|
|
|
9,837,928
|
|
|
|
9,837,928
|
|
|
|
9,837,928
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
To calculate CAD, amortization expense related to debt financing
costs and bond reissuance costs, depreciation expense on MF
Property assets, Tier 2 income due to the general partner
(as defined in the Agreement of Limited Partnership), interest
rate cap expense, provision for loan losses, impairments on
bonds and losses related to VIEs including the cumulative effect
of accounting change, are added back to the Companys net
income (loss) as computed in accordance with GAAP. The Company
uses CAD as a supplemental measurement of its ability to pay
distributions. The Company believes that CAD provides relevant
information about its operations and is necessary along with net
income (loss) for understanding its operating results. |
There is no generally accepted methodology for computing CAD,
and the Companys computation of CAD may not be comparable
to CAD reported by other companies.
Although the Company considers CAD to be a useful measure of its
operating performance, CAD should not be considered as an
alternative to net income (loss) or net cash flows from
operating activities which are calculated in accordance with
GAAP.
The following sets forth a reconciliation of the Companys
net income (loss) as determined in accordance with GAAP and its
CAD for the periods set forth.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
940,866
|
|
|
$
|
12,776,735
|
|
|
$
|
19,565,142
|
|
|
$
|
(37,710,057
|
)
|
|
$
|
4,594,664
|
|
Net (income) loss related to VIEs and eliminations due to
consolidation
|
|
|
3,452,591
|
|
|
|
(3,863,226
|
)
|
|
|
(1,443,519
|
)
|
|
|
4,867,444
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income before impact of VIE consolidation
|
|
$
|
4,393,457
|
|
|
|
8,913,509
|
|
|
|
18,121,623
|
|
|
|
5,180,388
|
|
|
|
4,594,664
|
|
Change in fair value of derivatives and interest rate cap
amortization
|
|
|
249,026
|
|
|
|
210
|
|
|
|
(364,969
|
)
|
|
|
117,916
|
|
|
|
360,549
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expense (Partnership only)
|
|
|
1,478,278
|
|
|
|
25,605
|
|
|
|
24,467
|
|
|
|
196,122
|
|
|
|
48,155
|
|
Tier 2 Income distributable to the General Partner(1)
|
|
|
(57,830
|
)
|
|
|
(1,062,500
|
)
|
|
|
(3,595,754
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for loan losses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
734,000
|
|
|
|
217,654
|
|
|
|
1,810,000
|
|
Impairment on tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
374,841
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CAD
|
|
$
|
6,062,931
|
|
|
$
|
7,876,824
|
|
|
$
|
14,919,367
|
|
|
$
|
6,086,921
|
|
|
$
|
6,813,368
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
As described in Note 3 to the consolidated financial
statements, Net Interest Income representing contingent interest
and Net Residual Proceeds representing contingent (Tier 2
income) will be distributed 75% to the BUC |
19
|
|
|
|
|
holders and 25% to the General Partner. This adjustment
represents the 25% of Tier 2 income due to the General
Partner. For 2007, Lake Forest generated approximately $231,000
of Tier 2 income. For 2006, the Northwoods Lake Apartments
provided for $4.25 million of Tier 2 income. For 2005,
the Clear Lake sale resulted in approximately $14.4 million
of Tier 2 income. |
|
|
Item 7.
|
Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations.
|
General
In this Managements Discussion and Analysis we will
discuss the results of operations in two sections, (1) the
Company, which refers to the consolidated financial
information as reported on a GAAP basis of America First Tax
Exempt Investors, L.P, its subsidiary, America First LP Holding
Corp. (Holding Corp) and the consolidated variable
interest entities (VIEs) as described below and
(2) the Partnership which refers to America
First Tax Exempt Investors, L.P. and Holding Corp as a
stand-alone entity without the consolidation of VIEs. MF
Properties refers to the multifamily apartment projects that are
owned by partnerships of which the Holding Corp is the 99%
limited partner and are consolidated with the Partnership. The
consolidated VIEs refers to certain entities that own
multifamily apartment projects financed with mortgage revenue
bonds held by the Partnership that have been determined to be
variable interest entities and are consolidated with the
Partnership in accordance with Financial Accounting Standards
Board (FASB) Interpretation No. 46R
(FIN 46R.) Throughout this discussion we will
refer to the Company, the Partnership, MF Properties and the
consolidated VIEs as described in this paragraph. This
discussion structure is consistent with the segment reporting of
the Company as presented in the Notes to the consolidated
financial statements of the Company.
Critical
Accounting Policies
The preparation of financial statements in accordance with GAAP
requires management of the Company to make a number of
judgments, assumptions and estimates. The application of these
judgments, assumptions and estimates can affect the amounts of
assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses reported by the
Company. All of the Companys significant accounting
policies are described in Note 2 to the Companys
consolidated financial statements included in Item 8 of
this report. The Company considers the following to be its
critical accounting policies because they involve judgments,
assumptions and estimates by management that significantly
affect the financial statements. If these estimates differ
significantly from actual results, the impact on our
Consolidated Financial Statements may be material.
Variable
Interest Entities (VIEs)
When the Partnership invests in a tax-exempt mortgage revenue
bond which is collateralized by the underlying multifamily
property, the Partnership will evaluate the entity which owns
the property securing the tax-exempt mortgage revenue bond to
determine if it is a VIE as defined by FIN 46R.
FIN 46R is a complex standard that requires significant
analysis and judgment. If it is determined that the entity is a
VIE, the Partnership will then evaluate if it is the primary
beneficiary of such VIE, by determining whether the Partnership
will absorb the majority of the VIEs expected losses,
receive a majority of the VIEs residual returns, or both.
If the Partnership determines itself to be the primary
beneficiary of the VIE, then the assets, liabilities and
financial results of the related multifamily property will be
consolidated in the Partnerships financial statements. If
management incorrectly applies the provisions of FIN 46R,
the Company might improperly consolidate, or fail to
consolidate, an entity.
Purchase
Accounting
Pursuant to SFAS No. 141, Business
Combinations, the Company allocates a portion of the total
acquisition cost of a property acquired to leases in existence
as of the date of acquisition. The estimated valuation of
in-place leases is calculated by applying a risk-adjusted
discount rate to the projected cash flow deficit at each
property during the
lease-up of
these properties. This allocated cost is amortized over the
average remaining term of the leases (approximately six to
twelve months) and is included in the Statement of Operations
under depreciation and amortization expense.
20
Investments
in Tax-Exempt Mortgage Revenue Bonds and Other Tax-Exempt
Bonds
The credit and capital markets have continued to deteriorate. If
uncertainties in these markets continue, the markets deteriorate
further or the Company experiences deterioration in the values
of its investment portfolio, the Company may incur impairments
to its investment portfolio which could negatively impact the
Companys financial condition, cash flows, and reported
earnings.
Valuation As all of the Partnerships
investments in tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds are classified
as available-for-sale securities, they are carried on the
balance sheet at their estimated fair values. The Company bases
the fair value of the tax-exempt bonds, which have a limited
market, on quotes from external sources, such as brokers, for
these or similar bonds. In the limited situation when quotes are
unavailable, the Partnership estimates the fair value for each
bond as the present value of its expected cash flows using a
discount rate for comparable tax-exempt investments. This
calculation methodology encompasses judgment in its application.
As of December 31, 2007, approximately $60.0 million
of the Companys tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds are
valued using broker quotes and approximately $5.7 million
are valued using managements discounted cash flow
analyses. Broker quotes and managements discounted cash
flow analyses provide indicative pricing only. Due to the
limited market for the tax-exempt bonds, these estimates of fair
value do not necessarily represent what the Company would
actually receive in a sale of the bonds.
Effect of classification of securities on
earnings As the Partnerships investments
in tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds are classified as
available-for-sale securities, changes in estimated fair values
are recorded as adjustments to accumulated other comprehensive
income, which is a component of partners capital, rather
than through earnings. The Partnership does not intend to hold
any of its securities for trading purposes; however, if the
Partnerships available-for-sale securities were classified
as trading securities, there could be substantially greater
volatility in the Partnerships earnings because changes in
estimated fair values would be reflected in the
Partnerships earnings.
Review of securities for other-than-temporary
impairment The Partnership periodically reviews
each of its mortgage revenue bonds for impairment by comparing
the estimated fair value of the revenue bond to its carrying
amount. The estimated fair value of the revenue bond is
calculated using a discounted cash flow model using interest
rates for comparable investments. A security is considered
other-than-temporarily impaired if evidence indicates that the
cost of the investment is not recoverable within a reasonable
period of time. If an other-than-temporary impairment exists,
the cost basis of the mortgage bond is written down to its
estimated fair value, with the amount of the write-down
accounted for as a realized loss. The recognition of an
other-than-temporary impairment and the potential impairment
analysis are subject to a considerable degree of judgment, the
results of which when applied under different conditions or
assumptions could have a material impact on the financial
statements. The estimated future cash flow of each revenue bond
depends on the operations of the underlying property and,
therefore is subject to a significant amount of uncertainty in
the estimation of future rental receipts, future real estate
operating expenses, and future capital expenditures. Such
estimates are affected by economic factors such as the rental
markets and labor markets in which the property operates, the
current capitalization rates for properties in the rental
markets, and tax and insurance expenses. Different conditions or
different assumptions applied to the calculation may provide
different results. The Partnership periodically compares its
estimates with historical results to evaluate the reasonableness
and accuracy of its estimates and adjusts its estimates
accordingly.
Revenue recognition The interest income
received by the Partnership from its tax-exempt mortgage revenue
bonds is dependent upon the net cash flow of the underlying
properties. Base interest income on fully performing tax-exempt
mortgage revenue bonds is recognized as it is accrued. Base
interest income on tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds not fully
performing is recognized as it is received. Past due base
interest on tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds, which are or were
previously not fully performing, is recognized as received. The
Partnership reinstates the accrual of base interest once the
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds ability to perform is
adequately demonstrated. Contingent interest income, which is
only received by the Partnership if the properties financed by
the tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds generate excess available
cash flow as set forth in each bond, is recognized as received.
21
Derivative
Instruments and Hedging Activities
The Partnerships investments in interest rate cap
agreements are accounted for under the provisions of
SFAS No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments
and Hedging Activities, (SFAS No. 133) as
amended and interpreted. SFAS No. 133 establishes
accounting and reporting standards for derivative financial
instruments, including certain derivative financial instruments
embedded in other contracts, and for hedging activity.
SFAS No. 133 requires the Partnership to recognize all
derivatives as either assets or liabilities in its financial
statements and record these instruments at their fair values. In
order to achieve hedge accounting treatment, hedging activities
must be appropriately designated, documented and proven to be
effective as a hedge pursuant to the provisions of
SFAS No. 133. The Partnership did not designate its
current hedges as qualifying hedges under SFAS No. 133.
The fair values of the caps at inception are their original
cost. Changes in the fair value of the interest rate cap
agreements are recognized in earnings as interest expense. The
fair value adjustment through earnings can cause a significant
fluctuation in reported net income although it has no impact on
the Partnerships cash flows. Although the Company utilizes
current price quotes by recognized dealers as a basis for
estimating the fair value of its interest rate cap agreements,
the calculation of the fair value involves a considerable degree
of judgment.
Executive
Summary
Overview
The Partnership operates for the purpose of acquiring, holding,
selling and otherwise dealing with a portfolio of federally
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds which have been issued to
provide construction
and/or
permanent financing of multifamily residential apartments. Each
multifamily property financed with tax-exempt mortgage bonds
held by the Partnership is owned by a separate entity. The
Partnership does not hold an ownership interest in any of these
entities. However, in some cases, these entities are treated as
VIEs and, as a result, the assets, liabilities and financial
results of the properties owned by these entities are
consolidated with the Company.
To facilitate its investment strategy of acquiring additional
tax exempt mortgage bonds secured by multifamily apartment
properties, the Partnership may acquire ownership positions in
apartment properties (MF Properties), in order to
ultimately restructure the property ownership through a sale of
the MF Properties and a syndication of low income housing tax
credits (LIHTCs). The Partnership expects to
ultimately restructure the property ownership through a sale of
the MF Properties and a syndication LIHTCs. The Partnership
expects to provide the tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds to the
new property owners as part of the restructuring. Such
restructurings will generally be expected to be initiated within
36 months of the initial investment in MF Properties and
will often coincide with the expiration of the compliance period
relating to LIHTCs previously issued with respect to the MF
Property. The Partnership will not acquire LIHTCs in connection
with these transactions. As of December 31, 2007, the
Partnerships wholly-owned subsidiary, America First LP
Holding Corp., held limited partnership interests in six
entities that own MF Properties containing a total of
544 rental units. Until the Partnership restructures the
property ownership as described above, the MF Properties
operating goal is similar to that of the VIEs as described below.
The VIEs operating goal is to generate increasing amounts
of net rental income from these properties that will allow them
to service debt. In order to achieve this goal, management of
these multifamily apartment properties is focused on:
(i) maintaining high economic occupancy and increasing
rental rates through effective leasing, reduced turnover rates
and providing quality maintenance and services to maximize
resident satisfaction; (ii) managing operating expenses and
achieving cost reductions through operating efficiencies and
economies of scale generally inherent in the management of a
portfolio of multiple properties; and (iii) emphasizing
regular programs of repairs, maintenance and property
improvements to enhance the competitive advantage and value of
the properties in their respective market areas.
Ten of the 17 properties which collateralize the bonds owned by
the Partnership and all of the MF Properties are managed by
America First Properties Management Company (Properties
Management), an affiliate of the Partnership. Management
believes that this relationship provides greater insight and
understanding of the underlying property operations and their
ability to meet debt service requirements to the Partnership.
The properties not
22
managed by Properties Management are Woodbridge Apartments of
Bloomington, Woodbridge Apartments of Louisville, Bella Vista
Apartments, Gardens of DeCordova, Gardens of Weatherford,
Prairiebrook Village, and Runnymede Apartments.
At December 31, 2007, the Partnership held 20 tax exempt
mortgage bonds, eight of which are secured by properties held by
VIEs and, therefore, eliminated in consolidation on the
Companys financial statements. As of December 31,
2007 and 2006, the eight consolidated VIE multifamily apartment
properties contained a total of 1,764 rental units. As of
December 31, 2005, the Company consolidated nine VIE
multifamily apartment properties containing a total of 2,256
Units. The properties underlying the nine non-consolidated
tax-exempt mortgage bonds contain a total of 1,286 rental
units at December 31, 2007. At December 31, 2006 and
2005, the Partnership held four non-consolidated tax-exempt
mortgage bonds secured by apartment properties containing a
total of 574 rental units.
Discussion
of the Partnership Owned Apartment Properties and the
Partnership Bond Holdings and the Related Apartment Properties
as of December 31, 2007
The following discussion outlines the individual apartment
properties financed by the Partnership and the MF Properties in
which it holds an ownership interest and briefly discusses their
overall operations and financial results. The discussion also
outlines the bond holdings of the Partnership, discusses the
significant terms of the bonds, identifies those ownership
entities which are consolidated VIEs of the Company and briefly
discusses the overall operations and financial results of the
underlying properties.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage of
|
|
|
Economic Occupancy(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Occupied
|
|
|
for the Period Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
of Units
|
|
|
Units as of December 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
Property Name
|
|
Location
|
|
of Units
|
|
|
Occupied
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Non-Consolidated Properties
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chandler Creek Apartments
|
|
Round Rock, TX
|
|
|
216
|
|
|
|
197
|
|
|
|
91
|
%
|
|
|
92
|
%
|
|
|
70
|
%
|
|
|
71
|
%
|
Clarkson College
|
|
Omaha, NE
|
|
|
142
|
|
|
|
118
|
|
|
|
83
|
%
|
|
|
83
|
%
|
|
|
80
|
%
|
|
|
70
|
%
|
Deerfield Apartments(5)
|
|
Blair, NE
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
83
|
%
|
|
|
64
|
%
|
|
|
65
|
%
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
Bella Vista Apartments(2)
|
|
Gainesville, TX
|
|
|
144
|
|
|
|
133
|
|
|
|
92
|
%
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
72
|
%
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
Woodland Park(3)
|
|
Topeka, KS
|
|
|
236
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
Prairiebrook Village(3)
|
|
Gardner, KS
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
Runnymede Apartments(4)
|
|
Austin, TX
|
|
|
252
|
|
|
|
227
|
|
|
|
90
|
%
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
90
|
%
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
Gardens of DeCordova(3)
|
|
Granbury, TX
|
|
|
76
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
Gardens of Weatherford(3)
|
|
Weatherford, TX
|
|
|
76
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,286
|
|
|
|
508
|
|
|
|
89
|
%
|
|
|
84
|
%
|
|
|
71
|
%
|
|
|
71
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VIEs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ashley Pointe at Eagle Crest
|
|
Evansville, IN
|
|
|
144
|
|
|
|
128
|
|
|
|
89
|
%
|
|
|
98
|
%
|
|
|
93
|
%
|
|
|
86
|
%
|
Ashley Square
|
|
Des Moines, IA
|
|
|
150
|
|
|
|
144
|
|
|
|
96
|
%
|
|
|
81
|
%
|
|
|
81
|
%
|
|
|
80
|
%
|
Bent Tree Apartments
|
|
Columbia, SC
|
|
|
232
|
|
|
|
210
|
|
|
|
91
|
%
|
|
|
92
|
%
|
|
|
81
|
%
|
|
|
80
|
%
|
Fairmont Oaks Apartments
|
|
Gainsville, FL
|
|
|
178
|
|
|
|
167
|
|
|
|
94
|
%
|
|
|
97
|
%
|
|
|
91
|
%
|
|
|
87
|
%
|
Iona Lakes Apartments
|
|
Ft. Myers, FL
|
|
|
350
|
|
|
|
280
|
|
|
|
80
|
%
|
|
|
88
|
%
|
|
|
70
|
%
|
|
|
90
|
%
|
Lake Forest Apartments
|
|
Daytona Beach, FL
|
|
|
240
|
|
|
|
225
|
|
|
|
94
|
%
|
|
|
98
|
%
|
|
|
98
|
%
|
|
|
97
|
%
|
Woodbridge Apts. of Bloomington III
|
|
Bloomington, IN
|
|
|
280
|
|
|
|
271
|
|
|
|
97
|
%
|
|
|
97
|
%
|
|
|
94
|
%
|
|
|
92
|
%
|
Woodbridge Apts. of Louisville II
|
|
Louisville, KY
|
|
|
190
|
|
|
|
185
|
|
|
|
97
|
%
|
|
|
94
|
%
|
|
|
92
|
%
|
|
|
91
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,764
|
|
|
|
1,610
|
|
|
|
91
|
%
|
|
|
93
|
%
|
|
|
86
|
%
|
|
|
89
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage of
|
|
|
Economic Occupancy(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Occupied
|
|
|
for the Period Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
of Units
|
|
|
Units as of December 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
Property Name
|
|
Location
|
|
of Units
|
|
|
Occupied
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
MF Properties
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Meadowview(4)
|
|
Erlanger, KY
|
|
|
64
|
|
|
|
59
|
|
|
|
92
|
%
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
83
|
%
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
Eagle Ridge(4)
|
|
Highland Heights, KY
|
|
|
118
|
|
|
|
113
|
|
|
|
96
|
%
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
90
|
%
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
Crescent Village(4)
|
|
Cincinnati, OH
|
|
|
90
|
|
|
|
81
|
|
|
|
90
|
%
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
90
|
%
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
Willow Bend(4)
|
|
Columbus (Hilliard), OH
|
|
|
92
|
|
|
|
90
|
|
|
|
98
|
%
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
93
|
%
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
Postwoods I(4)
|
|
Reynoldsburg, OH
|
|
|
92
|
|
|
|
83
|
|
|
|
90
|
%
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
83
|
%
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
Postwoods II(4)
|
|
Reynoldsburg, OH
|
|
|
88
|
|
|
|
82
|
|
|
|
93
|
%
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
83
|
%
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
544
|
|
|
|
508
|
|
|
|
93
|
%
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
88
|
%
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Economic occupancy is presented for the year ended
December 31, 2007 and 2006, and is defined as the net
rental income received divided by the maximum amount of rental
income to be derived from each property. This statistic is
reflective of rental concessions, delinquent rents and
non-revenue units such as model units and employee units. Actual
occupancy is a point in time measure while Economic occupancy is
a measurement over the period presented, therefore, Economic
occupancy for a period may exceed the Actual occupancy at any
point in time. |
|
(2) |
|
Bella Vista was under initial construction as of
December 31, 2006, and therefore has no occupancy data for
that period. |
|
(3) |
|
These properties were under initial construction as of
December 31, 2007, and therefore have no occupancy data. |
|
(4) |
|
Previous period occupancy numbers are not available, as this is
a new investment. |
|
(5) |
|
For Deerfield, only Physical occupancy is presented as of
December 31, 2006, as this is a new investment. |
Ashley Pointe Ashley Pointe at Eagle Crest
is located in Evansville, Indiana and contains 144 units.
The tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds owned by the Partnership
are traditional 80/20 bonds issued prior to the Tax
Reform Act of 1986. These bonds require that 20% of the rental
units be set aside for tenants whose income does not exceed 80%
of the area median income, without adjustment for household
size. The bonds have an outstanding principal amount of
$6.7 million and have a base interest rate of 7.0% per
annum. The bonds also contain a participation interest in any
excess cash flow generated by the underlying property through
the potential payment of contingent interest. The bond accrues
contingent interest at a rate of 3.5% annually and such
contingent interest is payable only if the underlying property
generates excess operating cash flows or realizes excess cash
through capital appreciation and a related sale or refinancing
of the property. To date, the property has not paid any
contingent interest and the Partnership has not recognized any
contingent interest income related to this bond. Because of its
capital structure and the participation interests contained in
the bond owned by the Partnership this property is a
consolidated VIE. Ashley Pointes operations resulted in
net operating income (calculated as property revenue less
salaries, advertising, administration, utilities, repair and
maintenance, insurance, taxes and management fee expenses) of
$611,000 and $467,000 on net revenue of approximately
$1.13 million and $1.09 million in 2007 and 2006
respectively. This improvement versus 2006 is primarily the
result of increased revenue from improved occupancy and a
decrease in real estate tax expense.
Ashley Square Ashley Square Apartments is
located in Des Moines, Iowa and contains 150 units. The
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds owned by the Partnership are
traditional 80/20 bonds issued prior to the Tax
Reform Act of 1986. These bonds require that 20% of the rental
units be set aside for tenants whose income does not exceed 80%
of the area median income, without adjustment for household
size. The bonds have an outstanding principal amount of
$6.5 million and have a base interest rate of 7.5% per
annum. The bonds also contain a participation interest in any
excess cash flow generated by the underlying property through
the potential payment of contingent interest. The bond accrues
contingent interest at a rate of 3.0% annually and such
contingent interest is
24
payable only if the underlying property generates excess
operating cash flows or realizes excess cash through capital
appreciation and a related sale or refinancing of the property.
To date, the property has not paid any contingent interest and
the Partnership has not recognized any contingent interest
income related to this bond. Because of its capital structure
and the participation interests contained in the bond owned by
the Partnership this property is a consolidated VIE.
Additionally, the equity ownership of this property is held by
individuals or entities affiliated with the general partner.
Ashley Squares operations resulted in net operating income
of $189,000 and $240,000 on net revenue of approximately
$1.06 million and $1.07 million in 2007 and 2006
respectively. The 2007 results were negatively impacted by
significant capital improvement projects which resulted in
varying numbers of units being unavailable for rent throughout
the year. With the completion of these projects in 2007,
occupancy numbers have improved and property management expects
improved operations in 2008.
Bella Vista Bella Vista Apartments is located
in Gainesville, Texas and contains 144 units. The
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds owned by the Partnership are
private activity housing bonds issued in conjunction with the
syndication of LITHCs. The bonds have an outstanding principal
amount of $6.8 million and have a base interest rate of
6.15% per annum. The bonds do not contain participation
interests. We have determined that the company that owns Bella
Vista Apartments does not meet the definition of a VIE. As a
result, this property is not consolidated. June 2007 was the
first full month of operations at Bella Vista. In 2007, Bella
Vistas operations resulted in net operating income of
$400,000 on net revenue of approximately $793,000.
Bent Tree Bent Tree Apartments is located in
Columbia, South Carolina and contains 232 units. The
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds owned by the Partnership are
traditional 80/20 bonds issued prior to the Tax
Reform Act of 1986. These bonds require that 20% of the rental
units be set aside for tenants whose income does not exceed 80%
of the area median income, without adjustment for household
size. The bonds have an outstanding principal amount of
$11.1 million and have a base interest rate of 7.1% per
annum. The bonds also contain a participation interest in any
excess cash flow generated by the underlying property through
the potential payment of contingent interest. The bond accrues
contingent interest at a rate of 1.9% annually and such
contingent interest is payable only if the underlying property
generates excess operating cash flows or realizes excess cash
through capital appreciation and a related sale or refinancing
of the property. To date, the property has not paid any
contingent interest and the Partnership has not recognized any
contingent interest income related to this bond. Because of its
capital structure and the participation interests contained in
the bond owned by the Partnership this property is a
consolidated VIE. Additionally, the equity ownership of this
property is held by individuals or entities affiliated with the
general partner. Bent Trees operations resulted in net
operating income of $685,000 and $580,000 on net revenue of
approximately $1.53 million and $1.46 million in 2007
and 2006 respectively. This increase in net operating income is
the result of increased revenue due to an increase in occupancy
and other miscellaneous revenues as well as a decrease in salary
expenses versus 2006.
Chandler Creek Chandler Creek Apartments is
located in Round Rock, Texas and contains 216 units. The
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds owned by the Partnership were
issued under Section 145 of the Code by a not-for-profit
entity qualified under Section 501(c) 3 of the Code. The
Chandler Creek bonds are in technical default and interest is
being paid on these bonds at a base rate below the stated rate.
In January 2004, the Company entered into a forbearance
agreement with the owner of Chandler Creek Apartments which set
forth the terms under which the Company agreed to forbear from
the exercise of remedies against the owner. Among the conditions
to forbearance is an agreement for current interest payments at
a rate below the stated rate. In April 2006, the Company
terminated the forbearance agreement with the owner. The
termination of the forbearance agreement allows the Company to
seek additional remedies including the ultimate foreclosure of
the property, if necessary. The Company does not currently
intend to exercise its right to foreclose on the property as the
property continues to pursue alternatives to ultimately satisfy
its obligations to its creditors. The bonds have an outstanding
principal amount of $11.5 million and are currently paying
a base interest rate of 6.0% per annum. The bonds do not contain
participation interests. Because the property is owned by a
501(c) 3 not-for-profit entity it is not a VIE. Chandler
Creeks operations resulted in net operating income of
$1.1 million and $788,000 on net revenue of approximately
$1.9 million and $1.7 million in 2007 and 2006
respectively. The increase in net operating income is due to
increased fee revenues and a decrease in professional fees.
Clarkson College Clarkson College is a 142
bed student housing facility located in Omaha, Nebraska. The
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds owned by the Partnership were
issued under Section 145 of the Code by a not-
25
for-profit entity qualified under Section 501(c) 3 of the
Code. The bonds have an outstanding principal amount of
$6.1 million and have a base interest rate of 6.0% per
annum. The bonds also contain a participation interest in any
excess cash flow generated by the underlying property through
the potential payment of contingent interest. The bonds accrue
contingent interest at a rate of 1.25% annually and such
contingent interest is payable only if the underlying property
generates excess operating cash flows or realizes excess cash
through capital appreciation and a related sale or refinancing
of the property. To date, the property has not paid any
contingent interest and the Partnership has not recognized any
contingent interest income related to this bond. Because the
property is owned by a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit entity it is not
a VIE. Clarkson Colleges operations resulted in net
operating income of $499,000 and $393,000 on net revenue of
approximately $695,000 and $588,000 in 2007 and 2006
respectively. As shown in the table above, occupancy trends are
positive as economic occupancy increased from 2006 to 2007
driving the increased net operating income.
Crescent Village Crescent Village Townhomes
is located in Cincinnati, Ohio and contains 90 units.
Crescent Village is one of the MF Properties consolidated with
the Partnership. Accordingly, there are no tax-exempt bonds
currently secured by this property. Crescent Village has
realized approximately $190,000 in net operating income on
revenue of $386,000 since its acquisition on June 29, 2007.
Deerfield Deerfield Apartments is located in
Blair, Nebraska and contains 72 units. The tax-exempt
mortgage revenue bonds owned by the Partnership were issued
under Section 145 of the Code by a not-for-profit entity
qualified under Section 501(c) 3 of the Code. The
Series A bonds have an outstanding principal amount of
$3.3 million and have a base interest rate of 6.25% per
annum. The Series B bonds have an outstanding principal
amount of $90,000 and have a base interest rate of 8.5% per
annum The bonds do not contain participation interests. Because
the property is owned by a 501(c) 3 not-for-profit entity it is
not a consolidated VIE. In 2007, Deerfields operations
resulted in net operating income of $224,000 on net revenue of
approximately $408,000. These bonds were purchased in the fourth
quarter of 2006.
Eagle Ridge Eagle Ridge Townhomes is located
in Erlanger, Kentucky and contains 64 units. Eagle Ridge is
one of the MF Properties consolidated with the Partnership.
Accordingly, there are no tax-exempt bonds currently secured by
this property. Eagle Ridge has realized approximately $109,000
in net operating income on revenue of $230,000 since its
acquisition on June 29, 2007.
Fairmont Oaks Fairmont Oaks Apartments is
located in Gainesville, Florida and contains 178 units. The
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds owned by the Partnership are
traditional 80/20 bonds issued prior to the Tax
Reform Act of 1986. These bonds require that 20% of the rental
units be set aside for tenants whose income does not exceed 80%
of the area median income, without adjustment for household
size. The bonds have an outstanding principal amount of
$7.8 million and have a base interest rate of 6.2% per
annum. The bonds also contain a participation interest in any
excess cash flow generated by the underlying property through
the potential payment of contingent interest. The bond accrues
contingent interest at a rate of 2.2% annually and such
contingent interest is payable only if the underlying property
generates excess operating cash flows or realizes excess cash
through capital appreciation and a related sale or refinancing
of the property. To date, the property has not paid any
contingent interest and the Partnership has not recognized any
contingent interest income related to this bond. Because of its
capital structure and the participation interests contained in
the bond owned by the Partnership this property is a
consolidated VIE. Additionally, the equity ownership of this
property is held by individuals or entities affiliated with the
general partner. Fairmont Oaks operations resulted in net
operating income of $808,000 and $643,000 on net revenue of
approximately $1.6 million and $1.4 million in 2007
and 2006 respectively. The increase in net operating income is a
direct result of increased economic occupancy.
Gardens of DeCordova The Gardens of DeCordova
Apartments is currently under construction in Granbury, Texas
and will contain 76 units upon completion. The Partnership
owns the tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds financing this
project. Based on the construction schedule, finished units are
expected to be available for leasing starting in April 2008 with
a final completion of the project expected by November 2008. The
developer and principals have guaranteed completion and
stabilization of the project. The general contractor has a
guaranteed maximum price contract and payment and performance
bonds are in place. The project has an additional five months of
capitalized interest reserve sufficient to fund debt service
beyond the expected date of completion.
26
Gardens of Weatherford The Gardens of
Weatherford Apartments is currently under construction in
Weatherford, Texas and will contain 76 units upon
completion. The Partnership owns the tax-exempt mortgage revenue
bonds financing this project. The estimated completion date is
November 2008 with some units available for rent prior to that
date. The developer and principals have guaranteed completion
and stabilization of the project. The general contractor has a
guaranteed maximum price contract and payment and performance
bonds are in place. The project has an additional two months of
capitalized interest reserve sufficient to fund debt service
beyond the expected date of completion.
Iona Lakes Iona Lakes Apartments is located
in Fort Myers, Florida and contains 350 units. The
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds owned by the Partnership are
traditional 80/20 bonds issued prior to the Tax
Reform Act of 1986. These bonds require that 20% of the rental
units be set aside for tenants whose income does not exceed 80%
of the area median income, without adjustment for household
size. The bonds have an outstanding principal amount of
$16.4 million and have a base interest rate of 6.9% per
annum. The bonds also contain a participation interest in any
excess cash flow generated by the underlying property through
the potential payment of contingent interest. The bond accrues
contingent interest at a rate of 2.6% annually and such
contingent interest is payable only if the underlying property
generates excess operating cash flows or realizes excess cash
through capital appreciation and a related sale or refinancing
of the property. To date, the property has not paid any
contingent interest and the Partnership has not recognized any
contingent interest income related to this bond. Because of its
capital structure and the participation interests contained in
the bond owned by the Partnership this property is a
consolidated VIE. Additionally, the equity ownership of this
property is held by individuals or entities affiliated with the
general partner. Iona Lakes operations resulted in net
operating income of $1.1 million and $1.6 million on net
revenue of approximately $2.6 million and $3.2 million
in 2007 and 2006 respectively. As shown in the table above,
occupancy trends were lower in 2007 which directly impacted
operating results. The decline in occupancy resulted from a
number of month-to-month tenants returning to their hurricane
damaged homes as repairs were completed and has not recovered
due to local market conditions.
Lake Forest Lake Forest Apartments is
located in Daytona Beach, Florida and contains 240 units.
The tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds owned by the Partnership
are traditional 80/20 bonds issued prior to the Tax
Reform Act of 1986. These bonds require that 20% of the rental
units be set aside for tenants whose income does not exceed 80%
of the area median income, without adjustment for household
size. The bonds have an outstanding principal amount of
$10.2 million and have a base interest rate of 6.9% per
annum. The bonds also contain a participation interest in any
excess cash flow generated by the underlying property through
the potential payment of contingent interest. The bond accrues
contingent interest at a rate of 1.6% annually and such
contingent interest is payable only if the underlying property
generates excess operating cash flows or realizes excess cash
through capital appreciation and a related sale or refinancing
of the property. To date, the property has paid approximately
$231,000 of contingent interest, representing all of the
contingent interest income recognized by the Partnership in
2007. Because of its capital structure and the participation
interests contained in the bond owned by the Partnership this
property is a consolidated VIE. Additionally, the equity
ownership of this property is held by individuals or entities
affiliated with the general partner. Lake Forests
operations resulted in net operating income of $1.1 million
and $1.2 million on net revenue of approximately
$2.07 million and $2.14 million in 2007 and 2006
respectively.
Meadowview Meadowview Apartments is located
in Highland Heights, Kentucky and contains 118 units.
Meadowview is one of the MF Properties consolidated with the
Partnership. Accordingly, there are no tax-exempt bonds
currently secured by this property. Meadowview has realized
approximately $190,000 in net operating income on revenue of
$429,000 since its acquisition on June 29, 2007.
Prairiebrook Village In June 2007, the
Company acquired the Prairiebrook Village bonds. The bonds were
issued in order to construct a 72 unit multifamily
apartment complex in Gardner, Kansas. On February 11, 2008,
the bond trustee notified the owner and developer of
Prairiebrook Village that they were not in compliance with
certain sections of the bond indenture. The occurrence and
continuation of this non-compliance could become an event of
default. The Partnership is currently working with the trustee,
developer, and owners of the project to develop an action plan.
Should the non-compliance become an event of default, the
Partnership will exercise all remedies at its disposal including
recovering all moneys still on deposit with the trustee, sale of
all assets owned by the project, and will pursue owner and
developer guarantees. The Partnership anticipates that, should
it have to exercise its remedies, amounts recovered will be
sufficient to repay the par amount of the bonds.
27
Postwoods I Postwoods Townhomes is located
in Reynoldsburg, Ohio and contains 92 units. Postwoods I is
one of the MF Properties consolidated with the Partnership.
Accordingly, there are no tax-exempt bonds currently secured by
this property. Postwoods I has realized approximately $160,000
in net operating income on revenue of $349,000 since its
acquisition on June 29, 2007.
Postwoods II Postwoods Townhomes is located
in Reynoldsburg, Ohio and contains 88 units.
Postwoods II is one of the MF Properties consolidated with
the Partnership. Accordingly, there are no tax-exempt bonds
currently secured by this property. Postwoods II has
realized approximately $109,000 in net operating income on
revenue of $303,000 since its acquisition on June 29, 2007.
Runnymede Apartments Runnymede Apartments is
located in Austin, Texas and contains 252 units. The
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds owned by the Partnership are
private activity housing bonds issued in conjunction with the
syndication of LITHCs. The bonds have an outstanding principal
amount of $10.8 million and have a base interest rate of
6.00%. The bonds do not contain participation interests. We have
determined that the company that owns Runnymede Apartments does
not meet the definition of a VIE. As a result, this property is
not consolidated. These bonds were purchased in October 2007, as
such full year operating results are not available.
Willow Bend Willow Bend Townhomes is located
in Columbus (Hilliard), Ohio and contains 92 units. Willow
Bend is one of the MF Properties consolidated with the
Partnership. Accordingly, there are no tax-exempt bonds
currently secured by this property. Willow Bend has realized
approximately $162,000 in net operating income on revenue of
$369,000 since its acquisition on June 29, 2007.
Woodbridge at Bloomington Woodbridge
Apartments at Bloomington is located in Bloomington, Indiana and
contains 280 units. The tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds
owned by the Partnership are traditional 80/20 bonds
issued prior to the Tax Reform Act of 1986. These bonds require
that 20% of the rental units be set aside for tenants whose
income does not exceed 80% of the area median income, without
adjustment for household size. The bonds have an outstanding
principal amount of $12.6 million and have a base interest
rate of 7.5% per annum. The bonds also contain a participation
interest in any excess cash flow generated by the underlying
property through the potential payment of contingent interest.
The bond accrues contingent interest at a rate of 3.5% annually
and such contingent interest is payable only if the underlying
property generates excess operating cash flows or realizes
excess cash through capital appreciation and a related sale or
refinancing of the property. To date, the property has not paid
any contingent interest and the Partnership has not recognized
any contingent interest income related to this bond. Because of
its capital structure and the participation interests contained
in the bond owned by the Partnership this property is a
consolidated VIE. Woodbridge at Bloomingtons operations
resulted in net operating income of $1.1 million and
$1.0 million on net revenue of approximately
$2.3 million and $2.2 million in 2007 and 2006
respectively. As shown in the table above, occupancy trends are
positive as physical occupancy remained high and economic
occupancy increased from 2006 to 2007. The increase in net
operating income is a direct result of a decrease in real estate
taxes.
Woodbridge at Louisville Woodbridge
Apartments at Louisville is located in Louisville, Kentucky and
contains 190 units. The tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds
owned by the Partnership are traditional 80/20 bonds
issued prior to the Tax Reform Act of 1986. These bonds require
that 20% of the rental units be set aside for tenants whose
income does not exceed 80% of the area median income, without
adjustment for household size. The bonds have an outstanding
principal amount of $9.0 million and have a base interest
rate of 7.5% per annum. The bonds also contain a participation
interest in any excess cash flow generated by the underlying
property through the potential payment of contingent interest.
The bond accrues contingent interest at a rate of 3.5% annually
and such contingent interest is payable only if the underlying
property generates excess operating cash flows or realizes
excess cash through capital appreciation and a related sale or
refinancing of the property. To date, the property has not paid
any contingent interest and the Partnership has not recognized
any contingent interest income related to this bond. Because of
its capital structure and the participation interests contained
in the bond owned by the Partnership this property is a
consolidated VIE. Woodbridge at Louisvilles operations
resulted in net operating income of $749,000 and $755,000 on net
revenue of approximately $1.7 million and $1.6 million
in 2007 and 2006 respectively.
Woodland Park Woodland Park Apartments is
currently under construction in Topeka, Kansas and will contain
236 units upon completion. The Partnership owns the
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds financing this
28
project. Based on the construction schedule, finished units are
expected to be available for leasing starting in May 2008 with a
final completion of the project expected by May 2009. The
developer and principals have guaranteed completion and
stabilization of the project. The general contractor has a
guaranteed maximum price contract and payment and performance
bonds are in place. The project has an additional four months of
capitalized interest reserve sufficient to fund debt service
beyond the expected date of completion.
The Company has determined that the underlying entities that own
the Runnymede Apartments, Prairiebrook Village Apartments,
Woodland Park Apartments, the Gardens of DeCordova Apartments,
the Gardens of Weatherford Apartments, Clarkson College,
Chandler Creek Apartments, Bella Vista Apartments, and the
Deerfield Apartments which are financed by bonds owned by the
Partnership do not meet the definition of a VIE and accordingly,
their financial statements are not required to be consolidated
into the Companys consolidated financial statements under
FIN 46R.
Results
of Operations
The
Consolidated Company
The tables below compare the results of operations for the
Company for 2007, 2006, and 2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the
|
|
|
For the
|
|
|
For the
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2007
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2006
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2005
|
|
|
Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property revenues
|
|
$
|
16,280,151
|
|
|
$
|
14,187,135
|
|
|
$
|
13,891,556
|
|
Mortgage revenue bond investment income
|
|
|
3,227,254
|
|
|
|
1,418,289
|
|
|
|
1,061,242
|
|
Other bond investment income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,891
|
|
|
|
73,179
|
|
Other interest income
|
|
|
751,797
|
|
|
|
337,008
|
|
|
|
102,474
|
|
Gain on sale of securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
126,750
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Revenues
|
|
|
20,259,202
|
|
|
|
15,947,323
|
|
|
|
15,255,201
|
|
Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate operating (exclusive of items shown below)
|
|
|
10,057,506
|
|
|
|
8,781,819
|
|
|
|
8,515,626
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
4,165,117
|
|
|
|
2,486,366
|
|
|
|
2,740,703
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
3,531,192
|
|
|
|
2,106,292
|
|
|
|
1,176,293
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
1,577,551
|
|
|
|
1,575,942
|
|
|
|
2,028,366
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Expenses
|
|
|
19,331,366
|
|
|
|
14,950,419
|
|
|
|
14,460,988
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interest in net loss of consolidated subsidiary
|
|
|
13,030
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations
|
|
|
940,866
|
|
|
|
996,904
|
|
|
|
794,213
|
|
Income from discontinued operations, (including gain on sale of
$11,667,246 and $18,771,497 in 2006 and 2005, respectively)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,779,831
|
|
|
|
18,770,929
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
940,866
|
|
|
|
12,776,735
|
|
|
|
19,565,142
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year
Ended December 31, 2007 Compared to the Year Ended
December 31, 2006
Property Revenues. Property revenues increased
approximately $2.1 million for the year ended
December 31, 2007 compared to the same period of 2006. The
increase is attributable to the acquisition of the MF Properties
which had 2007 revenue of approximately $2.1 million.
Annual net rental revenues per unit related to the VIEs
decreased from approximately $7,632 in 2006 to approximately
$7,534 in 2007, or $98 per unit. Annual net rental revenues per
unit related to the MF Properties were, on an annualized basis,
$7,427 per unit in 2007.
29
Mortgage revenue bond investment income. The
increase in mortgage revenue bond investment income from 2006 to
2007 is primarily due to income generated by the tax-exempt
mortgage bonds acquired in 2007 plus a full year of income from
bonds acquired during 2006. In 2007, a total of seven new bond
investments were acquired with a total carrying value of
approximately $42.0 million as of December 31, 2007.
Income from these new investments accounted for
$1.3 million of the total increase. The remaining increase
is attributable to a full year of income on bond investments
acquired in 2006.
Other interest income. Other interest income
represents interest earned on cash and cash equivalents. The
increase is attributable to higher average balances of cash and
cash equivalents during the year which resulted from the
issuance of additional BUCs in April 2007.
Real estate operating expenses. Real estate
operating expenses increased approximately $1.3 million
during 2007 compared to 2006. This increase is primarily
attributable to the purchase of the MF Properties which had
operating expenses of approximately $1.2 million.
Depreciation and amortization. Depreciation
and amortization increased approximately $1.7 million in
2007 compared to 2006. Depreciation is primarily associated with
the apartment properties of the consolidated VIEs and the MF
Properties. Amortization is primarily associated with in-place
lease assets recorded as part of the purchase accounting for the
acquisition of the MF Properties. Depreciation and amortization
related to the MF Properties accounted for the majority of
the increase as depreciation expense on the MF Properties was
approximately $459,000 and amortization related to the MF
Properties was approximately $984,000 in 2007.
Interest expense. Interest expense increased
approximately $1.4 million during 2007 compared to 2006 due
to higher levels of borrowing and the mark-to-market adjustments
on our interest rate caps. Total outstanding debt increased from
approximately $45.8 million at December 31, 2006 to
approximately $91.3 million as of December 31, 2007.
Interest expense on the new debt accounted for approximately
$1.3 million of the overall increase. The remaining
increase is attributable to the effect of interest rate cap
expense which is the result of marking our interest rate caps to
fair value plus amortization of premiums paid for the caps. For
the year ended December 31, 2006, this fair value
adjustment increased interest expense by $210 as compared to an
increase in interest expense in 2007 of $74,000.
General and administrative expenses. General
and administrative expenses were consistent between 2007 and
2006.
Year
Ended December 31, 2006 Compared to the Year Ended
December 31, 2005
Property Revenues. Property revenues increased
approximately $296,000 for the year ended December 31, 2006
compared to the same period of 2005. The increase is primarily
attributable to an increase in net rental revenue resulting from
the increase in economic occupancy. Annual net rental revenues
per unit increased from approximately $7,529 in 2005 to
approximately $7,632 in 2006, or $103 per unit. The largest
increases in per unit rents were realized at Woodbridge
Apartment of Bloomington, Woodbridge Apartments of Louisville
and Lake Forest where the properties combined to increase rental
revenues by approximately $234,000 or $319 per unit for the year
ended December 31, 2006 compared to 2005.
Mortgage revenue bond investment income. The
increase in mortgage revenue bond investment income from 2005 to
2006 is primarily due to income generated by the tax-exempt
mortgage bonds acquired in 2006. Specifically, the Bella Vista
and Deerfield bonds were acquired in the second and fourth
quarters of 2006, respectively. The interest income from Bella
Vista accounted for most of the increase.
Other interest income. Other interest income
represents interest earned on cash and cash equivalents. The
increase is attributable to higher average balances of cash and
cash equivalents during the year which resulted from the Clear
Lake and Northwoods transactions.
Gain on sale of securities. The Company sold
its entire interest in the Museum Tower bonds during the first
quarter of 2005 realizing a gain on the sale of securities of
$126,750. There were no such sales of securities in 2006.
Real estate operating expenses. Real estate
operating expenses increased during 2006 compared to 2005. This
increase is related to spending on ongoing repairs and
maintenance in order to make the properties more
30
attractive to current and potential tenants. Additionally, the
properties realized increased professional services fees, real
estate taxes and insurance costs.
Depreciation and amortization. Depreciation
and amortization consists primarily of depreciation associated
with the apartment properties of the consolidated VIEs. The
decrease in depreciation expense in 2006 is attributable to
certain assets becoming fully depreciated during the year.
Interest expense. Interest expense increased
significantly when comparing 2006 to 2005 due mainly to
increased interest rates on our variable interest debt and the
mark-to-market adjustments on our interest rate caps. The
effective borrowing rates for the year on our variable interest
debt increased approximately 1%, or $477,000. The remaining
increase is attributable to the effect of interest rate cap
expense which is the result of marking our interest rate caps to
market plus amortization of premiums paid for the caps. For the
year ended December 31, 2005 this mark-to-market adjustment
reduced interest expense by $365,000 as compared to an increase
in interest expense in 2006 of $210.
General and administrative expenses. General
and administrative expenses declined during 2006 compared to the
same period in 2005 primarily as a result of the payment of
$359,000 of deferred administrative fees in 2005. These fees
were previously deferred by the general partner, however, in
conjunction with the sale of Clear Lake Colony Apartments, these
fees were paid in December 2005. There were no such deferred
fees paid in 2006. Additionally, salaries and benefits expense
decreased approximately $90,000 for the year ended
December 31, 2006 compared to 2005 due mainly to lower
bonus accruals and lower benefit costs.
The
Partnership
The Partnership was formed for the primary purpose of acquiring,
holding, selling and otherwise dealing with a portfolio of
federally tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds which have been
issued to provide construction
and/or
permanent financing of multifamily residential apartments. The
Partnerships business objectives are to: (i) preserve
and protect its capital; (ii) provide regular cash
distributions to BUC holders; and (iii) provide a potential
for an enhanced federally tax-exempt yield as a result of a
participation interest in the net cash flow and net capital
appreciation of the underlying real estate properties financed
by the tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds.
The Partnership is pursuing a business strategy of acquiring
additional tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds on a leveraged
basis in order to: (i) increase the amount of tax-exempt
interest available for distribution to its BUC holders;
(ii) reduce risk through asset diversification and interest
rate hedging; and (iii) achieve economies of scale. The
Partnership seeks to achieve its investment growth strategy by
investing in additional tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds and
related investments, taking advantage of attractive financing
structures available in the tax-exempt securities market and
entering into interest rate risk management instruments.
Each of the tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds bears tax-exempt
interest at a fixed rate and ten of the bonds provide for the
payment of additional contingent interest that is payable solely
from available net cash flow generated by the financed property.
At December 31, 2007, all of the Partnerships
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds, with the exemption of
Chandler Creek, were paying their full amount of base interest.
The Partnership has the ability and may restructure the terms of
its tax-exempt mortgage revenue bond to reduce the base interest
rate payable on these bonds. The Partnership remains aware of
this potential and continues to monitor the performance of the
multifamily properties collateralizing its tax-exempt mortgage
revenue bonds.
The Partnership has financed the acquisition of tax-exempt
mortgage revenue bonds through the securitization of certain of
its tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds under the Merrill Lynch
P-Float program. As of December 31, 2007 the Partnership
has securitized $71.4 million of its tax-exempt mortgage
revenue bond portfolio. See the discussion of Liquidity and
Capital Resources below for further discussion.
The Partnership may make taxable loans or acquire direct
ownership interests in real property with the ultimate purpose
of acquiring tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds secured by the
same property. The Partnership may also make taxable loans to
provide capital project funding to a property securing a
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bond already owned by the
Partnership. Therefore, the business purpose of the Partnership
making taxable loans or acquiring direct property ownership
interests is not solely to earn taxable income, but rather to
acquire, either
31
immediately or in the future, a tax-exempt mortgage revenue bond
or to improve the condition of a property securing a tax-exempt
mortgage revenue bond.
As of December 31, 2007, the Partnerships
wholly-owned subsidiary, Holding Corp., held limited partnership
interests in six entities that own MF Properties containing a
total of 544 rental units. As noted above, the Partnership
expects to ultimately restructure the property ownership through
a sale of the MF Properties and a syndication of the associated
LIHTCs. The Partnership expects to provide the tax-exempt
mortgage revenue bonds to the new property owners as part of the
restructuring. Until such a restructuring occurs the operations
of the properties owned by the limited partnerships are
consolidated with the Partnership.
The following discussion of the Partnerships results of
operations for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and
2005 reflects the operations of the Partnership without the
consolidation of the VIEs required by FIN 46R. This
information reflects the information used by management to
analyze the Partnerships operations and is reflective of
the segment data discussed in Note 13 to the financial
statements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the
|
|
|
For the
|
|
|
For the
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2007
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2006
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2005
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage revenue bond investment income
|
|
$
|
9,379,858
|
|
|
$
|
11,633,084
|
|
|
$
|
10,168,938
|
|
Property revenues
|
|
|
2,066,487
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other bond investment income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,892
|
|
|
|
73,179
|
|
Other interest income
|
|
|
751,798
|
|
|
|
983,372
|
|
|
|
505,032
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,198,143
|
|
|
|
12,621,348
|
|
|
|
10,747,149
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate operating (exclusive of items shown below)
|
|
|
1,230,695
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for loan losses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
734,000
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
3,531,192
|
|
|
|
2,106,291
|
|
|
|
2,149,027
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expense
|
|
|
1,478,278
|
|
|
|
25,605
|
|
|
|
24,467
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
1,577,551
|
|
|
|
1,575,942
|
|
|
|
2,028,366
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,817,716
|
|
|
|
3,707,838
|
|
|
|
4,935,860
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interest in net loss of consolidated subsidiary
|
|
|
13,030
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations
|
|
|
4,393,457
|
|
|
|
8,913,510
|
|
|
|
5,811,289
|
|
Income from discontinued operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,310,334
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income
|
|
$
|
4,393,457
|
|
|
$
|
8,913,510
|
|
|
$
|
18,121,623
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year
Ended December 31, 2007 Compared to the Year Ended
December 31, 2006
Mortgage revenue bond investment
income. Mortgage revenue bond investment income
decreased approximately $2.3 million in 2007 compared to
2006. The decrease is due to decreased collections of contingent
interest offset by increased collections of base interest.
Contingent interest income recognized in 2007 was approximately
$231,000 compared to approximately $4.3 million in 2006,
all of which was a result of the receipt of previously
unrecognized contingent interest associated with the
Partnerships previous investment in the Northwoods Lake
mortgage revenue bond. Due to the uncertainty in collections of
contingent interest, the Partnership recognizes this as income
only when it is realized. Base interest income on bonds increase
approximately $1.8 million in 2007 as interest associated
with the mortgage revenue bonds acquired in 2007 was
approximately $1.3 million. A full year of interest income
on bonds acquired in 2006 accounted for the remaining increase
in base interest.
Other interest income. Other interest income
represents interest earned on the Partnerships taxable
loans and cash and cash equivalents. The decrease is
attributable to a decline in interest received on taxable loans
offset by
32
an increase in income on cash equivalent investments. Interest
on taxable loans decreased approximately $646,000. The interest
on taxable loans is recorded as received due to the risk of
collection. Interest income on cash equivalents increased
approximately $415,000 due to higher levels of cash equivalents
during the year.
Real estate operating expenses. Real estate
operating expenses increased during 2007 as a direct result of
the purchase of the MF Properties which had operating expenses
of approximately $1.2 million.
Depreciation and amortization. Depreciation
and amortization consists primarily of depreciation and
amortization associated with the MF Properties acquired in 2007.
Interest expense. Interest expense increased
approximately $1.4 million during 2007 compared to 2006 due
to higher levels of borrowing and the mark-to-market adjustments
on our interest rate caps. Total outstanding debt increased from
approximately $45.8 million at December 31, 2006 to
approximately $91.3 million as of December 31, 2007.
Interest expense on the new debt accounted for approximately
$1.3 million of the overall increase. The remaining
increase is attributable to the effect of interest rate cap
expense which is the result of marking our interest rate caps to
market plus amortization of premiums paid for the caps. For the
year ended December 31, 2006 this mark-to-market adjustment
increased interest expense by $210 as compared to an increase in
interest expense in 2007 of $74,000.
General and administrative expenses. General
and administrative expenses were consistent between 2007 and
2006.
Year
Ended December 31, 2006 Compared to the Year Ended
December 31, 2005
Mortgage revenue bond investment
income. Mortgage revenue bond investment income
increased approximately $1.4 million in 2006 compared to
2005. The increase is due to increased collections of contingent
interest offset by decreased collections of base interest.
Contingent interest income collected in 2006 increased
approximately $2.2 million. Previously unrecognized
contingent interest associated with the Partnerships
investment in the Northwoods Lake mortgage revenue bond amounted
to $4.3 million and was received and recognized in the
third quarter of 2006. Previously unrecognized contingent
interest associated with the Clear Lake bonds totaling
approximately $2.1 million was received and recognized in
the fourth quarter of 2005. Due to the uncertainty in
collections of contingent interest, the Partnership recognizes
this as income only when it is realized. Interest associated
with the mortgage revenue bonds acquired in 2006 increased base
income by approximately $360,000. Offsetting the increase
associated with the new bonds were decreases in mortgage revenue
bond investment income related to bonds sold or otherwise
disposed in 2006 and 2005. The decrease in base interest on the
Northwoods bonds which were outstanding through August 24,
2006 and the Clear Lake bonds which were outstanding through
November 15, 2005 amounted to approximately
$1.1 million.
Other interest income. Other interest income
represents interest earned on the Partnerships taxable
loans and cash and cash equivalents. The increase is
attributable to interest received on taxable loans plus increase
income on cash equivalent investments. Interest on taxable loans
increased approximately $91,000. The interest on taxable loans
is recorded as received due to the risk of collection. Interest
income on cash equivalents increased approximately $337,000 due
to higher levels of cash equivalents during the year.
Provision for loan losses. The Partnership is
required to recognize a provision for loan losses against
earnings when it determines that the full amount of principal
and interest on its taxable loans may not be fully recoverable.
The Partnership recorded a provision for loan losses of $734,000
in 2005. No such expense was recorded in 2006.
Interest expense. Interest expense decreased
by approximately $43,000 during 2006 compared to 2005. The
decrease is attributable to interest expense on loans
outstanding during 2005 related to Clear Lake Colony Apartments
which were no longer outstanding in 2006. Total interest expense
paid in 2005 related to Clear Lake, including origination fees
of $160,000 paid on a bridge loan used to facilitate the sale of
the Clear Lake property, was approximately $777,000. Offsetting
the decline in interest paid related to Clear Lake were two
items, an increase in our variable borrowing rates and the
mark-to-market adjustment recorded related to our interest rate
caps. The effective borrowing rates for the year on our variable
interest debt increased approximately 1%, or $477,000. The
remaining increase is attributable to the effect of interest
rate cap expense which is the result of
33
marking our interest rate caps to market plus amortization of
premiums paid for the caps. For the year ended December 31,
2005 this mark-to-market adjustment reduced interest expense by
$365,000 as compared to an increase in interest expense in 2006
of $210.
General and administrative expenses. General
and administrative expenses declined during 2006 compared to the
same period in 2005 primarily as a result of the payment of
$359,000 of deferred administrative fees in 2005. These fees
were previously deferred by the general partner, however, in
conjunction with the sale of Clear Lake Colony Apartments, these
fees were paid in December 2005. There were no such deferred
fees paid in 2006. Salaries and benefits expense decreased
approximately $90,000 for the year ended December 31, 2006
compared to 2005 due mainly to lower bonus accruals and lower
benefit costs. Professional and Board of Managers fees increased
by approximately $60,000 due mainly to increased legal costs
offset by a decline in Board of Managers fees. Along with the
items noted, miscellaneous other administrative expenses showed
general declines in 2006.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
Partnership
Liquidity
Tax-exempt interest earned on the mortgage revenue bonds,
including those financing properties held by VIEs, represents
the Partnerships principal source of cash flow. The
Partnership may also receive cash distributions from equity
interests held in MF Properties. Tax-exempt interest is
primarily comprised of base interest payments received on the
Partnerships tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds. Certain of
the tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds may also generate payments
of contingent interest to the Partnership from time to time when
the underlying apartment properties generate excess cash flow.
Since base interest on each of the Partnerships mortgage
revenue bonds is fixed, the Partnerships cash receipts
tend to be fairly constant period to period unless the
Partnership acquires or disposes of its investments in
tax-exempt bonds. Changes in the economic performance of the
properties financed by tax-exempt bonds with a contingent
interest provision will affect the amount of contingent
interest, if any, paid to the Partnership. The economic
performance of a multifamily apartment property depends on the
rental and occupancy rates of the property and on the level of
operating expenses. Occupancy rates and rents are directly
affected by the supply of, and demand for, apartments in the
market area in which a property is located. This, in turn, is
affected by several factors such as local or national economic
conditions, the amount of new apartment construction and the
affordability of single-family homes. In addition, factors such
as government regulation (such as zoning laws), inflation, real
estate and other taxes, labor problems and natural disasters can
affect the economic operations of an apartment property. The
primary uses of cash by apartment properties are: (i) the
payment of operating expenses; and (ii) the payment of debt
service. Other sources of cash include debt financing and the
sale of additional BUCs.
The Partnerships principal uses of cash are the payment of
distributions to BUC holders, interest and principal on debt
financing and general and administrative expenses. The
Partnership also uses cash to acquire additional investments.
Distributions to BUC holders may increase or decrease at the
determination of the General Partner. The Partnership is
currently paying distributions at the rate of $0.54 per BUC per
year. The General Partner determines the amount of the
distributions based upon the projected future cash flows of the
Partnership. Future distributions to BUC holders will depend
upon the amount of base and contingent interest received on its
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds and cash received from other
investments (including MF Properties), the amount of its
borrowings and the effective interest rate these borrowings, and
the amount of the Partnerships undistributed cash.
In January 2007, the Company filed a Registration Statement on
Form S-3
with the SEC relating to the sale of up to $100.0 million
of its BUCs. The Company intends to issue BUCs from time to time
under this Registration Statement to raise additional equity
capital as needed to fund investment opportunities. Raising
additional equity capital for deployment into new investment
opportunities is part of our overall growth strategy outlined
above. Pursuant to this Registration Statement, in April 2007
the Company issued, through an underwritten public offering, a
total of 3,675,000 BUCs at a public offering price of $8.06 per
BUC. Net proceeds realized by the Company from the issuance of
the additional BUCs were approximately $27.5 million, after
payment of an underwriters discount and other offering
costs of approximately $2.1 million. The proceeds were used
to acquire additional tax-exempt
34
revenue bonds and other investments meeting the
Partnerships investment criteria, and for general working
capital needs.
The credit and capital markets have continued to deteriorate. If
uncertainties in these markets continue, the markets deteriorate
further or the Company experiences deterioration in the values
of its investment portfolio, the Company may incur impairments
to its investment portfolio which could negatively impact the
Companys financial condition, cash flows, and reported
earnings.
Although the consequences of the credit issues experienced
recently by the single-family subprime mortgage industry are not
fully known, we do not anticipate that our existing assets will
be adversely affected by these events. The Company does not
issue mortgage loans secured by mortgages on single-family
residential properties. In addition, we believe that additional
demand for affordable rental housing may be created if there are
continued defaults on subprime single family mortgages and a
general contraction of credit available for single family
mortgage loans. Additional demand for rental housing may have a
positive economic effect on apartment properties financed by the
tax-exempt bonds held by the Company. While we believe the
current tightening of credit may also create opportunities for
additional investments consistent with the Companys
investment strategy because there may be fewer parties competing
to acquire tax-exempt bonds issued to finance affordable housing
there can be no assurance that we will be able to finance the
acquisition of additional tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds
through either additional equity or debt financing.
VIE
Liquidity
The VIEs primary source of cash is net rental revenues
generated by their real estate investments. Net rental revenues
from a multifamily apartment property depend on the rental and
occupancy rates of the property and on the level of operating
expenses. Occupancy rates and rents are directly affected by the
supply of, and demand for, apartments in the market area in
which a property is located. This, in turn, is affected by
several factors such as local or national economic conditions,
the amount of new apartment construction and the affordability
of single-family homes. In addition, factors such as government
regulation (such as zoning laws), inflation, real estate and
other taxes, labor problems and natural disasters can affect the
economic operations of an apartment property.
The VIEs primary uses of cash are: (i) the payment of
operating expenses; and (ii) the payment of debt service on
the VIEs bonds and mortgage notes payable which are held
by the Partnership.
Consolidated
Liquidity
On a consolidated basis, cash provided by operating activities
for 2007 decreased approximately $1.4 million compared to
2006 mainly due to changes in working capital components. Cash
from investing activities decreased approximately
$54.4 million, in 2007 compared to 2006 primarily due to
the purchase of the MF Properties and the acquisition of
additional tax-exempt revenue bonds in 2007. Cash from financing
activities increased approximately $57.0 million in 2007
compared to 2006. This is the result of the receipt of proceeds
from the mortgage on the MF Properties, additional issuances of
debt in the P-Float program, and the sale of additional BUCs
offset by the payment of liabilities assumed.
In connection with the acquisition of the MF Properties, an
aggregate loan of approximately $19.9 million was utilized
by the underlying limited partnerships to refinance their
existing mortgages. The interest rate on this mortgage is
variable and is calculated as one month LIBOR plus 1.55%. As of
the transaction date, one month LIBOR was 5.32% and the interest
on the mortgage was 6.87%. As of December 31, 2007, one
month LIBOR was 4.86% and the interest on the mortgage was
6.41%. To mitigate exposure to this variable rate mortgage, an
interest rate cap was purchased which effectively caps the
interest rate on this mortgage at 8.3%. The mortgage matures in
July 2009. In addition, the Company entered into three new
P-Float securitization transactions for a total of
$25.9 million of new debt. Such securitization transactions
through the Merrill Lynch P-Float program are accounted for as
secured borrowings and, in effect, provide variable-rate
financing for the acquisition of new, or the securitization of
existing, tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds. This debt financing
bears interest at a weekly floating bond rate, including
associated remarketing, credit enhancement, liquidity and
trustee fees. The average interest rates for all debt in the
P-Float program was 4.5% per annum and 4.3% per annum during
2007 and 2006, respectively. Maturity dates for the
Companys debt financing range from 2008 through 2038.
35
Historically, our primary leverage vehicle has been the Merrill
Lynch P-Float program. Recent credit losses and credit rating
downgrades at Merrill Lynch have resulted in a significant
increase in Merrill Lynchs cost of borrowing under the
P-Float program since December 31, 2007. This is reflected
in an increased spread over the SIFMA rate payable on the
P-Floats. The increased spread over SIFMA has resulted in a
significantly higher interest rate on the Partnerships
P-Float financing. As discussed in Item 7A, Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risks, the
Partnerships effective interest rate on its P-Float
borrowings has increased approximately 1.25% to 2.0% from
November 30, 2007 to February 29, 2008. A 1.5%
increase in the Partnerships effective interest rate, on
an annualized basis, would result in approximately
$1.1 million of additional interest expense on the
Partnerships existing P-Float financing. This additional
interest expense will lower the Partnerships CAD.
In addition, if the interest rate on the P-Floats rise to a
level where the interest received on the underlying tax-exempt
bonds is not sufficient to pay all interest due on the P-Floats,
the P-Float may be terminated and the underlying tax-exempt
bonds may be sold in order to satisfy the obligations on the
P-Floats. Due to these developments with our P-Float debt, we do
not expect to have access to additional debt financing through
the Merrill Lynch P-Float program for the foreseeable future and
this is expected to limit our ability to acquire additional
tax-exempt bonds on a leveraged basis.
We are currently evaluating alternative financing vehicles to
replace our P-Float debt in order to reduce our interest expense
and in order to have access to new leverage financing for
additional tax-exempt mortgage bonds on reasonable terms. We
have not entered into any agreements with respect to any such
alternative debt financing and there can be no assurances that
we will be able to do so.
In the long-term, the Partnership believes that cash provided by
its tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds and other investments will
be adequate to meet its projected liquidity requirements,
including the payment of expenses, interest and distributions to
BUC holders. Recently, income from investments has not been
sufficient to fund such expenditures without utilizing cash
reserves to supplement the deficit. Additionally, the increased
costs of borrowing described above will further reduce CAD.
While the Partnership currently expects to maintain the annual
distribution amount of $0.54 per BUC, if we are unable to secure
alternative financing and our cost of borrowing remains at the
current increased level for an extended period, the annual
distribution amount may need to be reduced. See discussion below
regarding Cash Available for Distribution.
Cash
Available for Distribution
Management utilizes a calculation of Cash Available for
Distribution (CAD) as a means to determine the
Partnerships ability to make distributions to BUC holders.
The General Partner believes that CAD provides relevant
information about its operations and is necessary along with net
income for understanding its operating results. To calculate
CAD, amortization expense related to debt financing costs and
bond reissuance costs, Tier 2 income due to the General
Partner as defined in the Agreement of Limited Partnership,
interest rate cap expense or income, provision for loan losses,
impairments on bonds, losses related to VIEs including the
cumulative effect of accounting change and depreciation expense
are added back to the Companys net income (loss) as
computed in accordance with GAAP. Management evaluates two
measures of CAD by further breaking down the calculation into
Total CAD and CAD excluding contingent interest. There is no
generally accepted methodology for computing CAD, and the
Companys computation of CAD may not be comparable to CAD
reported by other companies. Although the Company considers CAD
to be a useful measure of its operating performance, CAD should
not be considered as an alternative to net income or net cash
flows from operating activities which are calculated in
accordance with GAAP.
The Partnerships regular annual distributions are
currently equal to $0.54 per unit. In recent years CAD excluding
contingent interest and realized gains has not been sufficient
to fully fund such distributions without utilizing cash reserves
to supplement the deficit. During the third quarter of 2007 CAD
exceeded the quarterly distribution amount of $0.135 per BUC.
During the fourth quarter CAD was approximately $380,000, or
$0.03 per BUC, lower than the quarterly distribution amount as a
result of the increased borrowing costs associated with our
P-Float debt discussed above, the timing of debt borrowings in
early fourth quarter, and the reinvestment of the
36
proceeds in December 2007 and January 2008. While the
Partnership currently expects to maintain the annual
distribution amount of $0.54 per BUC, if we are unable to secure
alternative financing and our cost of borrowing remains at the
current increased level for an extended period, the annual
distribution amount may need to be reduced.
The following tables show the calculation of CAD and the
break-down of Total CAD and CAD excluding contingent interest
and realized gains for the years ended December 31, 2007,
2006, and 2005.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
940,866
|
|
|
$
|
12,776,735
|
|
|
$
|
19,565,142
|
|
Net (income) loss related to VIEs and eliminations due to
consolidation
|
|
|
3,452,591
|
|
|
|
(3,863,226
|
)
|
|
|
(1,443,519
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income before impact of VIE consolidation
|
|
$
|
4,393,457
|
|
|
|
8,913,509
|
|
|
|
18,121,623
|
|
Change in fair value of derivatives and interest rate cap
amortization
|
|
|
249,026
|
|
|
|
210
|
|
|
|
(364,969
|
)
|
Depreciation and amortization expense (Partnership only)
|
|
|
1,478,278
|
|
|
|
25,605
|
|
|
|
24,467
|
|
Tier 2 Income distributable to the General Partner(1)
|
|
|
(57,830
|
)
|
|
|
(1,062,500
|
)
|
|
|
(3,595,754
|
)
|
Provision for loan losses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
734,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CAD
|
|
$
|
6,062,931
|
|
|
$
|
7,876,824
|
|
|
$
|
14,919,367
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
As described in Note 3 to the Companys consolidated
financial statements contained herein, Net Interest Income
representing contingent interest and Net Residual Proceeds
representing contingent interest (Tier 2 Income) is
distributable 75% to the BUC holders and 25% to the General
Partner. All Tier 2 income distributable to the General
Partner is excluded from the calculation of CAD. Lake Forest
generated approximately $231,000 of Tier 2 Income during
2007, of which $57,830 is distributable to the General Partner.
The Northwoods Lake Apartments sale in 2006 generated
$4.25 million of Tier 2 Income, of which $1,062,500 is
distributable to the General Partner. The Clear Lake sale in
2005 generated approximately $14.4 million of Tier 2
Income, of which $3,596,000 is distributable to the General
Partner. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Total CAD
|
|
$
|
6,062,931
|
|
|
$
|
7,876,824
|
|
|
$
|
14,919,367
|
|
Contingent interest
|
|
|
173,489
|
|
|
|
3,187,500
|
|
|
|
10,787,261
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CAD excluding contingent interest
|
|
$
|
5,889,442
|
|
|
$
|
4,689,324
|
|
|
$
|
4,132,106
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average number of units outstanding, basic and diluted
|
|
|
12,491,490
|
|
|
|
9,837,928
|
|
|
|
9,837,928
|
|
Net income, basic and diluted, per unit
|
|
$
|
0.34
|
|
|
$
|
0.74
|
|
|
$
|
1.74
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total CAD per unit
|
|
$
|
0.49
|
|
|
$
|
0.80
|
|
|
$
|
1.52
|
|
CAD from contingent interest, per unit
|
|
$
|
0.01
|
|
|
|
0.32
|
|
|
|
1.10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CAD excluding contingent interest, per unit
|
|
$
|
0.48
|
|
|
$
|
0.48
|
|
|
$
|
0.42
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off
Balance Sheet Arrangements
As of December 31, 2007 and 2006, the Partnership invested
in tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds which are collateralized by
multifamily housing projects. The multifamily housing projects
are owned by entities that are not controlled by the
Partnership. The Partnership has no equity interest in these
entities and does not guarantee any obligations of these
entities. Some of the ownership entities are deemed to be VIEs
and are consolidated with the Partnership for financial
reporting purposes. The VIEs that are consolidated with the
Partnership do not have off-balance sheet arrangements.
37
The Partnership has financed the acquisition of some of its
tax-exempt revenue bonds using the Merrill Lynch P-Float
program. Although this financing involves placing the mortgage
revenue bonds in trust in exchange for an interest in the trust,
the transaction is treated as a leveraged financing and not a
sale of the mortgage revenue bonds. Therefore, the Partnership
continues to reflect the mortgage revenue bonds as assets in its
balance sheet and does not have any off-balance sheet
arrangements.
The Partnership does not engage in trading activities involving
non-exchange traded contracts. As such, the Partnership is not
materially exposed to any financing, liquidity, market, or
credit risk that could arise if it had engaged in such
relationships.
The Partnership does not have any relationships or transactions
with persons or entities that derive benefits from their
non-independent relationships with the Company or its related
parties other than what is disclosed in Note 8 to the
Companys consolidated financial statements.
Contractual
Obligations
The Partnership has the following contractual obligations as of
December 31, 2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments Due by Period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less Than
|
|
|
1-2
|
|
|
3-5
|
|
|
More Than
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
1 Year
|
|
|
Years
|
|
|
Years
|
|
|
5 Years
|
|
|
Debt financing
|
|
$
|
91,315,000
|
|
|
$
|
8,010,000
|
|
|
$
|
54,215,000
|
|
|
$
|
15,990,000
|
|
|
$
|
13,100,000
|
|
Effective Interest Rate(s)(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.61
|
%
|
|
|
5.33
|
%
|
|
|
4.54
|
%
|
|
|
4.50
|
%
|
Interest(2)
|
|
$
|
13,689,916
|
|
|
$
|
3,987,446
|
|
|
$
|
5,757,794
|
|
|
$
|
3,944,675
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Effective interest rates differ as described in Note 7 to
the Companys consolidated financial statements contained
herein. Interest rates shown are the average effective rate,
including fees, for the year ended December 31, 2007. |
|
(2) |
|
Interest shown is estimated based upon current effective
interest rates through maturity. Excludes management fees
payable to AFCA 2, as they are not fixed and determinable. |
Inflation
With respect to the financial results of the Partnerships
investments in tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds, substantially
all of the resident leases at the multifamily residential
properties, which collateralize the Partnerships
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds, allow, at the time of
renewal, for adjustments in the rent payable there under, and
thus may enable the properties to seek rent increases. The
substantial majority of these leases are for one year or less.
The short- term nature of these leases generally serves to
reduce the risk to the properties of the adverse effects of
inflation; however, market conditions may prevent the properties
from increasing rental rates in amounts sufficient to offset
higher operating expenses. Inflation did not have a significant
impact on the Partnerships financial results for the years
presented in this report.
Recent
Accounting Pronouncements
In June 2006, the FASB issued Interpretation No. 48,
Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes, an Interpretation
of FASB Statement No. 109. The interpretation clarifies
the accounting for uncertainty in tax positions. The
interpretation, effective for the Company beginning in the first
quarter of 2007, did not have a material effect on the
Partnership.
In September 2006, the FASB issued Statement No. 157,
Fair Value Measurement
(SFAS No. 157). This statement does not
require new fair value measurements, however, it provides
guidance on applying fair value and expands required
disclosures. SFAS No. 157 is effective beginning in
the first quarter of 2008. The Company does not expect the
application of SFAS No. 157 to have a material impact
on the consolidated financial statements.
In February 2007, the FASB issued Statement No. 159, The
Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial
Liabilities Including an amendment of FASB
No. 115 (SFAS No. 159). This
statement permits, but does not require, entities to choose to
measure many financial instruments and certain other items as
fair value.
38
SFAS No. 159 is effective for us beginning in the
first quarter of 2008. The Company has evaluated the provisions
of SFAS No. 159 and did not elect to adopt the fair
value option on any financial instruments held by the Company on
December 31, 2007. Management has not determined whether it
will elect this option for any new financial instruments
acquired in the future.
In June 2007, the American Institute of Certified Public
Accountants (AICPA) issued Statement of Position (SOP)
07-1,
Clarification of the Scope of the Audit and Accounting Guide
Investment Companies and Accounting for Parent Companies and
Equity Method Investors for Investments in Investment
Companies. This SOP provides guidance for determining
whether an entity is within the scope of the AICPA Audit and
Accounting Guide Investment Companies (the Guide).
Entities that are within the scope of the Guide are required,
among other things, to carry their investments at fair value,
with changes in fair value included in earnings. In October
2007, the effective date of this SOP was deferred indefinitely.
The Company is currently evaluating this new guidance and has
not determined whether it will be required to apply the
provisions of the Guide in presenting its financial statements.
In December 2007, the FASB issued Statement No. 160,
Noncontrolling Interests in Consolidated Financial
Statements- an amendment of ARB 51
(SFAS No. 160). SFAS No. 160
requires that a noncontrolling interest in a subsidiary be
reported as equity and the amount of consolidated net income
specifically attributable to the noncontrolling interest be
identified in the consolidated financial statements. It also
calls for consistency in the manner of reporting changes in the
parents ownership interest and requires fair value
measurement of any noncontrolling equity investment retained in
a deconsolidation. SFAS No. 160 is effective for the
Company on January 1, 2009. The Company is currently
evaluating the impact that SFAS No. 160 will have on
its consolidated financial statements upon adoption.
In December 2007, the FASB issued Statement No. 141
(revised 2007), Business Combinations
(SFAS No. 141R).
SFAS No. 141R broadens the guidance of
SFAS No. 141, extending its applicability to all
transactions and other events in which one entity obtains
control over one or more other businesses. It broadens the fair
value measurement and recognition of assets acquired,
liabilities assumed, and interests transferred as a result of
business combinations. SFAS No. 141R is effective for
the Company on January 1, 2009. The Company is currently
evaluating the impact that SFAS No. 141R will have on
its consolidated financial statements upon adoption.
|
|
Item 7A.
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk.
|
The Partnerships primary market risk exposures are
interest rate risk and credit risk. The Partnerships
exposure to market risks relates primarily to its investments in
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds and its debt financing.
The Company bases the fair value of the tax-exempt bonds, which
have a limited market, on quotes from external sources, such as
brokers, for these or similar bonds. In the limited situation
when quotes are unavailable, the Company estimates the fair
value for each bond as the present value of its expected cash
flows using a discount rate for comparable tax-exempt
investments. This calculation methodology encompasses judgment
in its application. As of December 31, 2007, approximately
$60 million of the Companys tax-exempt mortgage
revenue bonds are valued using broker quotes and approximately
$5.7 million are valued using managements discounted
cash flow analyses. Broker quotes and managements
discounted cash flow analyses provide indicative pricing only.
Due to the limited market for the tax-exempt bonds, these
estimates of fair value do not necessarily represent what the
Company would actually receive in a sale of the bonds.
The credit and capital markets have continued to deteriorate. If
uncertainties in these markets continue, the markets deteriorate
further or the Company experiences deterioration in the values
of its investment portfolio, the Company may incur impairments
to its investment portfolio which could negatively impact the
Companys financial condition, cash flows, and reported
earnings.
Interest
Rate Risk
Interest rates are highly sensitive to many factors, including
governmental, monetary and tax policies, domestic and
international economic and political considerations and other
factors beyond the Partnerships
39
control. The nature of the Partnerships investment in the
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds and the debt financing used to
finance these investments exposes the Partnership to financial
risk due to fluctuations in market interest rates. The
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds bear base interest at fixed
rates and may additionally pay contingent interest which
fluctuates based upon the cash flows of the underlying property.
As of December 31, 2007, the weighted average base rate of
the tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds was 6.5%. Accordingly, the
interest income generated by the tax-exempt mortgage revenue
bonds is generally fixed, except to the extent the underlying
properties generate enough excess cash flow to pay contingent
interest. Each of the bonds matures after 2011.
Conversely, the interest rates on the Partnerships
floating rate debt financing fluctuate based on the SIFMA Index
Rate, which resets weekly. Accordingly, the Partnerships
cost of borrowing will increase as the SIFMA Index Rate
increases. As of December 31, 2007, the Partnership had
total debt financing outstanding of $71.4 million. The
weighted average effective interest rate for 2007 on the debt
outstanding as of December 31, 2007 was approximately 4.5%.
If the average SIFMA Index Rate, including fees, had increased
or decreased by 100 basis points for the year ended
December 31, 2007, the interest expense payments on this
variable-rate debt financing would have increased or decreased
by approximately $714,000, respectively. If the SIFMA Index Rate
were to increase 100 basis points, certain interest rate
cap agreements, described below, would be exceeded, thereby
reducing the impact of the interest rate increase by
approximately $300,000.
In the event of a significant unfavorable fluctuation in
interest rates, the Partnership may collapse each of its
financing transactions by exercising the call feature of the
respective bond securitization. The SIFMA Index Rate, net of any
fees, ranged from 3.09% to 3.95% during the year ended
December 31, 2007, while the base rates of the securitized
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds range from 6.15% to 7.50% as
of December 31, 2007. In the event that the SIFMA Index
Rate rises dramatically and exceeds the base rate of the
securitized tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds, the trust holding
the bonds would be collapsed as a result of insufficient
interest from the underlying fixed-rate tax-exempt mortgage bond
to service the floating rate senior interest obligations of the
P-Float. Upon collapse of the trust, the Company would have to
either refinance or sell the tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds.
A decrease in the net interest income earned through the
structure of the securitizations would decrease cash available
for distributions.
Historically, our primary leverage vehicle has been the Merrill
Lynch P-Float program. Recent credit losses and credit rating
downgrades at Merrill Lynch have resulted in a significant
increase in Merrill Lynchs cost of borrowing under the
P-Float program. This is reflected in an increased spread over
the SIFMA rate payable on the
P-Floats.
The increased spread over SIFMA has resulted in a significantly
higher interest rate on the Partnerships
P-Float
financing.
The following table displays the SIFMA rate, estimated P-Float
program credit spread and the resulting effective interest rate
to the Partnership under the P-Float program as of the dates
shown.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Partnership Effective
|
|
|
SIFMA Floating
|
|
|
P-Float Program
|
|
Interest Rate on
|
|
|
Rate Index
|
|
|
Credit Spread
|
|
P-Float Debt
|
|
September 30, 2007
|
|
|
3.84
|
%
|
|
0.90% to 0.95%
|
|
4.74% to 4.79%
|
October 31, 2007
|
|
|
3.26
|
%
|
|
1.07% to 1.22%
|
|
4.33% to 4.48%
|
November 30, 2007
|
|
|
3.58
|
%
|
|
1.30% to 1.35%
|
|
4.88% to 4.93%
|
December 31, 2007
|
|
|
3.42
|
%
|
|
2.33%
|
|
5.75%
|
January 31, 2008
|
|
|
2.20
|
%
|
|
3.85%
|
|
6.05%
|
February 29, 2008
|
|
|
3.16
|
%
|
|
2.95% to 3.77%
|
|
6.11% to 6.93%
|
The increased P-Float program credit spread has resulted in a
significantly higher effective interest rate for the
Partnership. As shown in the table above, the Partnerships
effective interest rate has increased approximately 1.25% to
2.0% from November 30, 2007 to February 29, 2008. A
1.5% increase in the Partnerships effective interest rate,
on an annualized basis, would result in approximately
$1.1 million of additional interest expense based on
$71.4 million of outstanding P-Float debt. We are currently
evaluating alternative financing vehicles to replace our P-Float
debt in order to reduce our interest expense and in order to
have access to new leverage financing for additional tax-exempt
mortgage bonds on reasonable terms. We have not entered into any
agreements with respect to any such alternative debt financing
and there can be no assurances that we will be able to do so.
Additionally,
40
there can be no assurances that our existing P-Float debt will
remain in place even with the additional costs currently being
incurred.
The interest rate of the mortgage financing on the MF Properties
fluctuates based on the LIBOR. Accordingly, the cost of
borrowing on the debt will increase as the LIBOR increases. As
of December 31, 2007, the outstanding balance of the
mortgage financing of the MF Properties was $19.9 million.
The weighted average effective interest rate for 2007 on the
debt outstanding as of December 31, 2007 was approximately
7.0%. If the average LIBOR Rate, including fees, had increased
or decreased by 100 basis points for the year ended
December 31, 2007, the interest expense payments on this
variable-rate debt financing would have increased or decreased
by approximately $199,000, respectively.
The Partnership is managing its interest rate risk on its debt
financing by entering into interest rate cap agreements that cap
the amount of interest expense it could pay on its floating rate
debt financing as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal of
|
|
|
Effective
|
|
|
Maturity
|
|
Purchase
|
|
|
|
Date Purchased
|
|
Debt Financing
|
|
|
Capped Rate
|
|
|
Date
|
|
Price
|
|
|
Counter Party
|
|
February 1, 2003
|
|
$
|
15,000,000
|
|
|
|
4.25
|
%(1)
|
|
January 1, 2010
|
|
$
|
608,000
|
|
|
Bank of America
|
July 7, 2006
|
|
$
|
10,000,000
|
|
|
|
4.75
|
%
|
|
July 1, 2011
|
|
$
|
159,700
|
|
|
US Bank
|
May 1, 2007
|
|
$
|
10,000,000
|
|
|
|
4.75
|
%
|
|
May 1, 2012
|
|
$
|
65,500
|
|
|
US Bank
|
June 29, 2007
|
|
$
|
19,920,000
|
|
|
|
8.30
|
%
|
|
July 1, 2009
|
|
$
|
17,500
|
|
|
JP Morgan
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The counterparty has the right to convert the cap into a fixed
rate swap. The counterparty exercised this conversion right
effective February 1, 2008. Under the terms of the swap
arrangement, the Partnership will pay a fixed rate of 2.95%. The
Partnership will receive a variable rate payment from the
counterparty based on the SIFMA Index. |
Using the cap agreements, the Partnership is able to benefit
from a low interest rate environment, while still remaining
protected from a significant increase in the floating rates.
This rate is set weekly and settlements under the swap agreement
will be made monthly based on the original notional amount of
$15,000,000. The swap will maintain the original expiration date
of January 1, 2010.
The cap agreements are required to be marked to fair value with
the difference recognized in earnings as interest expense which
can result in significant volatility to reported net income over
the term of the caps. The weighted-average effective rate on the
debt financing, excluding the effect of marking the interest
rate cap agreements to fair value, was 4.5% for the year ended
December 31, 2007. At times during 2007, our effective
interest rates were in excess of our interest rate caps
resulting in cash payments to the Partnership of approximately
$76,000.
The fair value of the Partnerships investments in
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds, which bear fixed base
interest rates, is also directly impacted by changes in market
interest rates. An increase in rates will cause the fair value
of the bonds to decrease. Although changes in the fair value of
the bonds does not impact earnings or cash flow, they affect
total partners capital and book value per unit. In
addition, if the fair value of the bonds decreases, the
Partnership may need to provide additional collateral for its
debt financing.
Credit
Risk
The Partnerships primary credit risk is the risk of
default on its portfolio of tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds
and taxable loans collateralized by the multifamily properties.
The tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds are not direct obligations
of the governmental authorities that issued the bonds and are
not guaranteed by such authorities or any insurer or other
party. In addition, the tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds and
the associated taxable loans are non-recourse obligations of the
property owner. As a result, the sole source of principal and
interest payments (including both base and contingent interest)
on the tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds and the taxable loans
is the net rental revenues generated by these properties or the
net proceeds from the sale of these properties.
If a property is unable to sustain net rental revenues at a
level necessary to pay current debt service obligations on the
Partnerships tax-exempt mortgage revenue bond or taxable
loan on such property, a default may occur. A propertys
ability to generate net rental income is subject to a wide
variety of factors, including rental and occupancy rates of the
property and the level of operating expenses. Occupancy rates
and rents are directly affected by the supply
41
of, and demand for, apartments in the market area in which a
property is located. This, in turn, is affected by several
factors such as local or national economic conditions, the
amount of new apartment construction and the affordability of
single-family homes. In addition, factors such as government
regulation (such as zoning laws), inflation, real estate and
other taxes, labor problems and natural disasters can affect the
economic operations of an apartment property.
Additionally, four bonds owned by the Partnership are
construction bonds. The principal risk associated with
construction lending is the risk that construction of the
property will be substantially delayed or never completed. This
may occur for a number of reasons including
(i) insufficient financing to complete the project due to
underestimated construction costs or cost overruns;
(ii) failure of contractors or subcontractors to perform
under their agreements, (iii) inability to obtain
governmental approvals; (iv) labor disputes, and
(v) adverse weather and other unpredictable contingencies
beyond the control of the developer. If a property is not
completed, or costs more to complete than anticipated, it may
cause the Partnership to receive less than the full amount of
interest owed to it on the tax-exempt bond financing such
property or otherwise result in a default under the mortgage
loan that secures its tax-exempt bond on the property. As
construction or renovation is completed, these properties will
move into the
lease-up
phase. The
lease-up of
these properties may not be completed on schedule or at
anticipated rent levels, resulting in a greater risk that these
investments may go into default than investments secured by
mortgages on properties that are stabilized or fully
leased-up.
The underlying property may not achieve expected occupancy or
debt service coverage levels. In order to lower these risks, the
Partnership has required the owners/developers of these projects
to enter into guaranteed maximum price contracts, obtain payment
and performance bonds, and have capitalized interest reserve
funds.
Defaults on its tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds and taxable
loans may reduce the amount of future cash available for
distribution to BUC holders. In addition, if a propertys
net rental income declines, it may affect the market value of
the property. If the market value of a property deteriorates,
the amount of net proceeds from the ultimate sale or refinancing
of the property may be insufficient to repay the entire
principal balance of the tax-exempt mortgage revenue bond or
taxable loan secured by the property.
In the event of a default on a tax-exempt mortgage revenue bond
or taxable loan, the Partnership will have the right to
foreclose on the mortgage or deed of trust securing the
property. If the Partnership takes ownership of the property
securing a defaulted tax-exempt mortgage revenue bond, it will
be entitled to all net rental revenues generated by the
property. However, such amounts will no longer represent
tax-exempt interest to the Partnership.
The Partnerships primary method of managing the credit
risks associated with its tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds and
taxable loans is to perform a complete due diligence and
underwriting process of the properties securing these mortgage
bonds and loans and to carefully monitor the performance of such
property on a continuous basis.
The Partnership is also exposed to credit risk with respect to
its debt financing. A significant portion of the
Partnerships debt financing has been obtained using
securitizations issued through the Merrill Lynch P-Float
program. In this program, the senior interests sold are credit
enhanced by Merrill Lynch or its affiliate. The inability of
Merrill Lynch or its affiliate to perform under the program or
impairment of the credit enhancement may increase the cost of
borrowing under the P-Float program or may even terminate the
transaction and cause the Partnership to lose the net interest
income earned as a result. The Partnership recognizes the
concentration of financing with this institution and
periodically monitors its ability to continue to perform.
As the above information incorporates only those material
positions or exposures that existed as of December 31,
2007, it does not consider those exposures or positions that
could arise after that date. The ultimate economic impact of
these market risks on the Partnership will depend on the
exposures that arise during the period, the Partnerships
risk mitigating strategies at that time and overall business and
economic environment.
Concentration
of Credit Risk
The Company maintains the majority of its unrestricted cash
balances at two financial institutions. The balances are insured
by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation up to $100,000 at
each institution. At various times, the cash balances may exceed
the $100,000 limit. The Company is also exposed to risk on its
short-term investments in the event of non-performance by
counterparties. The Company does not anticipate any
non-performance. This risk is minimized significantly by the
Companys portfolio being restricted to investment grade
securities.
42
|
|
Item 8.
|
Financial
Statements and Supplementary Data.
|
REPORT OF
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Partners of
America First Tax Exempt Investors, L.P.
Omaha, Nebraska
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of
America First Tax Exempt Investors, L.P. and subsidiaries (the
Company) as of December 31, 2007 and 2006, and
the related consolidated statements of operations, of
partners capital and comprehensive income (loss), and of
cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended
December 31, 2007. These financial statements are the
responsibility of the Companys management. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial
statements based on our audits. We did not audit the financial
statements of Woodbridge Apartments of Louisville II, L.P. and
Woodbridge Apartments of Bloomington III, L.P. (consolidated
variable interest entities), which statements, collectively,
reflect total assets constituting 8% of consolidated total
assets as of December 31, 2006, and total revenues
constituting 21% and 17% of consolidated total revenues for the
years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. Those
statements were audited by other auditors whose reports have
been furnished to us, and our opinion, insofar as it relates to
the amounts included for Woodbridge Apartments of Louisville II,
L.P. and Woodbridge Apartments of Bloomington III, L.P., is
based solely on the reports of the other auditors.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are
free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a
test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in
the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the
accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall financial
statement presentation. We believe that our audits and the
reports of the other auditors provide a reasonable basis for our
opinion.
In our opinion, based on our audits and the reports of the other
auditors, such consolidated financial statements present fairly,
in all material respects, the financial position of America
First Tax Exempt Investors, L.P. and subsidiaries as of
December 31, 2007 and 2006, and the results of their
operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in
the period ended December 31, 2007, in conformity with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of
America.
As discussed in Note 4 to the financial statements, the
financial statements include tax-exempt investments valued at
$66,167,000 (40% of total assets) and $27,103,000 (27% of total
assets) as of December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively,
whose fair values have been estimated by management in the
absence of readily determinable fair values. Managements
estimates are based on quotes from external sources, such as
brokers, for these or similar investments. In the limited
situation when quotes are unavailable, management estimates the
fair value of each investment as the present value of the
expected cash flows using a discount rate for comparable
tax-exempt investments.
We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the
Companys internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2007, based on the criteria established in
Internal Control Integrated Framework issued
by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission and our report dated March 11, 2008 expressed an
unqualified opinion on the Companys internal control over
financial reporting.
/s/ DELOITTE &
TOUCHE LLP
Omaha, Nebraska
March 11, 2008
43
AMERICA
FIRST TAX EXEMPT INVESTORS, L.P.
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
ASSETS
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
14,821,946
|
|
|
$
|
8,476,928
|
|
Restricted cash
|
|
|
2,865,890
|
|
|
|
2,131,272
|
|
Interest receivable
|
|
|
534,699
|
|
|
|
264,160
|
|
Tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds
|
|
|
66,167,116
|
|
|
|
27,103,398
|
|
Other tax-exempt bond
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,800,000
|
|
Real estate assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land
|
|
|
10,357,004
|
|
|
|
7,280,555
|
|
Buildings and improvements
|
|
|
99,218,397
|
|
|
|
77,311,306
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate assets before accumulated depreciation
|
|
|
109,575,401
|
|
|
|
84,591,861
|
|
Accumulated depreciation
|
|
|
(31,543,780
|
)
|
|
|
(28,381,932
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net real estate assets
|
|
|
78,031,621
|
|
|
|
56,209,929
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
2,457,736
|
|
|
|
1,214,502
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Assets
|
|
$
|
164,879,008
|
|
|
$
|
100,200,189
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES
|
Accounts payable, accrued expenses and other liabilities
|
|
$
|
6,808,458
|
|
|
$
|
6,117,451
|
|
Distribution payable
|
|
|
2,432,327
|
|
|
|
1,566,378
|
|
Debt financing
|
|
|
71,395,000
|
|
|
|
45,770,000
|
|
Mortgage payable
|
|
|
19,920,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Liabilities
|
|
|
100,555,785
|
|
|
|
53,453,829
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments and Contingencies (Note 11)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interest
|
|
|
48,756
|
|
|
|
|
|
Partners Capital
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General partner
|
|
|
348,913
|
|
|
|
1,526,062
|
|
Beneficial Unit Certificate holders
|
|
|
112,880,314
|
|
|
|
90,722,467
|
|
Unallocated deficit of variable interest entities
|
|
|
(48,954,760
|
)
|
|
|
(45,502,169
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Partners Capital
|
|
|
64,274,467
|
|
|
|
46,746,360
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Liabilities and Partners Capital
|
|
$
|
164,879,008
|
|
|
$
|
100,200,189
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the consolidated
financial statements.
44
AMERICA
FIRST TAX EXEMPT INVESTORS, L.P.
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property revenues
|
|
$
|
16,280,151
|
|
|
$
|
14,187,135
|
|
|
$
|
13,891,556
|
|
Mortgage revenue bond investment income
|
|
|
3,227,254
|
|
|
|
1,418,289
|
|
|
|
1,061,242
|
|
Other bond investment income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,891
|
|
|
|
73,179
|
|
Other interest income
|
|
|
751,797
|
|
|
|
337,008
|
|
|
|
102,474
|
|
Gain on sale of securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
126,750
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Revenues
|
|
|
20,259,202
|
|
|
|
15,947,323
|
|
|
|
15,255,201
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate operating (exclusive of items shown below)
|
|
|
10,057,506
|
|
|
|
8,781,819
|
|
|
|
8,515,626
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
4,165,117
|
|
|
|
2,486,366
|
|
|
|
2,740,703
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
3,531,192
|
|
|
|
2,106,292
|
|
|
|
1,176,293
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
1,577,551
|
|
|
|
1,575,942
|
|
|
|
2,028,366
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Expenses
|
|
|
19,331,366
|
|
|
|
14,950,419
|
|
|
|
14,460,988
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interest in net loss of consolidated subsidiary
|
|
|
13,030
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations
|
|
|
940,866
|
|
|
|
996,904
|
|
|
|
794,213
|
|
Income (loss) from discontinued operations, (including gain on
sale of $11,667,246 and $18,771,497 in 2006 and 2005,
respectively)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,779,831
|
|
|
|
18,770,929
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
940,866
|
|
|
|
12,776,735
|
|
|
$
|
19,565,142
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Limited partners interest in net income per unit (basic
and diluted):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations
|
|
$
|
0.34
|
|
|
$
|
0.74
|
|
|
$
|
0.58
|
|
Income from discontinued operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.16
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income, basic and diluted, per unit
|
|
$
|
0.34
|
|
|
$
|
0.74
|
|
|
$
|
1.74
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average number of units outstanding, basic and diluted
|
|
|
12,491,490
|
|
|
|
9,837,928
|
|
|
|
9,837,928
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the consolidated
financial statements.
45
AMERICA
FIRST TAX EXEMPT INVESTORS, L.P.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF PARTNERS CAPITAL AND
COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS)
FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2007, 2006 AND 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unallocated
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beneficial Unit
|
|
|
Deficit of
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
General
|
|
|
Certificate Holders
|
|
|
Variable Interest
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
|
|
Partner
|
|
|
# of Units
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Entities
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Income (Loss)
|
|
|
Balance at January 1, 2005
|
|
$
|
75,358
|
|
|
|
9,837,928
|
|
|
$
|
78,659,842
|
|
|
$
|
(50,808,914
|
)
|
|
$
|
27,926,286
|
|
|
$
|
(1,657,167
|
)
|
Comprehensive income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
1,021,216
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,100,407
|
|
|
|
1,443,519
|
|
|
|
19,565,142
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized gain on securities
|
|
|
10,145
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,004,319
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,014,464
|
(1)
|
|
|
1,014,464
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,579,606
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributions paid or accrued
|
|
|
(928,661
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7,937,241
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8,865,902
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2005
|
|
|
178,058
|
|
|
|
9,837,928
|
|
|
|
88,827,327
|
|
|
|
(49,365,395
|
)
|
|
|
39,639,990
|
|
|
|
(642,703
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
1,627,305
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,286,204
|
|
|
|
3,863,226
|
|
|
|
12,776,735
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized loss on securities
|
|
|
(797
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(78,935
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(79,732
|
)(1)
|
|
|
(79,732
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,697,003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributions paid or accrued
|
|
|
(278,504
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,312,129
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,590,633
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2006
|
|
|
1,526,062
|
|
|
|
9,837,928
|
|
|
|
90,722,467
|
|
|
|
(45,502,169
|
)
|
|
|
46,746,360
|
|
|
|
(722,435
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sale of Beneficial Unit Certificates
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,675,000
|
|
|
|
27,495,512
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27,495,512
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
99,451
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,294,006
|
|
|
|
(3,452,591
|
)
|
|
|
940,866
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized loss on securities
|
|
|
(28,594
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,830,815
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,859,409
|
)(1)
|
|
|
(2,859,409
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,918,543
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributions paid or accrued
|
|
|
(1,248,006
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6,800,856
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8,048,862
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2007
|
|
$
|
348,913
|
|
|
|
13,512,928
|
|
|
$
|
112,880,314
|
|
|
$
|
(48,954,760
|
)
|
|
$
|
64,274,467
|
|
|
$
|
(3,581,844
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Gains recognized in net income during the years ended
December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005 were $0, $0 and $126,750,
respectively. |
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the consolidated
financial statements.
46
AMERICA
FIRST TAX EXEMPT INVESTORS, L.P.
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Cash flows from operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
940,866
|
|
|
$
|
12,776,735
|
|
|
$
|
19,565,142
|
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by
operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expense
|
|
|
4,165,117
|
|
|
|
2,621,203
|
|
|
|
3,507,864
|
|
Gain on sale of securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(126,750
|
)
|
Minority interest in net loss of consolidated subsidiary
|
|
|
(13,030
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on sale of discontinued operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(11,667,246
|
)
|
|
|
(18,771,497
|
)
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities, net of effect of
acquisitions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Increase) decrease in interest receivable
|
|
|
(270,539
|
)
|
|
|
(121,344
|
)
|
|
|
42,122
|
|
Decrease in other assets
|
|
|
16,403
|
|
|
|
842,823
|
|
|
|
812,482
|
|
Increase (decrease) in accounts payable, accrued expenses and
other liabilities
|
|
|
(611,794
|
)
|
|
|
1,184,924
|
|
|
|
(1,177,536
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities
|
|
|
4,227,023
|
|
|
|
5,637,095
|
|
|
|
3,851,827
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from sale of tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds
|
|
|
4,800,000
|
|
|
|
19,200,000
|
|
|
|
4,026,750
|
|
Proceeds from sale of discontinued operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,443,223
|
|
|
|
32,196,883
|
|
Acquisition of tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds
|
|
|
(41,974,000
|
)
|
|
|
(10,190,000
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisition of other tax-exempt bonds
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(12,000,000
|
)
|
|
|
(12,000,000
|
)
|
(Increase) decrease in restricted cash
|
|
|
(734,618
|
)
|
|
|
985,068
|
|
|
|
(71,313
|
)
|
Capital expenditures
|
|
|
(929,050
|
)
|
|
|
(2,082,339
|
)
|
|
|
(1,069,126
|
)
|
Acquisition of partnerships
|
|
|
(9,220,390
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal payments received on tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds
|
|
|
50,873
|
|
|
|
40,834
|
|
|
|
21,666
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities
|
|
|
(48,007,185
|
)
|
|
|
6,396,786
|
|
|
|
23,104,860
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributions paid
|
|
|
(7,182,913
|
)
|
|
|
(5,365,790
|
)
|
|
|
(8,865,902
|
)
|
Proceeds from mortgage payable
|
|
|
19,920,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt financing costs paid
|
|
|
(1,271,266
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repayment of mortgage financing
|
|
|
(15,112,771
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from debt financing
|
|
|
25,900,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal payments on debt financing
|
|
|
(275,000
|
)
|
|
|
(345,000
|
)
|
|
|
(16,285,000
|
)
|
Principal payments made on tax-exempt bonds
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(295,835
|
)
|
Acquisition of interest rate cap agreements
|
|
|
(83,000
|
)
|
|
|
(159,700
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Increase (decrease) in deposits and escrowed funds
|
|
|
734,618
|
|
|
|
(985,068
|
)
|
|
|
(528,687
|
)
|
Sale of Beneficial Unit Certificates
|
|
|
27,495,512
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities
|
|
|
50,125,180
|
|
|
|
(6,855,558
|
)
|
|
|
(25,975,424
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
6,345,018
|
|
|
|
5,178,323
|
|
|
|
981,263
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of year
|
|
|
8,476,928
|
|
|
|
3,298,605
|
|
|
|
2,317,342
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of year
|
|
$
|
14,821,946
|
|
|
$
|
8,476,928
|
|
|
$
|
3,298,605
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash paid during the year for interest
|
|
$
|
3,018,436
|
|
|
$
|
2,480,905
|
|
|
$
|
3,190,446
|
|
Supplemental disclosure of non-cash financing and investing
activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities assumed in the acquisition of partnerships
|
|
$
|
15,742,740
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Distributions declared but not paid
|
|
$
|
2,432,327
|
|
|
$
|
1,566,378
|
|
|
$
|
1,341,534
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the consolidated
financial statements.
47
AMERICA
FIRST TAX EXEMPT INVESTORS, L.P.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2007, 2006 AND 2005
America First Tax Exempt Investors, L.P. (the
Partnership) was formed on April 2, 1998 under
the Delaware Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act for the
purpose of acquiring, holding, selling and otherwise dealing
with a portfolio of federally tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds
which have been issued to provide construction
and/or
permanent financing of multifamily residential apartments. The
Partnership will terminate on December 31, 2050 unless
terminated earlier under the provisions of its Agreement of
Limited Partnership. The general partner of the Partnership is
America First Capital Associates Limited Partnership Two (the
general partner or AFCA 2).
The credit issues experienced recently by the single-family
subprime mortgage industry have affected interest rates and
availability of credit generally. Although the consequences of
these events and their impact on our ability to pursue our plan
to grow through investments in additional tax-exempt bonds
secured by first mortgages on affordable multifamily housing
projects are not fully known, we do not anticipate that our
existing assets will be adversely affected by these events. The
Company does not issue mortgage loans secured by mortgages on
single-family residential properties or acquire securities
backed by single-family mortgage loans.
|
|
2.
|
Summary
of Significant Accounting Policies
|
Principles
of Consolidation
The Partnership is required to consolidate the assets,
liabilities and results of operations of certain entities that
meet the definition of a variable interest entity (a
VIE) into the Partnerships financial
statements under the provisions of FASB Interpretation
No. 46, Consolidation of Variable Interest
Entities an interpretation of ARB 51, as amended
(FIN 46R). Management has determined that
eight of the entities which own multifamily apartment properties
financed by the Partnerships tax-exempt mortgage revenue
bonds are VIEs. Because management determined that the
Partnership is the primary beneficiary of each of these VIEs
pursuant to the terms of each tax-exempt mortgage revenue bond
and the criteria within FIN 46R, the Partnership
consolidated the assets, liabilities and results of these
VIEs multifamily properties into the Partnerships
financial statements. The Partnership also consolidates its
subsidiary, America First LP Holding Corp (Holding
Corp). All transactions and accounts between the
Partnership, Holding Corp, and the consolidated VIEs, including
the indebtedness underlying the tax-exempt mortgage bonds
secured by the properties owned by the VIEs, have been
eliminated in consolidation.
The Partnership does not presently believe that the
consolidation of VIEs for reporting under generally accepted
accounting principles in the United States of America
(GAAP) impacts the Partnerships tax status,
amounts reported to Beneficial Unit Certificate holders
(BUC holders) on IRS
Form K-1,
the Partnerships ability to distribute tax-exempt income
to BUC holders, the current level of quarterly distributions or
the tax-exempt status of the underlying mortgage revenue bonds.
In this
Form 10-K,
the Company refers to the consolidated financial
information as reported on a GAAP basis of the Partnership, its
subsidiary Holding Corp and the consolidated VIEs while the
Partnership refers to America First Tax Exempt
Investors, L.P. and Holding Corp as a stand-alone entity without
consolidation of the VIEs.
Purchase
Accounting
Pursuant to SFAS No. 141, Business
Combinations, the Company allocates a portion of the total
acquisition cost of a property acquired to leases in existence
as of the date of acquisition. The estimated valuation of
in-place leases is calculated by applying a risk-adjusted
discount rate to the projected cash flow deficit at each
property during the projected
lease-up of
the property. This allocated cost is amortized over the average
remaining term of the leases (eight months) and is included in
the statement of operations under depreciation and amortization
48
AMERICA
FIRST TAX EXEMPT INVESTORS, L.P.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
expense. The remaining acquisition cost is allocated to the land
and building assets, thus valuing these assets as if the
building was vacant at purchase.
Use of
estimates in preparation of consolidated financial
statements
The preparation of the accompanying consolidated financial
statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make
estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of
assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and
liabilities at the date of the consolidated financial statements
and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the
reporting period. Actual results could differ from those
estimates.
Cash
and Cash Equivalents
Cash and cash equivalents include highly liquid securities and
investments in federally tax-exempt securities with maturities
of three months or less when purchased.
Concentration
of Credit Risk
The Company maintains the majority of its unrestricted cash
balances at two financial institutions. The balances are insured
by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation up to $100,000 at
each institution. At various times the cash balances may exceed
the $100,000 limit. The Company is also exposed to risk on its
short-term investments in the event of non-performance by
counterparties. The Company does not anticipate any
non-performance. This risk is minimized significantly by the
Companys portfolio being restricted to investment grade
securities.
Restricted
Cash
Restricted cash, which is legally restricted to use, is
comprised of resident security deposits, required maintenance
reserves, escrowed funds and collateral for interest rate cap
agreements as of December 31, 2007 and 2006. As of
December 31, 2007, the Company must maintain restricted
cash of $203,000 per the related interest rate cap collateral
agreements.
Investment
in Tax-Exempt Mortgage Revenue Bonds and Other Tax-Exempt
Bonds
The Company accounts for its investments in tax-exempt mortgage
revenue bonds and other tax-exempt bonds under the provisions of
SFAS No. 115, Accounting for Certain Investments in
Debt and Equity Securities
(SFAS No. 115). SFAS No. 115
requires investments in securities to be classified as one of
the following: 1) held-to-maturity,
2) available-for-sale, or 3) trading securities. All
of the Companys investments in tax-exempt mortgage revenue
bonds and other tax-exempt bonds are classified as
available-for-sale. Investments classified as available-for-sale
are reported at estimated fair value with the net unrealized
gains or losses reflected in other comprehensive income.
Unrealized gains and losses do not affect the cash flow of the
bonds, distributions to BUC holders, or the characterization of
the tax-exempt interest income of the financial obligation of
the underlying collateral.
The Company bases the fair value of the tax-exempt bonds, which
have a limited market, on quotes from external sources, such as
brokers, for these or similar bonds. In the limited situation
when quotes are unavailable, the Partnership estimates the fair
value for each bond as the present value of its expected cash
flows using a discount rate for comparable tax-exempt
investments. This calculation methodology encompasses judgment
in its application. As of December 31, 2007, approximately
$60.0 million of the Companys tax-exempt mortgage
revenue bonds are valued using broker quotes and approximately
$5.7 million are valued using managements discounted
cash flow analyses. Broker quotes and managements
discounted cash flow analyses provide indicative pricing only.
Due to the limited market for the tax-exempt bonds, these
estimates of fair value do not necessarily represent what the
Company would actually receive in a sale of the bonds.
49
AMERICA
FIRST TAX EXEMPT INVESTORS, L.P.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The Company periodically evaluates the credit risk exposure
associated with the tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds by
reviewing the fair value of the underlying real estate
collateral to determine whether an other-than-temporary
impairment exists. When the Company believes it is probable that
all amounts due under the terms of the tax-exempt mortgage
revenue bonds, including principal and accrued interest, will
not be collected, an other-than-temporary impairment is
recorded. If an other-than-temporary impairment exists, the cost
basis of the respective bond is written down to its estimated
fair value, with the amount of the write-down accounted for as a
realized loss.
The credit and capital markets have continued to deteriorate. If
uncertainties in these markets continue, the markets deteriorate
further or the Company experiences deterioration in the values
of its investment portfolio, the Company may incur impairments
to its investment portfolio which could negatively impact the
Companys financial condition, cash flows, and reported
earnings.
The interest income received by the Company from its investment
in tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds is dependent upon the net
cash flow of the underlying properties. Base interest income on
fully-performing tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds is recognized
as it is accrued. Tax-exempt bonds are considered to be
fully-performing if the bond is currently meeting all of its
obligations. Base interest income on tax-exempt mortgage revenue
bonds not fully performing is recognized as it is received. Past
due base interest on tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds, which
are or were previously not fully performing, is recognized as
received. Contingent interest income, which is only received by
the Company if the properties financed by the tax-exempt
mortgage revenue bonds generate excess available cash flow as
set forth in each bond agreement, is recognized as received. The
Company reinstates the accrual of base interest once the
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds ability to perform is
adequately demonstrated. As of December 31, 2007 and 2006,
the Companys tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds were fully
performing as to their base interest with the exception of
Chandler Creek as described in Note 4.
Interest income on other tax-exempt bonds is recognized as
earned.
The Company eliminates all but nine of the tax-exempt mortgage
revenue bonds and the associated interest income and interest
receivable when it consolidates the underlying real estate
collateral in accordance with FIN 46R.
Variable
interest entities (VIEs)
When the Partnership invests in a tax-exempt mortgage revenue
bond which is collateralized by a multifamily property, the
Partnership will evaluate the entity which owns the property
financed by the tax-exempt mortgage revenue bond to determine if
it is a VIE as defined by FIN 46R. FIN 46R is a
complex standard that requires significant analysis and
judgment. If it is determined that the entity is a VIE, the
Partnership will then evaluate if it is the primary beneficiary
of such VIE, by determining whether the Partnership will absorb
the majority of the VIEs expected losses, receive a
majority of the VIEs residual returns, or both. If the
Partnership determines itself to be the primary beneficiary of
the VIE, then the assets, liabilities and financial results of
the related multifamily property will be consolidated in the
Partnerships financial statements. As a result of such
consolidation, the tax-exempt or taxable debt financing provided
by the Partnership to such consolidated VIE will be eliminated
as part of the consolidation process. However, the Partnership
will continue to receive interest and principal payments on such
debt and these payments will retain their characterization as
either tax-exempt or taxable interest for income tax reporting
purposes. Since the Partnership has no legal ownership of the
VIEs, creditors of the VIEs have no recourse to the Partnership.
Investments
in Real Estate
The Companys investments in real estate are carried at
cost less accumulated depreciation. Depreciation of real estate
is based on the estimated useful life of the related asset,
generally
19-40 years
on multifamily residential apartment buildings and five to
fifteen years on capital improvements and is calculated using
the straight-line method. Maintenance and repairs are charged to
expense as incurred, while significant improvements, renovations
and replacements are capitalized.
50
AMERICA
FIRST TAX EXEMPT INVESTORS, L.P.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Management reviews each property for impairment at least
annually and whenever events or changes in circumstances
indicate that the carrying value of a property may not be
recoverable. The review of recoverability is based upon
comparing the net book value of each real estate property to the
sum of its estimated undiscounted future cash flows. If
impairment exists due to the inability to recover the carrying
value of a property, an impairment loss is recorded to the
extent that the carrying value of the property exceeds its
estimated fair value. There were no impairment losses recognized
during the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005.
Debt
Financing
The Company has financed the acquisition of a portion of its
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bond portfolio using securitizations
through the Merrill Lynch P-Float program. Through this program,
the Partnership transfers a tax-exempt mortgage revenue bond
into a trust which issues two types of securities, senior
securities (P-Floats) and subordinated residual
interest securities (RITES). The P-Floats are
floating rate securities representing a beneficial ownership
interest in the outstanding principal and interest of the
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bond credit enhanced by Merrill
Lynch (or a Merrill Lynch affiliate) and sold to institutional
investors. The RITES are issued to the Partnership and represent
a beneficial ownership interest in the remaining interest on the
underlying tax-exempt mortgage revenue bond. The Partnership
maintains a call right on the senior floating rate securities
and, upon exercise of such right, may collapse the trusts and,
therefore, retains a level of control over the tax-exempt
mortgage revenue bond. In order to collapse the trusts, the cost
is equal to the par amount plus 20% of any increase in the fair
value of the underlying bonds. The Partnership accounts for the
securitization transactions in accordance with
SFAS No. 140, Accounting for Transfers and
Servicing of Financial Assets and Extinguishments of
Liabilities. The Partnership has determined that control is
maintained by the Company over the transferred assets in these
transactions. Therefore, the Company accounts for these
transactions as secured borrowings and not sales transactions.
Deferred
Financing Costs
Debt financing costs are capitalized and amortized on a
straight-line basis over the stated maturity of the related debt
financing agreement, which approximates the effective interest
method. Bond issuance costs are capitalized and amortized on a
straight-line basis over the stated maturity of the related
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds, which approximates the
effective interest method. As of December 31, 2007 and
2006, debt financing costs and bond issuance costs of $1,163,298
and $215,386, respectively, were included in other assets. These
costs are net of accumulated amortization of $459,057 and
$135,703 as of December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively.
Income
Taxes
No provision has been made for income taxes because the BUC
holders are required to report their share of the
Partnerships taxable income for federal and state income
tax purposes. Certain of the consolidated VIEs and Holding Corp
are corporations that are subject to federal and state income
taxes. At December 31, 2007 and 2006, the Company evaluated
whether it was more likely than not that any deferred tax assets
would be realized. The Company has recorded a valuation
allowance against the remaining deferred tax assets because the
realization of these future benefits is not more likely than not.
Revenue
Recognition on Investments in Real Estate
The Partnerships VIEs and the MF Properties (see
Note 5) are lessors of multifamily rental units under
leases with terms of one year or less. Rental revenue is
recognized, net of rental concessions, on a straight-line method
over the related lease term.
51
AMERICA
FIRST TAX EXEMPT INVESTORS, L.P.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Derivative
Instruments and Hedging Activities
The Company accounts for its derivative and hedging activities
in accordance with SFAS No. 133, Accounting for
Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities
(SFAS No. 133) as amended and interpreted.
SFAS No. 133 requires the recognition of all
derivative instruments as assets or liabilities in the
Companys consolidated balance sheets and measurement of
these instruments at fair value. The accounting treatment is
dependent upon whether or not a derivative instrument is
designated as a hedge and, if so, the type of hedge. The
Companys interest rate cap agreements do not have a
specific hedge designation under SFAS No. 133, and
therefore changes in fair value are recognized in the
consolidated statements of operations as interest expense. The
Company is exposed to loss should a counterparty to its
derivative instruments default. The Company does not anticipate
non-performance by any counterparty. The fair value of the
interest rate cap agreements is determined based upon current
price quotes by recognized dealers.
Net
Income per BUC
Net income per BUC has been calculated based on the weighted
average number of BUCs outstanding during each year presented.
The Partnership has no dilutive equity securities and,
therefore, basic net income per BUC is the same as diluted net
income per BUC. The following table provides a reconciliation of
net income per BUC holder:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Calculation of limited partners interest in income from
continuing operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations
|
|
$
|
940,866
|
|
|
$
|
996,904
|
|
|
$
|
794,213
|
|
Less: general partners interest in income from continuing
operations
|
|
|
99,451
|
|
|
|
1,627,305
|
|
|
|
58,113
|
|
Unallocated loss related to variable interest entities
|
|
|
(3,452,591
|
)
|
|
|
(7,916,605
|
)
|
|
|
(5,017,076
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Limited partners interest in income from continuing
operations
|
|
$
|
4,294,006
|
|
|
$
|
7,286,204
|
|
|
$
|
5,753,176
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Calculation of limited partners interest in income from
discontinued operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from discontinued operations
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
11,779,831
|
|
|
$
|
18,770,929
|
|
Less: general partners interest in income from
discontinued operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
963,103
|
|
Unallocated income related to variable interest entities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,779,831
|
|
|
|
6,460,595
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Limited partners interest in discontinued operations
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
11,347,231
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52
AMERICA
FIRST TAX EXEMPT INVESTORS, L.P.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Calculation of limited partners interest in net income Net
income
|
|
$
|
940,866
|
|
|
$
|
12,776,735
|
|
|
$
|
19,565,142
|
|
Less general partners interest in net income
|
|
|
99,451
|
|
|
|
1,627,305
|
|
|
|
1,021,216
|
|
Unallocated income (loss) related to variable interest entities
|
|
|
(3,452,591
|
)
|
|
|
3,863,226
|
|
|
|
1,443,519
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Limited partners interest in net income
|
|
$
|
4,294,006
|
|
|
$
|
7,286,204
|
|
|
$
|
17,100,407
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average number of units outstanding, basic and diluted
|
|
|
12,491,490
|
|
|
|
9,837,928
|
|
|
|
9,837,928
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Limited partners interest in net income per BUC (basic and
diluted):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations
|
|
$
|
0.34
|
|
|
$
|
0.74
|
|
|
$
|
0.58
|
|
Income from discontinued operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.16
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
0.34
|
|
|
$
|
0.74
|
|
|
$
|
1.74
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.
|
Partnership
Income, Expenses and Cash Distributions
|
The Agreement of Limited Partnership of the Partnership contains
provisions for the distribution of Net Interest Income, Net
Residual Proceeds and Liquidation Proceeds (as defined in the
Agreement of Limited Partnership) and for the allocation of
income and loss from operations and allocation of income and
loss arising from a repayment, sale or liquidation. Income and
losses will be allocated to each BUC holder on a periodic basis,
as determined by the general partner, based on the number of
BUCs held by each BUC holder as of the last day of the period
for which such allocation is to be made. Distributions of Net
Interest Income and Net Residual Proceeds will be made to each
BUC holder of record on the last day of each distribution period
based on the number of BUCs held by each BUC holder as of such
date.
Net Interest Income as defined in the Agreement of Limited
Partnership, will be distributed 99% to the BUC holders and 1%
to AFCA 2. The portion of Net Residual Proceeds, as defined in
the Agreement of Limited Partnership, representing a return of
principal will be distributed 100% to the BUC holders.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Agreement of Limited
Partnership further breaks down Net Interest Income and Net
Residual Proceeds into Tiers. Tier 1 income is defined as
Net Interest Income excluding contingent interest and is
distributed as described above. Net Interest Income representing
contingent interest and Net Residual Proceeds representing
contingent interest in an amount equal to 0.9% per annum of the
principal amount of the mortgage bonds on a cumulative basis is
defined as Tier 2 income. Tier 2 income is distributed
75% to the BUC holders and 25% to AFCA 2. The general partner
may hold Tier 2 income as a reserve for the benefit of the
Partnership rather than distributing all Tier 2 income in a
given period.
With respect to the allocation of income and loss from
operations, if a partner has a deficit capital account balance
as of the last day of any fiscal year, then all items of income
for such fiscal year shall be first allocated to such partner in
the amount and manner necessary to eliminate such deficit.
The unallocated deficit of the VIEs is primarily comprised of
the accumulated historical net losses of the VIEs as of the
FIN 46R implementation date and the VIEs net losses
subsequent to that date. The unallocated deficit of the VIEs is
not allocated to the general partner and BUC holders as such
activity is not contemplated by, or addressed in, the Agreement
of Limited Partnership.
53
AMERICA
FIRST TAX EXEMPT INVESTORS, L.P.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Cash distributions are currently made on a quarterly basis but
may be made on a monthly or semiannual basis at the election of
AFCA 2.
|
|
4.
|
Investments
in Tax-Exempt Mortgage Revenue Bonds
|
The tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds are issued by various
state and local governments, their agencies and authorities to
finance the construction or rehabilitation of income-producing
real estate properties. However, the tax-exempt mortgage revenue
bonds do not constitute an obligation of any state or local
government, agency or authority and no state or local
government, agency or authority is liable on them, nor is the
taxing power of any state or local government pledged to the
payment of principal or interest on the tax-exempt mortgage
revenue bonds. The tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds are
non-recourse obligations of the respective owners of the
properties. The sole source of the funds to pay principal and
interest on the tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds is the net
cash flow or the sale or refinancing proceeds from the
properties. Each tax-exempt mortgage revenue bond, however, is
collateralized by a first mortgage on all real and personal
property included in the related property and an assignment of
rents. Each of the tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds bears
tax-exempt interest at a fixed rate and the Clarkson College
bonds provide for the payment of additional contingent interest
that is payable solely from available net cash flow generated by
the financed property.
The Companys financial statements reflect the following
investments in tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds as of
December 31, 2007 and 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2007
|
|
Description of Tax-Exempt
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
Estimated
|
|
Mortgage Revenue Bonds
|
|
Cost
|
|
|
Gain
|
|
|
Loss
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
Chandler Creek Apartments
|
|
$
|
11,500,000
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
(792,350
|
)
|
|
$
|
10,707,650
|
|
Clarkson College
|
|
|
6,084,960
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(396,644
|
)
|
|
|
5,688,316
|
|
Bella Vista
|
|
|
6,800,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(380,800
|
)
|
|
|
6,419,200
|
|
Deerfield Apartments
|
|
|
3,390,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(77,614
|
)
|
|
|
3,312,386
|
|
Woodland Park
|
|
|
15,715,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(658,340
|
)
|
|
|
15,056,660
|
|
Prairiebrook Village
|
|
|
5,862,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(313,317
|
)
|
|
|
5,548,683
|
|
Gardens of DeCordova
|
|
|
4,870,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(408,108
|
)
|
|
|
4,461,892
|
|
Gardens of Weatherford
|
|
|
4,702,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(394,028
|
)
|
|
|
4,307,972
|
|
Runnymede
|
|
|
10,825,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(160,643
|
)
|
|
|
10,664,357
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
69,748,960
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
(3,581,844
|
)
|
|
$
|
66,167,116
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2006
|
|
Description of Tax-Exempt
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
Estimated
|
|
Mortgage Revenue Bonds
|
|
Cost
|
|
|
Gain
|
|
|
Loss
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
Chandler Creek Apartments
|
|
$
|
11,500,000
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
(81,650
|
)
|
|
$
|
11,418,350
|
|
Clarkson College
|
|
|
6,135,833
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(640,785
|
)
|
|
|
5,495,048
|
|
Bella Vista
|
|
|
6,800,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,800,000
|
|
Deerfield Apartments
|
|
|
3,390,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,390,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
27,825,833
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
(722,435
|
)
|
|
$
|
27,103,398
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Chandler Creek bonds are in technical default and interest
is being paid on these bonds at a rate below the stated rate. In
January 2004 the Company entered into a forbearance agreement
with the owner of Chandler Creek Apartments which set forth the
terms under which the Company agreed to forbear from the
exercise of remedies against the owner. Among the conditions to
forbearance is an agreement for current interest payments at a
rate below the stated rate. In April 2006, the Company
terminated the forbearance agreement with the owner. The
54
AMERICA
FIRST TAX EXEMPT INVESTORS, L.P.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
termination of the forbearance agreement allows the Company to
seek additional remedies including the ultimate foreclosure of
the property, if necessary. The Company does not currently
intend to exercise its right to foreclose on the property
because the property owner continues to pursue alternatives to
ultimately satisfy its obligations to its creditors.
All of the tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds that the
Partnership owns have been issued to provide construction
and/or
permanent financing of multifamily residential properties. The
credit and capital markets have continued to deteriorate. If
uncertainties in these markets continue, the markets deteriorate
further or the Company experiences deterioration in the values
of its investment portfolio, the Company may incur impairments
to its investment portfolio which could negatively impact the
Companys financial condition, cash flows, and reported
earnings.
Valuation As all of the Partnerships
investments in tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds are classified
as available-for-sale securities, they are carried on the
balance sheet at their estimated fair values. The Company bases
the fair value of the tax-exempt bonds, which have a limited
market, on quotes from external sources, such as brokers, for
these or similar bonds. In the limited situation when quotes are
unavailable, the Company estimates the fair value for each bond
as the present value of its expected cash flows using a discount
rate for comparable tax-exempt investments. This calculation
methodology encompasses judgment in its application.
As of December 31, 2007, approximately $60 million of
the Companys tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds are valued
using broker quotes and approximately $5.7 million are
valued using managements discounted cash flow analyses.
Broker quotes and managements discounted cash flow
analyses provide indicative pricing only. Due to the limited
market for the tax-exempt bonds, these estimates of fair value
do not necessarily represent what the Company would actually
receive in a sale of the bonds.
The Chandler Creek and Clarkson College investments have been in
an unrealized loss position for greater than twelve months.
These unrealized losses are, however, not considered to be
other-than-temporary because the Partnership has the intent and
ability to hold these securities until their value recovers or
until maturity if necessary. The unrealized loss will continue
to fluctuate each reporting period based on the market
conditions and present value of the expected cash flows.
In May 2007, the Company acquired the Woodland Park bonds at par
value of $15.1 million Series A and $0.6 million
Series B, which together represented 100% of the bond
issuance. The bonds earn interest at an annual rate of 6.0% for
Series A and 8.0% for Series B with semi-annual
interest payments and a stated maturity date of November 1,
2047. The bonds were issued in order to construct a
236 unit multifamily apartment complex in Topeka, Kansas.
The apartment complex is currently under construction with an
estimated completion date of March 2009.
In May 2007, the Company acquired the Gardens of DeCordova bonds
at par value of $4.9 million, which represented 100% of the
bond issuance. The bonds earn interest at an annual rate of 6.0%
with semi-annual interest payments and a stated maturity date of
May 1, 2047. The bonds were issued in order to construct a
76 unit multifamily apartment complex in Granbury, Texas.
The apartment complex is currently under construction with an
estimated completion date of September 2008.
In May 2007, the Company acquired the Gardens of Weatherford
bonds at par value of $4.7 million, which represented 100%
of the bond issuance. The bonds earn interest at an annual rate
of 6.0% with semi-annual interest payments and a stated maturity
date of May 1, 2047. The bonds were issued in order to
construct a 76 unit multifamily apartment complex in
Weatherford, Texas. The apartment complex is currently under
construction with an estimated completion date of December 2008.
In June 2007, the Company acquired the Prairiebrook Village
bonds at par value of $5.5 million Series A and
$0.4 million Series B, which together represented 100%
of the bond issuance. The bonds earn interest at an annual rate
of 6.0% for the Series A and 8.0% for the Series B
with semi-annual interest payments and a stated maturity
55
AMERICA
FIRST TAX EXEMPT INVESTORS, L.P.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
date of June 1, 2047. The bonds were issued in order to
construct a 72 unit multifamily apartment complex in
Gardner, Kansas. The apartment complex is currently under
construction with an estimated completion date of January 2009.
On February 11, 2008, the bond trustee notified the owner
and developer of Prairiebrook Village that they were not in
compliance with certain sections of the bond indenture. The
occurrence and continuation of this non-compliance could become
an event of default. The Partnership is currently working with
the trustee, developer, and owners of the project to develop an
action plan. Should the non-compliance become an event of
default, the Partnership will evaluate all remedies at its
disposal including foreclosure on the mortgage securing the
bonds thereby allowing the Partnership to recover all moneys
still on deposit with the trustee, sell all assets owned by the
project and pursue owner and developer guarantees. The
Partnership anticipates that, should it have to exercise its
remedies, amounts recovered will be sufficient to repay the par
amount of the bonds.
In October 2007, the Company acquired the Runnymede Apartments
bonds at par value of $10.8 million, which represented 100%
of the bond issuance. The bonds earn interest at an annual rate
of 6.0% with semi-annual interest payments and a stated maturity
date of October 1, 2042. The bonds are secured by a
252 unit multifamily apartment complex in Austin, Texas.
In April 2006, the Company acquired the Bella Vista bonds at par
value of $6.8 million, which represented 100% of the bond
issuance. The bonds earn interest at an annual rate of 6.15%
with semi-annual interest payments and a stated maturity date of
April 1, 2046. The bonds were issued in order to construct
a 144 unit multi-family apartment complex in Gainesville,
Texas. Construction was completed and operations began at Bella
Vista in 2007.
In October 2006, the Company acquired the Deerfield
Series A and B bonds at par value of $3.3 million and
$90,000, respectively. The bonds earn interest at an annual rate
of 6.25% on the Series A and 8.5% on the Series B. The
bonds are secured by a 72 unit apartment complex in Blair,
Nebraska.
The Company has determined that the underlying entities that own
the Runnymede Apartments, Prairiebrook Village Apartments,
Woodland Park Apartments, the Gardens of DeCordova Apartments,
the Gardens of Weatherford Apartments, the Bella Vista
Apartments, and the Deerfield Apartments which are financed by
bonds owned by the Partnership do not meet the definition of a
VIE and accordingly, their financial statements are not required
to be consolidated into the Companys consolidated
financial statements under FIN 46R.
56
AMERICA
FIRST TAX EXEMPT INVESTORS, L.P.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Descriptions of the properties collateralizing the tax-exempt
mortgage revenue bonds and other tax-exempt bonds and certain
terms of such bonds are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Base
|
|
|
Outstanding at
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maturity
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
Dec. 31,
|
|
|
Earned in
|
|
Property Name
|
|
Location
|
|
Date
|
|
|
Rate
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Chandler Creek Apartments
|
|
Round Rock, TX
|
|
|
11/1/2042
|
|
|
|
6.00
|
%(1)
|
|
$
|
11,500,000
|
|
|
$
|
948,741
|
|
Clarkson College
|
|
Omaha, NE
|
|
|
11/1/2035
|
|
|
|
6.00
|
%
|
|
|
6,084,960
|
|
|
|
366,521
|
|
Bella Vista
|
|
Gainesville, TX
|
|
|
4/1/2046
|
|
|
|
6.15
|
%
|
|
|
6,800,000
|
|
|
|
418,200
|
|
Deerfield Apartments
|
|
Blair, NE
|
|
|
11/15/2048
|
|
|
|
6.25
|
%
|
|
|
3,300,000
|
|
|
|
210,199
|
|
Deerfield Apartments
|
|
Blair, NE
|
|
|
11/15/2048
|
|
|
|
8.50
|
%
|
|
|
90,000
|
|
|
|
7,183
|
|
Gardens of DeCordova
|
|
Granbury, TX
|
|
|
5/1/2047
|
|
|
|
6.00
|
%
|
|
|
4,870,000
|
|
|
|
187,495
|
|
Gardens of Weatherford
|
|
Weatherford, TX
|
|
|
5/1/2047
|
|
|
|
6.00
|
%
|
|
|
4,702,000
|
|
|
|
181,027
|
|
Prairiebrook Village
|
|
Gardner, KS
|
|
|
6/1/2047
|
|
|
|
6.00
|
%
|
|
|
5,449,000
|
|
|
|
184,387
|
|
Prairiebrook Village
|
|
Gardner, KS
|
|
|
6/1/2047
|
|
|
|
8.00
|
%
|
|
|
413,000
|
|
|
|
15,602
|
|
Woodland Park
|
|
Topeka, KS
|
|
|
11/1/2047
|
|
|
|
6.00
|
%
|
|
|
15,065,000
|
|
|
|
554,528
|
|
Woodland Park
|
|
Topeka, KS
|
|
|
11/1/2047
|
|
|
|
8.00
|
%
|
|
|
650,000
|
|
|
|
21,667
|
|
Runnymede
|
|
Austin, TX
|
|
|
10/1/2042
|
|
|
|
6.00
|
%
|
|
|
10,825,000
|
|
|
|
131,704
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Tax-Exempt Mortgage Bonds
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
69,748,960
|
|
|
$
|
3,227,254
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Base
|
|
|
Outstanding at
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maturity
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
Dec. 31,
|
|
|
Earned in
|
|
Property Name
|
|
Location
|
|
Date
|
|
|
Rate
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Chandler Creek Apartments
|
|
Round Rock, TX
|
|
|
11/1/2042
|
|
|
|
6.00
|
%(1)
|
|
$
|
11,500,000
|
|
|
$
|
690,000
|
|
Clarkson College
|
|
Omaha, NE
|
|
|
11/1/2035
|
|
|
|
6.00
|
%
|
|
|
6,135,833
|
|
|
|
369,296
|
|
Bella Vista
|
|
Gainesville, TX
|
|
|
4/1/2046
|
|
|
|
6.15
|
%
|
|
|
6,800,000
|
|
|
|
305,518
|
|
Deerfield Apartments
|
|
Blair, NE
|
|
|
11/15/2048
|
|
|
|
6.25
|
%
|
|
|
3,300,000
|
|
|
|
51,563
|
|
Deerfield Apartments
|
|
Blair, NE
|
|
|
11/15/2048
|
|
|
|
8.50
|
%
|
|
|
90,000
|
|
|
|
1,913
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Tax-Exempt Mortgage Bonds
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
27,825,833
|
|
|
$
|
1,418,290
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment in Other Tax-Exempt Bonds
|
|
|
|
|
9/1/2017
|
|
|
|
Variable(2
|
)
|
|
$
|
4,800,000
|
|
|
$
|
4,891
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Other Tax-Exempt Bonds
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
4,800,000
|
|
|
$
|
4,891
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
These bonds are in technical default and base interest is being
paid at a rate below the stated rate. See discussion above. |
|
(2) |
|
The variable rate on this investment resets weekly. The rate was
based on the SIFMA (formerly BMA) rate which was 3.9% at
December 31, 2006. This investment was sold during 2007. |
To facilitate its investment strategy of acquiring additional
tax-exempt mortgage bonds secured by multifamily apartment
properties (MF Properties), the Partnership may
acquire ownership positions in the MF Properties. The
57
AMERICA
FIRST TAX EXEMPT INVESTORS, L.P.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Partnership expects to ultimately restructure the property
ownership through a sale of the MF Properties and a syndication
of the associated low income housing tax credits
(LIHTCs). The Partnership expects to provide the
tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds to the new property owners as
part of the restructuring. Such restructurings will generally be
expected to be initiated within 36 months of the initial
investment in MF Properties and will often coincide with the
expiration of the compliance period relating to LIHTCs
previously issued with respect to the MF Property. The
Partnership will not acquire LIHTCs in connection with these
transactions.
On June 29, 2007, Holding Corp. acquired the 99% limited
partner interests in six Ohio limited partnerships (the
Property Partnerships) for a cash purchase price of
approximately $9.2 million plus assumed debt and other
liabilities of approximately $15.7 million. Each Property
Partnership owns a multifamily apartment property, of which four
are located in Ohio and two are located in Kentucky. The cash
portion of the purchase price was funded by cash on hand. In
connection with the acquisition, the Property Partnerships
refinanced their existing debt with an aggregate loan, see
Note 7 below. The 1% general partner interests in the six
Property Partnerships were acquired by Atlantic Development GP
Holding Corp., a party unaffiliated with the Partnership, with
the proceeds of an approximately $62,000 loan from Holding Corp.
These 1% general partner interests are reflected in the
Companys consolidated financial statements as minority
interests.
SFAS No. 141, Business Combinations, requires
that the total purchase price paid for MF Properties be
allocated to the Property Partnerships net tangible and
identified intangible assets acquired and liabilities assumed
based on their estimated fair values at the acquisition date.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MF Properties
|
|
|
|
Condensed Balance Sheet Data as of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6/29/2007
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2007
|
|
|
(Date of acquisition)
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
200,595
|
|
|
|
700
|
|
Restricted cash and other assets
|
|
|
1,621,646
|
|
|
|
1,790,439
|
|
In-place lease assets net of $681,480 amortization in 2007
|
|
|
227,160
|
|
|
|
908,640
|
|
Net real estate assets
|
|
|
23,724,644
|
|
|
|
23,992,705
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
25,774,045
|
|
|
|
26,692,484
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable, accrued expenses and other liabilities
|
|
|
978,413
|
|
|
|
568,883
|
|
Mortgage payable
|
|
|
19,920,000
|
|
|
|
19,920,000
|
|
Stockholders equity
|
|
|
4,875,632
|
|
|
|
6,203,601
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and stockholders equity
|
|
|
25,774,045
|
|
|
|
26,692,484
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The table below shows the pro forma condensed consolidated
results of operations of the Company as if the Property
Partnerships had been acquired at the beginning of the period
presented:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended,
|
|
|
For the Year Ended,
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2007
|
|
|
December 31, 2006
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
22,370,838
|
|
|
$
|
19,970,119
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
|
(518,488
|
)
|
|
|
11,856,334
|
|
Net income allocated to BUC holders
|
|
|
2,821,623
|
|
|
|
6,365,803
|
|
BUC holders interest in net income per unit (basic and
diluted):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income, basic and diluted, per unit
|
|
$
|
0.23
|
|
|
$
|
0.65
|
|
The pro forma financial information represents the historical
operating results of the combined Company with adjustments for
purchase accounting and is not necessarily indicative of the
results of operations that would have been achieved if the
acquisition had taken place at the beginning of the period
presented.
58
AMERICA
FIRST TAX EXEMPT INVESTORS, L.P.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
In addition to the MF Properties, the Partnership consolidates
the assets of the VIEs in accordance with FIN 46R. Although
the assets of the VIEs are consolidated, the Partnership has no
ownership interest in them other than to the extent they serve
as collateral for the tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds. The
results of operations of those properties are recorded by the
Company in consolidation but any net income or loss from these
properties does not accrue to the BUC holders or the general
partner, but is instead included in Unallocated income
(losses) related to Variable Interest Entities as shown in
the calculation of net income per BUC in Note 2 above.
The Company had the following investments in MF Properties as of
December 31, 2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MF Properties
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
Buildings
|
|
|
Value at
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Square Feet
|
|
|
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
Property Name
|
|
Location
|
|
of Units
|
|
|
per Unit
|
|
|
Land
|
|
|
Improvements
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Eagle Ridge
|
|
Erlanger, KY
|
|
|
64
|
|
|
|
1,183
|
|
|
$
|
290,763
|
|
|
$
|
2,387,242
|
|
|
$
|
2,678,005
|
|
Meadowview
|
|
Highland Heights, KY
|
|
|
118
|
|
|
|
1,119
|
|
|
|
703,936
|
|
|
|
4,881,630
|
|
|
|
5,585,566
|
|
Crescent Village
|
|
Cincinnati, OH
|
|
|
90
|
|
|
|
1,226
|
|
|
|
353,117
|
|
|
|
4,312,153
|
|
|
|
4,665,270
|
|
Willow Bend
|
|
Hilliard, OH
|
|
|
92
|
|
|
|
1,221
|
|
|
|
580,130
|
|
|
|
3,006,278
|
|
|
|
3,586,408
|
|
Postwoods I
|
|
Reynoldsburg, OH
|
|
|
92
|
|
|
|
1,186
|
|
|
|
572,065
|
|
|
|
3,247,757
|
|
|
|
3,819,822
|
|
Postwoods II
|
|
Reynoldsburg, OH
|
|
|
88
|
|
|
|
1,186
|
|
|
|
576,438
|
|
|
|
3,272,331
|
|
|
|
3,848,769
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24,183,840
|
|
Less accumulated depreciation (depreciation expense of
approximately $459,000 in 2007)
|
|
|
(459,196
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2007
|
|
$
|
23,724,644
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Company consolidated the following properties owned by the
VIEs as of December 31, 2007 and 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VIEs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
Buildings
|
|
|
Value at
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Square Feet
|
|
|
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
Property Name
|
|
Location
|
|
of Units
|
|
|
per Unit
|
|
|
Land
|
|
|
Improvements
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Ashley Point at Eagle Crest
|
|
Evansville, IN
|
|
|
144
|
|
|
|
910
|
|
|
$
|
321,489
|
|
|
$
|
6,092,695
|
|
|
$
|
6,414,184
|
|
Ashley Square
|
|
Des Moines, IA
|
|
|
150
|
|
|
|
970
|
|
|
|
650,000
|
|
|
|
7,353,350
|
|
|
|
8,003,350
|
|
Bent Tree Apartments
|
|
Columbia, SC
|
|
|
232
|
|
|
|
989
|
|
|
|
986,000
|
|
|
|
11,226,011
|
|
|
|
12,212,011
|
|
Fairmont Oaks Apartments
|
|
Gainsville, FL
|
|
|
178
|
|
|
|
1,139
|
|
|
|
850,400
|
|
|
|
8,108,627
|
|
|
|
8,959,027
|
|
Iona Lakes Apartments
|
|
Ft. Myers, FL
|
|
|
350
|
|
|
|
807
|
|
|
|
1,900,000
|
|
|
|
17,032,120
|
|
|
|
18,932,120
|
|
Lake Forest Apartments
|
|
Daytona Beach, FL
|
|
|
240
|
|
|
|
1,093
|
|
|
|
1,396,800
|
|
|
|
10,724,810
|
|
|
|
12,121,610
|
|
Woodbridge Apts. of Bloomington III
|
|
Bloomington, IN
|
|
|
280
|
|
|
|
946
|
|
|
|
656,346
|
|
|
|
10,150,460
|
|
|
|
10,806,806
|
|
Woodbridge Apts. of Louisville II
|
|
Louisville, KY
|
|
|
190
|
|
|
|
947
|
|
|
|
519,520
|
|
|
|
7,422,933
|
|
|
|
7,942,453
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
85,391,561
|
|
Less accumulated depreciation (depreciation expense of
approximately $2.9 million in 2007)
|
|
|
(31,084,584
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2007
|
|
$
|
54,306,977
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Net Real Estate Assets at December 31, 2007
|
|
$
|
78,031,621
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
59
AMERICA
FIRST TAX EXEMPT INVESTORS, L.P.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
Buildings
|
|
|
Value at
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Square Feet
|
|
|
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
Property Name
|
|
Location
|
|
of Units
|
|
|
per Unit
|
|
|
Land
|
|
|
Improvements
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Ashley Point at Eagle Crest
|
|
Evansville, IN
|
|
|
144
|
|
|
|
910
|
|
|
$
|
321,489
|
|
|
$
|
6,092,695
|
|
|
$
|
6,414,184
|
|
Ashley Square
|
|
Des Moines, IA
|
|
|
150
|
|
|
|
970
|
|
|
|
650,000
|
|
|
|
7,242,944
|
|
|
|
7,892,944
|
|
Bent Tree Apartments
|
|
Columbia, SC
|
|
|
232
|
|
|
|
989
|
|
|
|
986,000
|
|
|
|
11,025,115
|
|
|
|
12,011,115
|
|
Fairmont Oaks Apartments
|
|
Gainsville, FL
|
|
|
178
|
|
|
|
1139
|
|
|
|
850,400
|
|
|
|
8,004,382
|
|
|
|
8,854,782
|
|
Iona Lakes Apartments
|
|
Ft. Myers, FL
|
|
|
350
|
|
|
|
807
|
|
|
|
1,900,000
|
|
|
|
16,820,001
|
|
|
|
18,720,001
|
|
Lake Forest Apartments
|
|
Daytona Beach, FL
|
|
|
240
|
|
|
|
1093
|
|
|
|
1,396,800
|
|
|
|
10,557,253
|
|
|
|
11,954,053
|
|
Woodbridge Apts. of Bloomington III
|
|
Bloomington, IN
|
|
|
280
|
|
|
|
946
|
|
|
|
656,346
|
|
|
|
10,145,983
|
|
|
|
10,802,329
|
|
Woodbridge Apts. of Louisville II
|
|
Louisville, KY
|
|
|
190
|
|
|
|
947
|
|
|
|
519,520
|
|
|
|
7,422,933
|
|
|
|
7,942,453
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
84,591,861
|
|
Less accumulated depreciation (depreciation expense of
approximately $2.3 million in 2006)
|
|
|
(28,381,932
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Net Real Estate Assets at December 31, 2006
|
|
$
|
56,209,929
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.
|
Discontinued
Operations and Assets Held for Sale
|
The Company owned $6.15 million in bonds secured by
Northwoods Lake Apartments in Duluth, Georgia and under
FIN 46R, the Company was required to consolidate the
property. During the third quarter of 2006, the property owner
sold the property. In conjunction with the property sale, the
Partnership sold its investment in the Northwoods Lake
Apartments bonds. The sale of the bonds did not result in a
taxable gain to the Partnership. In order to properly reflect
the transaction under FIN 46R, the Company recorded the
sale of the property in 2006 as though it was owned by the
Company. As such, the Company recorded a gain on the sale of the
property of $11.7 million. The sale was completed for a
total purchase price of $29.5 million. As part of the
purchase price for the property, the buyer assumed the property
owners obligations under the Northwood Lake Apartment
Multifamily Housing Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2004A
(the Series A Bonds) and Series 2004B (the
Series B Bonds). The Series A Bonds had a
principal outstanding balance of $18.6 million and the
Series B Bonds had a principal outstanding balance of
$6.1 million. The Series A Bonds are held by
unaffiliated third parties. There is no material relationship
between the Partnership, the property owner or any of their
respective affiliates, on the one hand, and the Buyer or any of
its respective affiliates, on the other hand. The property owner
realized approximately $4.3 million in net cash proceeds
from the sale of the Property. These funds were used in their
entirety to retire existing obligations of the property owner
including accumulated tax exempt contingent interest earned by
the Partnership on the Series B Bonds. The equity in the
property owner was held by individuals associated with the
general partner of AFCA2. All net proceeds received by the
property owner as a result of the transaction and any assets
remaining with the property owner were used to settle
obligations to the Partnership. The sale of the bonds plus the
receipt of accumulated contingent interest in 2006 resulted in
total proceeds to the Partnership of approximately
$10.4 million.
As a result of the foregoing, Northwoods met the criteria under
SFAS No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or
Disposal of Long-lived Assets
(SFAS No. 144) as a discontinued
operation and is classified as such in the consolidated results
of operations and in the consolidated balance sheets. Under
SFAS No. 144, an asset is generally considered to
qualify as held for sale when: i) management, having the
authority to approve the action, commits to a plan to sell the
asset, ii) the asset is available for immediate sale in its
present condition, iii) an active program to locate a buyer
and other actions required to complete the plan to sell the
asset have been initiated at a price that is reasonable in
relation to its current fair value and iv) the sale of the
asset is probable, and transfer of the asset is expected to
qualify for recognition as a completed sale, within one year.
There were no assets or liabilities of discontinued operations
presented on the consolidated balance sheets as of
December 31, 2007 and December 31, 2006.
60
AMERICA
FIRST TAX EXEMPT INVESTORS, L.P.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The following table presents the revenues and net loss,
excluding gain on sale of $11.7 million in 2006 and
$18.8 million in 2005 for the discontinued operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Rental Revenues
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
2,199,010
|
|
|
$
|
5,802,361
|
|
Expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,085,173
|
|
|
|
5,802,929
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income (Loss)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
113,837
|
|
|
$
|
(568
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In conjunction with the sale of Clear Lake Colony Apartments in
2005, the general partners Board of Managers approved a
special distribution to the BUC holders. As described in
Note 3, all distributions to the partners are governed by
the Agreement of Limited Partnership. In accordance with the
Agreement of Limited Partnership, this special distribution is
considered a distribution of Net Residual Proceeds. All of the
Clear Lake sale proceeds are classified as Tier 2 Net
Residual Proceeds. The Board approved a special distribution of
$3.5 million from the Net Residual Proceeds from the Clear
Lake Colony sale. As this is a Tier 2 distribution,
approximately $2.6 million or 75% of the total distribution
was paid to BUC holders of record as of November 30, 2005
and approximately $0.9 million was paid to the general
partner in the fourth quarter of 2005. As a result of the
transaction, the Company recorded $18,779,929 as gain on sale in
income from discontinued operations on the consolidated
statement of operations in 2005.
In addition to the one-time distribution to BUC holders and the
general partner, a portion of the proceeds were used to pay
$359,000 of deferred administrative fees to the general partner.
The general partner had deferred payment of these administrative
fees without interest since 1989. Due to the gain realized on
this transaction, the general partner elected to receive these
fees. As previously disclosed in the Companys annual
reports on
Form 10-K,
this amount was to be accrued when it was probable that payment
would occur. The Partnership paid the $359,000 of administrative
fees during 2005 and therefore recognized the expense in 2005.
The Partnership used $16.0 million of the proceeds for the
repayment of debt. The remaining proceeds from the sale of
approximately $12.4 million were reinvested in accordance
with the Partnerships investment strategy.
|
|
7.
|
Debt
Financing and Mortgage Payable
|
The terms of the Companys debt financing are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt Financing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securitized Tax-Exempt
|
|
at December 31,
|
|
|
Original
|
|
|
Year
|
|
|
Stated
|
|
|
Effective
|
|
Mortgage Bond and Pledged Collateral
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Debt Financing
|
|
|
Acquired
|
|
|
Maturity
|
|
|
Rate(1)
|
|
|
Fairmont Oaks Apartments
|
|
$
|
7,775,000
|
|
|
$
|
8,020,000
|
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
|
April 2008
|
|
|
|
4.61
|
%
|
Lake Forest Apartments
|
|
|
10,240,000
|
|
|
|
10,590,000
|
|
|
|
2001
|
|
|
|
Dec. 2009
|
|
|
|
4.61
|
%
|
Bent Tree Apartments
|
|
|
11,130,000
|
|
|
|
11,130,000
|
|
|
|
2000
|
|
|
|
Dec. 2010
|
|
|
|
4.45
|
%
|
Woodbridge Bloomington Aptmnts
|
|
|
12,600,000
|
|
|
|
12,600,000
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
Dec. 2010
|
|
|
|
5.26
|
%
|
Iona Lakes Apartments
|
|
|
16,350,000
|
|
|
|
17,155,000
|
|
|
|
2000
|
|
|
|
April 2011
|
|
|
|
4.54
|
%
|
Ashley Square Apartments
|
|
|
6,500,000
|
|
|
|
6,500,000
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
May 2013
|
|
|
|
4.50
|
%
|
Bella Vista Apartments
|
|
|
6,800,000
|
|
|
|
6,800,000
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
June 2038
|
|
|
|
4.50
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt financing
|
|
$
|
71,395,000
|
|
|
$
|
72,795,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Represents the average effective interest rate, including fees,
for the year ended December 31, 2007 and excludes the
effect of interest rate caps (see Note 9.) |
61
AMERICA
FIRST TAX EXEMPT INVESTORS, L.P.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt Financing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securitized Tax-Exempt
|
|
at December 31,
|
|
|
Original
|
|
|
Year
|
|
|
Stated
|
|
|
Effective
|
|
Mortgage Bond and Pledged Collateral
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Debt Financing
|
|
|
Acquired
|
|
|
Maturity
|
|
|
Rate(2)
|
|
|
Bent Tree Apartments
|
|
$
|
11,130,000
|
|
|
$
|
11,130,000
|
|
|
|
2000
|
|
|
|
Dec. 2010
|
|
|
|
4.24
|
%
|
Fairmont Oaks Apartments
|
|
|
7,835,000
|
|
|
|
8,020,000
|
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
|
April 2007
|
|
|
|
4.27
|
%
|
Iona Lakes Apartments
|
|
|
16,485,000
|
|
|
|
17,155,000
|
|
|
|
2000
|
|
|
|
April 2011
|
|
|
|
4.23
|
%
|
Lake Forest Apartments
|
|
|
10,320,000
|
|
|
|
10,590,000
|
|
|
|
2001
|
|
|
|
Dec. 2009
|
|
|
|
4.31
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt financing
|
|
$
|
45,770,000
|
|
|
$
|
46,895,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2) |
|
Represents the average effective interest rate, including fees,
for the year ended December 31, 2006 and excludes the
effect of interest rate caps (see Note 9.). |
The securitization transactions which give rise to this debt
financing are accounted for as secured borrowings and, in
effect, provide variable-rate financing for the acquisition of
new, or the securitization of existing, tax-exempt mortgage
revenue bonds. Accordingly, the $71.4 million of tax-exempt
mortgage revenue bonds financed are required to be held in trust
and the subordinated interests (RITES) totaling
$80,325 and $20,000 are classified as other assets as of 2007
and 2006 respectively.
The Company did not recognize a gain or loss in connection with
any of the secured borrowings.
The Companys financing is concentrated with Merrill Lynch
through the P-Float program. Recent credit losses and credit
rating downgrades at Merrill Lynch have resulted in an increase
in the Companys cost of borrowing under the P- Float
program. We do not expect to have access to additional debt
financing through the Merrill Lynch P-Float program for the
foreseeable future.
Merrill Lynchs cost of borrowing related to the P-Float
program is expressed as an estimate of the Securities Industry
and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA), formerly
known as the Bond Market Association (BMA) floating
rate index, plus a basis point credit spread. The following
table displays the SIFMA rate, estimated Merrill Lynch credit
spread and the resulting effective interest rate to the Company
under the P-Float program as of the dates shown.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Partnership Effective
|
|
|
SIFMA Floating
|
|
|
P-Float Program
|
|
Interest Rate on
|
|
|
Rate Index
|
|
|
Credit Spread
|
|
P-Float Debt
|
|
September 30, 2007
|
|
|
3.84
|
%
|
|
0.90% to 0.95%
|
|
4.74% to 4.79%
|
October 31, 2007
|
|
|
3.26
|
%
|
|
1.07% to 1.22%
|
|
4.33% to 4.48%
|
November 30, 2007
|
|
|
3.58
|
%
|
|
1.30% to 1.35%
|
|
4.88% to 4.93%
|
December 31, 2007
|
|
|
3.42
|
%
|
|
2.33%
|
|
5.75%
|
January 31, 2008
|
|
|
2.20
|
%
|
|
3.85%
|
|
6.05%
|
February 29, 2008
|
|
|
3.16
|
%
|
|
2.95% to 3.77%
|
|
6.11% to 6.93%
|
The increased P-Float program credit spread has resulted in a
significantly higher effective interest rate for the Company. As
shown in the table above, the Companys effective interest
rate has increased approximately 1.25% to 2.0% from
November 30, 2007 to February 29, 2008. A 1.5%
increase in the Companys effective interest rate, on an
annualized basis, would result in approximately
$1.1 million of additional interest expense based on
$71.4 million of outstanding P-Float debt. The Company is
currently evaluating alternative financing vehicles to replace
its P-Float debt in order to reduce its interest
expense and in order to have access to new leverage financing
for additional tax-exempt mortgage bonds on reasonable terms.
The Company has not entered into any agreements with respect to
any such alternative debt financing and there can be no
assurances that it will be able to do so.
62
AMERICA
FIRST TAX EXEMPT INVESTORS, L.P.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Additionally, there can be no assurances that the existing
P-Float debt will remain in place even with the additional costs
currently being incurred.
In connection with the acquisition of the MF Properties, a
mortgage loan of approximately $19.9 million was obtained.
The interest rate on this mortgage is variable and is calculated
as one month LIBOR plus 1.55%. As of the transaction date, LIBOR
was 5.32% and the interest on the mortgage was 6.87%. As of
December 31, 2007, one month LIBOR was 4.86% and the
interest on the mortgage was 6.41%. The mortgage matures in July
2009. The Company has guaranteed the payment of certain
exceptions from the nonrecourse provisions and certain
environmental obligations, should they arise, in connection with
the loan.
The Companys aggregate borrowings as of December 31,
2007 contractually mature over the next five years and
thereafter as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
$
|
8,010,000
|
|
2009
|
|
|
30,275,000
|
|
2010
|
|
|
23,940,000
|
|
2011
|
|
|
15,940,000
|
|
2012
|
|
|
50,000
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
13,100,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
91,315,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In January 2008, the Partnership entered into a
$5.0 million line of credit. The line of credit is
available for new investments and general working capital
purposes. It is secured by certain mortgage revenue bonds and
bears interest at a variable rate of prime minus 0.5% per annum.
|
|
8.
|
Transactions
with Related Parties
|
Substantially all of the Companys general and
administrative expenses and certain costs capitalized by the
Partnership are paid by AFCA 2 or an affiliate and are
reimbursed by the Partnership. The capitalized costs were
incurred in connection with the acquisition or reissuance of
certain tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds and the debt financing
transactions. The amounts of such expenses reimbursed to AFCA 2
or an affiliate are shown below. The amounts below represent
actual cash reimbursements and do not reflect accruals made at
each year end.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Reimbursable salaries and benefits
|
|
$
|
616,058
|
|
|
$
|
612,836
|
|
|
$
|
705,559
|
|
Costs capitalized by the Partnership
|
|
|
455,613
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,388
|
|
Other expenses
|
|
|
70,236
|
|
|
|
130,985
|
|
|
|
278,045
|
|
Insurance
|
|
|
104,557
|
|
|
|
95,662
|
|
|
|
138,209
|
|
Professional fees and expenses
|
|
|
418,615
|
|
|
|
422,997
|
|
|
|
445,174
|
|
Investor services and custodial fees
|
|
|
38,511
|
|
|
|
47,739
|
|
|
|
34,323
|
|
Consulting and travel expenses
|
|
|
55,426
|
|
|
|
24,207
|
|
|
|
27,751
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,759,016
|
|
|
$
|
1,334,426
|
|
|
$
|
1,635,449
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AFCA 2 is entitled to receive an administrative fee from the
Partnership equal to 0.45% per annum of the outstanding
principal balance of any its tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds
or other tax-exempt investments for which the owner of the
financed property or other third party is not obligated to pay
such administrative fee directly to AFCA 2. For the years ended
December 31, 2007, 2006, and 2005, the Partnership paid
administrative fees to AFCA 2 of approximately $207,000,
$79,000, and $83,000, respectively. In addition to the
administrative fees paid directly by the Partnership, AFCA 2
receives administrative fees directly from the owners of
properties financed by
63
AMERICA
FIRST TAX EXEMPT INVESTORS, L.P.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
certain of the tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds held by the
Partnership. These administrative fees also equal 0.45% per
annum of the outstanding principal balance of these tax-exempt
mortgage revenue bonds and totaled approximately $526,000,
$313,000, and $318,000, in 2007, 2006, and 2005, respectively.
In addition, during 2006 AFCA 2 received payment of
approximately $440,000 of past due administrative fees from the
owners of Northwoods. Although these third party administrative
fees are not Partnership expenses, they have been reflected in
the accompanying consolidated financial statements of the
Company as a result of the consolidation of the VIEs. Such fees
are payable by the financed property prior to the payment of any
contingent interest on the tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds
secured by these properties. If the Partnership were to acquire
any of these properties in foreclosure, it would assume the
obligation to pay the administrative fees relating to mortgage
revenue bonds on these properties. During 2005, AFCA 2 also
received approximately $359,000 in deferred administrative fees
from the Partnership which related to the year ended
December 31, 1989. Such deferred administrative fees became
payable as a result of the gain realized by the Partnership from
the sale of Clear Lake Colony Apartments.
Accounts payable as of December 31, 2007 and 2006 included
accrued amounts for reimbursable costs and expenses and
administrative fees due to AFCA 2 of approximately $8,000 and
$58,000 respectively.
AFCA 2 earned mortgage placement fees in connection with the
acquisition of certain tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds. These
mortgage placement fees were paid by the owners of the
respective property and, accordingly, have not been reflected in
the accompanying consolidated financial statements because these
properties are not considered VIEs. During 2007, AFCA2 earned
acquisition fees from closing the Gardens of Weatherford,
Gardens of DeCordova, Woodland Park and Prairiebrook Village
bonds in the amount of approximately $311,000. Similar fees of
approximately $102,000 were earned by AFCA 2 during the year
ended December 31, 2006 in connection with the acquisition
of the Bella Vista and Deerfield tax-exempt mortgage revenue
bonds during 2006. There were no such fees earned in 2005.
An affiliate of AFCA 2, America First Property Management
Company, LLC (Properties Management) was retained to
provide property management services for Ashley Square,
Northwoods Lake Apartments, Ashley Pointe at Eagle Crest, Iona
Lakes Apartments, Clear Lake Colony Apartments, Bent Tree
Apartments, Lake Forest Apartments, Fairmont Oaks Apartments,
Eagle Ridge, Crescent Village, Meadowview, Willow Bend,
Postwoods I, and Postwoods II. The management fees paid to
Properties Management amounted to approximately $485,000 in
2007, $514,000 in 2006, and $756,000 in 2005. For the VIEs,
these management fees are not Partnership expenses but are
recorded by each applicable VIE entity and, accordingly, have
been reflected in the accompanying consolidated financial
statements. Such fees are paid out of the revenues generated by
the properties owned by the VIEs prior to the payment of any
interest on the tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds and taxable
loans held by the Partnership on these properties. For the MF
Properties, these management fees are considered real estate
operating expenses.
The shareholders of the limited-purpose corporations which own
five of the apartment properties financed with tax-exempt bonds
and taxable loans held by the Company are employees of
Burlington who are not involved in the operation or management
of the Company and who are not executive officers or managers of
Burlington.
|
|
9.
|
Interest
Rate Cap Agreements
|
As of December 31, 2007, the Company has four derivative
agreements in order to mitigate its exposure to increases in
interest rates on its variable-rate debt financing and mortgage
payable.
On November 1, 2007, an interest rate cap with a notional
amount of $10.0 million expired. This interest rate cap was
not replaced.
On June 29, 2007, Holding Corp purchased an interest rate
cap for a $17,500 premium. The derivative has a cap on the
floating rate index of 8.3%, a notional amount of
$19.9 million and matures on July 1, 2009. On
July 1, 2006, an interest rate cap with a notional amount
of $20.0 million expired. On July 7, 2006, the
Partnership purchased an interest rate cap for a $159,700
premium. The derivative has a cap on the floating rate index of
4.0%, a notional
64
AMERICA
FIRST TAX EXEMPT INVESTORS, L.P.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
amount of $10.0 million and matures on July 1, 2011.
It effectively caps the floating rate index at 4.0%, so the
maximum interest rate to be paid on $10.0 million of debt
financing is 4.0% plus remarketing, credit enhancement,
liquidity and trustee fees which aggregate to approximately
75 basis points.
On February 1, 2003, the Partnership purchased a
convertible interest rate cap for a $608,000 premium. The
derivative has a cap on the floating rate index of 3.50%, a
notional amount of $15.0 million and matures on
January 1, 2010. It effectively caps the floating rate
index at 3.50%, so the maximum interest rate to be paid on
$15.0 million of debt financing is 3.50% plus remarketing,
credit enhancement, liquidity and trustee fees which aggregate
to approximately 75 basis points. If the floating rate
index declines to a level where the counterparty elects to
exercise its option, the convertible cap would be converted to a
fixed rate swap and the Partnerships interest expense
would be converted to a fixed rate of 2.95% plus remarketing
costs paid in the P-Float program. The counterparty elected to
exercise this option in February 2008. Under the terms of the
swap, the Partnership will pay a fixed rate of interest of 2.95%
to the counterparty and will receive a variable rate of interest
from same based on the SIFMA Municipal Swap Index rate. This
rate is set weekly and settlements under the swap agreement will
be made monthly based on the original notional amount of
$15 million. The Partnership is required to maintain a
restricted compensating balance with the counterparty
institution based on the present value of the projected future
payments for the duration of the swap agreement. The swap will
maintain the original expiration date of January 1, 2010.
On May 1, 2007, the Partnership purchased an interest rate
cap for a $65,500 premium. The derivative has a cap on the
floating rate index of 4.0%, a notional amount of
$10.0 million and matures on May 1, 2012. It
effectively caps the floating rate index at 4.0%, so the maximum
interest rate to be paid on $10.0 million of debt financing
is 4.0% plus remarketing, credit enhancement, liquidity and
trustee fees which aggregate to approximately 75 basis
points.
Interest rate cap expense, which is the result of marking the
interest rate cap agreements to fair value, reduced interest
expense by approximately $365,000 for the year ended
December 31, 2005, and increased expense $74,000 and $210
for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006
respectively. These are free-standing derivatives, so changes in
fair value are included in earnings.
|
|
10.
|
Fair
Value of Financial Instruments
|
The following methods and assumptions were used by the
Partnership in estimating the fair value of its financial
instruments:
Cash and cash equivalents, restricted cash, interest
receivable, interest rate cap agreements and distribution
payable: Fair value approximates the carrying
value of such assets and liabilities due to the Companys
accounting policy
and/or
short-term nature of the financial instruments.
Debt financing: The carrying amount of the
debt financing approximates fair value because management
believes that the interest rates on the debt, which reset
weekly, vary based on market indices and are consistent with
those that would be currently available to the Partnership in
the market.
Investment in tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds and
investment in other tax-exempt bond: These
instruments are carried at fair value based on the
Companys estimate of fair value as described in
Notes 4 and 5.
|
|
11.
|
Commitments
and Contingencies
|
The Company is subject to various legal proceedings and claims
that arise in the ordinary course of business. These matters are
frequently covered by insurance. If it has been determined that
a loss is probable to occur, the estimated amount of the loss is
accrued in the consolidated financial statements. While the
resolution of these matters cannot be predicted with certainty,
management believes the final outcome of such matters will not
have a material adverse effect on the Companys
consolidated financial statements.
65
AMERICA
FIRST TAX EXEMPT INVESTORS, L.P.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
12.
|
Recent
Accounting Pronouncements
|
In June 2006, the FASB issued Interpretation No. 48,
Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes, an
Interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109. The
interpretation clarifies the accounting for uncertainty in tax
positions. The interpretation, effective for the Company
beginning in the first quarter of 2007, did not have a material
effect on the Partnerships consolidated financial
statements.
In September 2006, the FASB issued Statement No. 157,
Fair Value Measurements
(SFAS No. 157). This statement does not
require new fair value measurements; however, it provides
guidance on applying fair value and expands required
disclosures. SFAS No. 157 is effective for the Company
beginning in the first quarter of 2008. The Company does not
expect the application of SFAS No. 157 to have a
material impact on the consolidated financial statements.
In February 2007, the FASB issued Statement No. 159, The
Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities
Including an amendment of FASB No. 115
(SFAS No. 159). This statement permits,
but does not require, entities to choose to measure many
financial instruments and certain other items as fair value.
SFAS No. 159 is effective for the Company beginning in
the first quarter of 2008. The Company has evaluated the
provisions of SFAS No. 159 and did not elect to adopt
the fair value option on any financial instruments held by the
Company on December 31, 2007. Management has not determined
whether it will elect this option for any new financial
instruments acquired in the future.
In June 2007, the American Institute of Certified Public
Accountants (AICPA) issued Statement of Position (SOP)
07-1,
Clarification of the Scope of the Audit and Accounting Guide
Investment Companies and Accounting for Parent Companies and
Equity Method Investors for Investments in Investment
Companies. This SOP provides guidance for determining
whether an entity is within the scope of the AICPA Audit and
Accounting Guide Investment Companies (the Guide).
Entities that are within the scope of the Guide are required,
among other things, to carry their investments at fair value,
with changes in fair value included in earnings. In October
2007, the effective date of this SOP was deferred indefinitely.
The Company is currently evaluating this new guidance and has
not determined whether it will be required to apply the
provisions of the Guide in presenting its financial statements.
In December 2007, the FASB issued Statement No. 160,
Noncontrolling Interests in Consolidated Financial
Statements- an amendment of ARB 51
(SFAS No. 160). SFAS No. 160
requires that a noncontrolling interest in a subsidiary be
reported as equity and the amount of consolidated net income
specifically attributable to the noncontrolling interest be
identified in the consolidated financial statements. It also
calls for consistency in the manner of reporting changes in the
parents ownership interest and requires fair value
measurement of any noncontrolling equity investment retained in
a deconsolidation. SFAS No. 160 is effective for the
Company on January 1, 2009. The Company is currently
evaluating the impact that SFAS No. 160 will have on
its consolidated financial statements upon adoption.
In December 2007, the FASB issued Statement No. 141
(revised 2007), Business Combinations
(SFAS No. 141R).
SFAS No. 141R broadens the guidance of
SFAS No. 141, extending its applicability to all
transactions and other events in which one entity obtains
control over one or more other businesses. It broadens the fair
value measurement and recognition of assets acquired,
liabilities assumed, and interests transferred as a result of
business combinations. SFAS No. 141R is effective for
the Company on January 1, 2009. The Company is currently
evaluating the impact that SFAS No. 141R will have on
its consolidated financial statements upon adoption.
The Company consists of three reportable segments, Tax-Exempt
Bond Investments, MF Properties, and VIEs. In addition to the
three reportable segments, the Company also separately reports
its consolidating and eliminating entries because it does not
allocate certain items to the segments.
66
AMERICA
FIRST TAX EXEMPT INVESTORS, L.P.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Tax-Exempt
Bond Investments Segment
The Tax-Exempt Bond Investments segment consists of the
Companys portfolio of federally tax-exempt mortgage
revenue bonds which have been issued to provide construction
and/or
permanent financing of multifamily residential apartments. Such
tax exempt bonds are held as long-term investments. As of
December 31, 2007, the Company held twelve tax-exempt bonds
not associated with VIEs and eight tax-exempt bonds associated
with VIEs. The multifamily apartment properties financed by
these tax exempt bonds contain a total of 3,050 rental
units.
MF
Properties Segment
The MF Properties segment consists of indirect equity interests
in multifamily apartment properties which are not currently
financed by tax-exempt bonds held by the Partnership but which
the Partnership eventually intends to finance by such bonds
through a restructuring. In connection with any such
restructuring, the Partnership will be required to dispose of
any equity interest held in such MF Properties. The
Partnerships interests in its current MF Properties are
not currently classified as Assets Held for Sale because the
Partnership is not actively marketing them for sale, there is no
definitive purchase agreement in existence and, therefore, no
sale is expected in the next twelve months. During the time the
Partnership holds an interest in a MF Property, any net rental
income generated by the MF Properties in excess of debt service
will be available for distribution to the Partnership in
accordance with its interest in the MF Property. Any such cash
distribution will contribute to the Partnerships Cash
Available for Distribution (CAD). As of
December 31, 2007, the Company held interest in six MF
Properties containing a total of 544 rental units.
The
VIE segment
The VIE segment consists of multifamily apartment properties
which are financed with tax-exempt bonds held by the
Partnership, the assets, liabilities and operating results of
which are consolidated with those of the Partnership as a result
of FIN 46R. The tax-exempt bonds on these VIE properties
are eliminated from the Companys financial statements as a
result of such consolidation, however, such bonds are held as
long-term investments by the Partnership which continues to be
entitled to receive principal and interest payments on such
bonds. The Company does not actually own an equity position in
the VIEs or their underlying properties. As of December 31,
2007, the Company consolidated eight VIE multifamily apartment
properties containing a total of 1,764 rental units.
Management closely monitors and evaluates the financial
reporting associated with and the operations of the VIEs and the
MF Properties and performs such evaluation separately from the
other operations of the Partnership through interaction with the
affiliated property management company which manages the
multifamily apartment properties held by the VIEs and the MF
Properties.
Managements goals with respect to the properties
constituting each of the Companys reportable segments is
to generate increasing amounts of net rental income from these
properties that will allow them to (i) make all payments of
base interest, and possibly pay contingent interest, on the
properties included in the Tax-Exempt Bond Investments segment
and the VIE segment, and (ii) distribute net rental income
to the Partnership from the MF Properties segment until
such properties can be refinanced with additional tax-exempt
mortgage bonds meeting the Partnerships investment
criteria. In order to achieve these goals, management of these
multifamily apartment properties is focused on:
(i) maintaining high economic occupancy and increasing
rental rates through effective leasing, reduced turnover rates
and providing quality maintenance and services to maximize
resident satisfaction; (ii) managing operating expenses and
achieving cost reductions through operating efficiencies and
economies of scale generally inherent in the management of a
portfolio of multiple properties; and (iii) emphasizing
regular programs of repairs, maintenance and property
improvements to enhance the competitive advantage and value of
its properties in their respective market areas.
67
AMERICA
FIRST TAX EXEMPT INVESTORS, L.P.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The following table details certain key financial information
for the Companys reportable segments for the three years
ended December 31, 2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Total revenue
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax-Exempt Bond Financing
|
|
$
|
10,131,656
|
|
|
$
|
12,621,348
|
|
|
$
|
10,747,149
|
|
MF Properties
|
|
|
2,066,487
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VIEs
|
|
|
13,959,537
|
|
|
|
14,187,135
|
|
|
|
13,891,556
|
|
Consolidation/eliminations
|
|
|
(5,898,478
|
)
|
|
|
(10,861,160
|
)
|
|
|
(9,383,504
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenue
|
|
$
|
20,259,202
|
|
|
$
|
15,947,323
|
|
|
$
|
15,255,201
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest Expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax-Exempt Bond Financing
|
|
$
|
2,835,646
|
|
|
$
|
2,106,292
|
|
|
$
|
1,176,293
|
|
MF Properties
|
|
|
695,546
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VIEs
|
|
|
8,880,888
|
|
|
|
9,993,419
|
|
|
|
12,656,331
|
|
Consolidation/eliminations
|
|
|
(8,880,888
|
)
|
|
|
(9,993,419
|
)
|
|
|
(12,656,331
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total interest expense
|
|
$
|
3,531,192
|
|
|
$
|
2,106,292
|
|
|
$
|
1,176,293
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation Expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax-Exempt Bond Financing
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
MF Properties
|
|
|
459,196
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VIEs
|
|
|
2,702,652
|
|
|
|
2,824,579
|
|
|
|
3,414,544
|
|
Consolidation/eliminations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,020
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total depreciation expense
|
|
$
|
3,161,848
|
|
|
$
|
2,824,579
|
|
|
$
|
3,419,564
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from continuing operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax-Exempt Bond Financing
|
|
$
|
5,683,395
|
|
|
$
|
8,913,510
|
|
|
$
|
5,811,289
|
|
MF Properties
|
|
|
(1,302,968
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VIEs
|
|
|
(6,507,066
|
)
|
|
|
(5,942,777
|
)
|
|
|
(5,807,526
|
)
|
Consolidation/eliminations
|
|
|
3,067,505
|
|
|
|
(1,973,829
|
)
|
|
|
790,450
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations
|
|
$
|
940,866
|
|
|
$
|
996,904
|
|
|
$
|
794,213
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax-Exempt Bond Financing
|
|
$
|
5,683,395
|
|
|
$
|
8,913,510
|
|
|
$
|
18,121,623
|
|
MF Properties
|
|
|
(1,302,968
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VIEs
|
|
|
(6,507,066
|
)
|
|
|
10,729,646
|
|
|
|
(863,054
|
)
|
Consolidation/eliminations
|
|
|
3,067,505
|
|
|
|
(6,866,421
|
)
|
|
|
2,306,573
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
940,866
|
|
|
$
|
12,776,735
|
|
|
$
|
19,565,142
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax-Exempt Bond Financing
|
|
$
|
182,498,714
|
|
|
$
|
133,887,842
|
|
|
$
|
128,782,494
|
|
MF Properties
|
|
|
25,774,045
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VIEs
|
|
|
58,313,099
|
|
|
|
58,969,966
|
|
|
|
88,088,358
|
|
Consolidation/eliminations
|
|
|
(101,706,850
|
)
|
|
|
(92,657,619
|
)
|
|
|
(105,296,728
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
164,879,008
|
|
|
$
|
100,200,189
|
|
|
$
|
111,574,124
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total partners capital
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax-Exempt Bond Financing
|
|
$
|
107,735,743
|
|
|
$
|
85,758,294
|
|
|
$
|
80,970,212
|
|
MF Properties
|
|
|
4,875,632
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VIEs
|
|
|
(62,587,772
|
)
|
|
|
(55,827,776
|
)
|
|
|
(66,557,422
|
)
|
Consolidation/eliminations
|
|
|
14,250,864
|
|
|
|
16,815,842
|
|
|
|
25,227,200
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total partners capital
|
|
$
|
64,274,467
|
|
|
$
|
46,746,360
|
|
|
$
|
39,639,990
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
68
AMERICA
FIRST TAX EXEMPT INVESTORS, L.P.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
14.
|
Summary
of Unaudited Quarterly Results of Operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
4,207,462
|
|
|
$
|
4,449,112
|
|
|
$
|
5,710,312
|
|
|
$
|
5,892,316
|
|
Income (loss) from continuing operations
|
|
|
938,777
|
|
|
|
761,938
|
|
|
|
113,313
|
|
|
|
(873,162
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
938,777
|
|
|
$
|
761,938
|
|
|
$
|
113,313
|
|
|
$
|
(873,162
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations, per BUC
|
|
$
|
0.13
|
|
|
$
|
0.12
|
|
|
$
|
0.07
|
|
|
$
|
0.02
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income, basic and diluted, per BUC
|
|
$
|
0.13
|
|
|
$
|
0.12
|
|
|
$
|
0.07
|
|
|
$
|
0.02
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
3,797,294
|
|
|
$
|
3,904,489
|
|
|
$
|
3,840,578
|
|
|
$
|
4,404,962
|
|
Income (loss) from continuing operations
|
|
|
267,076
|
|
|
|
433,095
|
|
|
|
(51,007
|
)
|
|
|
347,740
|
|
Income (loss) from discontinued operations
|
|
|
193,459
|
|
|
|
211,739
|
|
|
|
11,783,237
|
|
|
|
(408,604
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
460,535
|
|
|
$
|
644,834
|
|
|
$
|
11,732,230
|
|
|
$
|
(60,864
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations, per BUC
|
|
$
|
0.11
|
|
|
$
|
0.13
|
|
|
$
|
0.37
|
|
|
$
|
0.13
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income, basic and diluted, per BUC
|
|
$
|
0.11
|
|
|
$
|
0.13
|
|
|
$
|
0.37
|
|
|
$
|
0.13
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
69
Report of
Independent Auditors
To the Partners
Woodbridge Apartments of Louisville II, L.P.
We have audited the accompanying balance sheet of Woodbridge
Apartments of Louisville II, L.P., a limited partnership, as of
December 31, 2006, and the related statements of profit and
loss, changes in partners capital (deficit) and cash flows
for the year then ended. These financial statements are the
responsibility of the Partnerships management. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial
statements based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards
generally accepted in the United States. Those standards require
that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable
assurance about whether the financial statements are free of
material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test
basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the
financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the
accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall financial
statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a
reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above
present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position
of Woodbridge Apartments of Louisville II, L.P. at
December 31, 2006, and the results of its operations and
its cash flows for the year then ended in conformity with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States.
Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming an opinion on
the basic financial statements taken as a whole. The
accompanying supporting data listed on the contents page are
presented for purposes of additional analysis and are not a
required part of the basic financial statements of the
Partnership. Such data has been subjected to the auditing
procedures applied in our audit of the basic financial
statements and, in our opinion, are fairly stated, in all
material respects, in relation to the basic financial statements
taken as a whole.
/s/ Katz,
Sapper & Miller, LLP
Indianapolis, Indiana
February 2, 2007
70
Report of
Independent Auditors
To the Partners
Woodbridge Apartments of Louisville II, L.P.
We have audited the accompanying balance sheet of Woodbridge
Apartments of Louisville II, L.P., a limited partnership, as of
December 31, 2005, and the related statements of profit and
loss, changes in partners capital (deficit) and cash flows
for the year then ended. These financial statements are the
responsibility of the Partnerships management. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial
statements based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards
generally accepted in the United States. Those standards require
that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable
assurance about whether the financial statements are free of
material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test
basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the
financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the
accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall financial
statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a
reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above
present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position
of Woodbridge Apartments of Louisville II, L.P. at
December 31, 2005, and the results of its operations and
its cash flows for the year then ended in conformity with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States.
Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming an opinion on
the basic financial statements taken as a whole. The
accompanying supporting data listed on the contents page are
presented for purposes of additional analysis and are not a
required part of the basic financial statements of the
Partnership. Such data has been subjected to the auditing
procedures applied in our audit of the basic financial
statements and, in our opinion, are fairly stated, in all
material respects, in relation to the basic financial statements
taken as a whole.
/s/ Katz,
Sapper & Miller, LLP
Indianapolis, Indiana
January 28, 2006
71
Report of
Independent Auditors
To the Partners
Woodbridge Apartments of Bloomington III, L.P.
We have audited the accompanying balance sheet of Woodbridge
Apartments of Bloomington III, L.P., a limited partnership, as
of December 31, 2006, and the related statements of profit
and loss, changes in partners capital (deficit) and cash
flows for the year then ended. These financial statements are
the responsibility of the Partnerships management. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial
statements based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards
generally accepted in the United States. Those standards require
that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable
assurance about whether the financial statements are free of
material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test
basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the
financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the
accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall financial
statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a
reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above
present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position
of Woodbridge Apartments of Bloomington III, L.P. at
December 31, 2006, and the results of its operations and
its cash flows for the year then ended in conformity with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States.
Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming an opinion on
the basic financial statements taken as a whole. The
accompanying supporting data listed on the contents page are
presented for purposes of additional analysis and are not a
required part of the basic financial statements of the
Partnership. Such data has been subjected to the auditing
procedures applied in our audit of the basic financial
statements and, in our opinion, are fairly stated, in all
material respects, in relation to the basic financial statements
taken as a whole.
/s/ Katz,
Sapper & Miller, LLP
Indianapolis, Indiana
February 2, 2007
72
Report of
Independent Auditors
To the Partners
Woodbridge Apartments of Bloomington III, L.P.
We have audited the accompanying balance sheet of Woodbridge
Apartments of Bloomington III, L.P., a limited partnership, as
of December 31, 2005, and the related statements of profit
and loss, changes in partners capital (deficit) and cash
flows for the year then ended. These financial statements are
the responsibility of the Partnerships management. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial
statements based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards
generally accepted in the United States. Those standards require
that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable
assurance about whether the financial statements are free of
material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test
basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the
financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the
accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall financial
statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a
reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above
present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position
of Woodbridge Apartments of Bloomington III, L.P. at
December 31, 2005, and the results of its operations and
its cash flows for the year then ended in conformity with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States.
Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming an opinion on
the basic financial statements taken as a whole. The
accompanying supporting data listed on the contents page are
presented for purposes of additional analysis and are not a
required part of the basic financial statements of the
Partnership. Such data has been subjected to the auditing
procedures applied in our audit of the basic financial
statements and, in our opinion, are fairly stated, in all
material respects, in relation to the basic financial statements
taken as a whole.
/s/ Katz,
Sapper & Miller, LLP
Indianapolis, Indiana
January 28, 2006
73
|
|
Item 9.
|
Changes
in and Disagreements With Accountants on Accounting and
Financial Disclosure.
|
Not
applicable
|
|
Item 9A.
|
Controls
and Procedures.
|
Evaluation of disclosure controls and
procedures. The Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer of the general partner of the general partner
of the Partnership have evaluated the effectiveness of the
Companys disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(e)
and
15d-15(e))
as of the end of the period covered by this report. Based on
that evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief
Financial Officer have concluded that the Companys current
disclosure controls and procedures are effective.
Management
Report On Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
The Companys management (consisting of the officers of the
Burlington Capital Group LLC in its capacity as the general
partner of the general partner of the Partnership) is
responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal
control over financial reporting as such term is defined in
Securities Exchange Act
Rule 13a-15(f).
The Company carried out an evaluation under the supervision and
with the participation of the Companys management,
including the Companys Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer (or persons performing such functions), of the
effectiveness of the Companys internal control over
financial reporting. The Companys management used the
framework in Internal Control Integrated
Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations (COSO) to perform this evaluation. Based on that
evaluation, the Companys management concluded that the
Companys internal control over financial reporting was
effective as of December 31, 2007.
Management has excluded from its assessment the internal control
over financial reporting at Woodbridge Apartments of Louisville
II, L.P. and Woodbridge Apartments of Bloomington III, L.P.,
both consolidated variable interest entities. These entities
were excluded from the assessment as the Partnership does not
own or directly manage these entities and, therefore, Company
Management does not have the ability to dictate, modify or
effectively assess the internal controls at these entities.
The effectiveness of the Partnerships internal control
over financial reporting as of December 31, 2007 has been
audited by Deloitte & Touche LLP, an independent
registered public accounting firm, as stated in their report, a
copy of which is included in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
74
REPORT OF
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Partners of
America First Tax Exempt Investors, L.P.
Omaha, Nebraska
We have audited the internal control over financial reporting of
America First Tax Exempt Investors, L.P. and subsidiaries (the
Company) as of December 31, 2007, based on
criteria established in Internal Control
Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission. The Companys
management is responsible for maintaining effective internal
control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting,
included in the accompanying Management Report On Internal
Control Over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to
express an opinion on the Companys internal control over
financial reporting based on our audit.
As described in Management Report On Internal Control Over
Financial Reporting, management excluded from its assessment
the internal control over financial reporting at Woodbridge
Apartments of Louisville II, L.P. and Woodbridge Apartments of
Bloomington III, L.P. (consolidated variable interest entities),
because the Company does not have the ability to dictate,
modify, or affectively assess the internal controls at these
entities. Woodbridge Apartments of Louisville II, L.P. and
Woodbridge Apartments of Bloomington III, L.P. constitute 4.7%
of total assets and 24.2% of property revenues of the
consolidated financial statements of the Company as of and for
the year ended December 31, 2007. Accordingly, our audit
did not include the internal control over financial reporting at
Woodbridge Apartments of Louisville II, L.P. and Woodbridge
Apartments of Bloomington III, L.P.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control
over financial reporting was maintained in all material
respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of
internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk
that a material weakness exists, testing and evaluating the
design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on
the assessed risk, and performing such other procedures as we
considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our
audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
A companys internal control over financial reporting is a
process designed by, or under the supervision of, the
companys principal executive and principal financial
officers, or persons performing similar functions, and effected
by the companys board of directors, management, and other
personnel to provide reasonable assurance regarding the
reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of
financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles. A companys
internal control over financial reporting includes those
policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance
of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly
reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the
company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions
are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial
statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company
are being made only in accordance with authorizations of
management and directors of the company; and (3) provide
reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of
unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the
companys assets that could have a material effect on the
financial statements.
Because of the inherent limitations of internal control over
financial reporting, including the possibility of collusion or
improper management override of controls, material misstatements
due to error or fraud may not be prevented or detected on a
timely basis. Also, projections of any evaluation of the
effectiveness of the internal control over financial reporting
to future periods are subject to the risk that the controls may
become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the
degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may
deteriorate.
In our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material
respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as
of December 31, 2007, based on the criteria established in
Internal Control Integrated Framework issued
by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission.
We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the
consolidated financial statements as of and for the year ended
December 31, 2007 of the Company and our report dated
March 11, 2008 expressed an unqualified opinion on those
financial statements and included an explanatory paragraph
regarding managements estimates for investments without
readily determinable fair values.
/s/ DELOITTE &
TOUCHE LLP
Omaha, Nebraska
March 11, 2008
75
Changes in internal controls over financial
reporting. There were no changes in the
Companys internal controls over financial reporting during
the Companys most recent fiscal quarter that have
materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially
affect, the Companys internal control over financial
reporting.
|
|
Item 9B.
|
Other
Information.
|
None.
PART III
|
|
Item 10.
|
Directors,
Executive Officers and Corporate Governance.
|
The Partnership has no directors or officers of its own.
Management of the Partnership consists of the general partner of
the Partnership, America First Capital Associates Limited
Partnership Two (AFCA 2) and its general partner,
The Burlington Capital Group LLC (formerly America First
Companies, L.L.C.) (Burlington).
The following individuals are the officers and managers of
Burlington, and each serves for a term of one year. BUC holders
have no right to nominate or elect managers of Burlington.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Position Held
|
|
Position Held Since
|
|
Michael B. Yanney
|
|
Chairman of the Board and Manager
|
|
|
1984
|
|
Lisa Y. Roskens
|
|
President, Chief Executive Officer and Manager
|
|
|
2001/2000/1999
|
|
Michael J. Draper
|
|
Chief Financial Officer
|
|
|
2004
|
|
Mariann Byerwalter
|
|
Manager(2)
|
|
|
1997
|
|
Dr. William S. Carter
|
|
Manager(2)
|
|
|
2003
|
|
Patrick J. Jung
|
|
Manager(1)(2)
|
|
|
2003
|
|
George H. Krauss
|
|
Manager
|
|
|
2001
|
|
Dr. Martin A. Massengale
|
|
Manager(1)(2)
|
|
|
1994
|
|
Dr. Gail Walling Yanney
|
|
Manager
|
|
|
1996
|
|
Clayton K. Yeutter
|
|
Manager(1)(2)
|
|
|
2001
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Member of the Burlington Audit Committee. The Board of Managers
has designated Mr. Jung as the audit committee
financial expert as such term is defined in
Item 401(h) of SEC
Regulation S-K. |
|
(2) |
|
Determined to be independent under both Section 10A of the
Securities Act of 1934 and under the NASDAQ Marketplace rules. |
Michael B. Yanney, 74, has served as the Chairman of the
Board of Burlington and its predecessors since 1984. From 1977
until the organization of Burlington in 1984, Mr. Yanney
was principally engaged in the ownership and management of
commercial banks. From 1961 to 1977, Mr. Yanney was
employed by Omaha National Bank and Omaha National Corporation
(now part of U.S. Bank), where he held various positions,
including the position of Executive Vice President and Treasurer
of the holding company. Mr. Yanney also serves as a member
of the boards of directors of Level 3 Communications, Inc.,
Streck Laboratories, and Magnum Resources, Inc. Mr. Yanney
is the husband of Gail Walling Yanney and the father of Lisa Y.
Roskens.
Lisa Y. Roskens, 41, is Chief Executive Officer and
President of Burlington. From 1999 to 2000, Ms. Roskens was
managing Director of Twin Compass, LLC. From 1997 to 1999,
Ms. Roskens was employed by Inacom Corporation where she
held the position of Director of Business Development and
Director of Field Services Development. From 1995 to 1997,
Ms. Roskens served as Finance Director for the
U.S. Senate campaign of Senator Charles Hagel of Nebraska.
From 1992 to 1995, Ms. Roskens was an attorney with the
Kutak Rock LLP law firm in Omaha, Nebraska, specializing in
commercial litigation. Ms. Roskens is the daughter of
Michael B. Yanney and Gail Walling Yanney.
76
Michael J. Draper, 42, is Chief Financial Officer of
Burlington. From April 2004 to September 2004, he was the
Director of Finance and Accounting for Burlington. From April
2000 through March 2004, he was employed at Transgenomic, Inc.
where he served as Chief Financial Officer and prior to that as
Controller. Prior to Transgenomic, Mr. Draper was Vice
President of Accounting and Finance for MSI Systems Integrators
for over 2 years and was with Deloitte & Touche
LLP for over 8 years.
Mariann Byerwalter, 47, is Chairman of JDN Corporate
Advisory LLC. She was Vice President of Business Affairs and
Chief Financial Officer of Stanford University from 1996 to
2001. Ms. Byerwalter was Executive Vice President of
America First Eureka Holdings, Inc. (AFEH) and
EurekaBank from 1988 to January 1996. Ms. Byerwalter was
Chief Financial Officer and Chief Operating Officer of AFEH, and
Chief Financial Officer of EurekaBank from 1993 to January 1996.
She was an officer of BankAmerica Corporation and its venture
capital subsidiary from 1984 to 1987. She served as Vice
President and Executive Assistant to the President of Bank of
America and was a Vice President in the banks Corporate
Planning and Development Department. She was also on the
Stanford Board of Trustees from 1992 to 1996 and was
re-appointed to such in 2002. Ms. Byerwalter currently
serves on the board of directors of LookSmart, Inc., Redwood
Trust, Inc., SRI International, the PMI Group Inc., the Stanford
Hospital and Clinics, the Lucile Packard Childrens
Hospital and certain investment companies affiliated with
Charles Schwab Corporation.
Dr. William S. Carter, 81, is retired from medical
practice. He is a graduate of Butler University and the Nebraska
University College of Medicine. He served his residency at the
University of Missouri and was appointed a diplomat of the
American Board of Otorhinolaryngology. He was in private
practice in Omaha, Nebraska, until 1993. He is currently on the
board of directors of Murphy Drug Co. and is a director of the
Happy Hollow Club in Omaha and the Thunderbird Club in Rancho
Mirage, California.
Patrick J. Jung, CPA, 60, currently is the Chief
Operating Officer with Surdell & Partners, LLC. Prior
to joining Surdell, Mr. Jung was with KPMG LLP for
30 years. During that period, he served as a partner for
20 years and as the managing partner of the Nebraska
business unit for the last six years. Mr. Jung also serves
on the boards of directors of Werner Enterprises, Inc, including
its audit and compensation committees, and Supertel Hospitality,
Inc, including its audit committee.
George H. Krauss, 66, has been a consultant to Burlington
since 1996. Mr. Krauss is also of counsel to Kutak Rock
LLP, a national law firm of over 300 lawyers headquartered in
Omaha, Nebraska. Mr. Krauss has been associated with Kutak
Rock LLP since 1972 and served as its managing partner from 1983
to 1993. Mr. Krauss also serves on the board of directors
of MFA Mortgage Investments, Inc. and InfoUSA, Inc..
Mr. Krauss is a member of the compensation committee,
corporate governance and nominating committee of MFA Mortgage
Investments, Inc. and is a member of the corporate governance
and nominating committee of InfoUSA, Inc.
Dr. Martin A. Massengale, 74, is President Emeritus
of the University of Nebraska, Director of the Center for
Grassland Studies and a Foundation Distinguished Professor.
Prior to becoming President Emeritus in 1994, he served as
Interim President from 1989 to 1991 and as President until 1994,
as Chancellor of the University of Nebraska Lincoln from 1981
until 1991 and as Vice Chancellor for Agriculture and Natural
Resources from 1976 to 1981. Prior to that time, he was a
professor and associate dean of the College of Agriculture at
the University of Arizona. Dr. Massengale currently serves
on the board of managers of AAFL Enterprises, LLC, including as
a member of its executive committee and the chairman of its
communications committee.
Dr. Gail Walling Yanney, 70, is a retired physician.
Dr. Yanney practiced anesthesiology and was the Executive
Director of the Clarkson Foundation until October of 1995. In
addition, she was a director of FirsTier Bank, N.A., Omaha,
Nebraska, prior to its merger with First Bank, N.A.
Dr. Yanney is the wife of Michael B. Yanney and the mother
of Lisa Y. Roskens.
Clayton K. Yeutter, 77, is of counsel to
Hogan & Hartson, a Washington D.C. law firm. From 1978
to 1985 he served as the President and Chief Executive Officer
of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange. Mr. Yeutter served as
the U.S. Trade Representative from 1985 to 1989, as
U.S. Secretary of Agriculture from 1989 to 1991, and has
served in cabinet and sub-cabinet posts under four
U.S. Presidents. Mr. Yeutter currently serves on the
board of directors of Neogen Corp., Covanta Holding Corp. and
American Commercial Lines, Inc.
77
Section 16(a)
Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance
Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
requires the managers and executive officers of Burlington and
persons who own more than 10% of the Partnerships BUCs to
file reports of their ownership of BUCs with the SEC. Such
officers, managers and BUC holders are required by SEC
regulation to furnish the Partnership with copies of all
Section 16(a) reports they file. Based solely upon review
of the copies of such reports received by the Partnership and
written representations from each such person who did not file
an annual report with the SEC (Form 5) that no other
reports were required, the Partnership believes that there was
compliance for the year ended December 31, 2007 with all
Section 16(a) filing requirements applicable to such
executive officers, managers and beneficial owners of BUCs.
Code
of Ethical Conduct and Code of Conduct
Burlington has adopted the Code of Ethical Conduct for its
senior executive and financial officers as required by
Section 406 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. As such,
this Code of Ethical Conduct covers all executive officers of
Burlington, who perform such duties for the Partnership.
Burlington has also adopted the Code of Conduct applicable to
all directors, officers and employees which is designed to
comply with the listing requirements of the NASDAQ Stock Market.
Both the Code of Ethical Conduct and the Code of Conduct are
available on the Partnerships website at
www.ataxz.com.
|
|
Item 11.
|
Executive
Compensation.
|
Neither the Partnership nor AFCA 2 has any officers. Certain
services are provided to the Partnership by officers of
Burlington. However, under the terms of our Agreement of Limited
Partnership, neither AFCA2 nor Burlington is allowed to be
reimbursed by us for any compensation paid by Burlington to its
officers. As a result, we do not pay compensation of any nature
to the persons who effectively act as our executive officers.
Accordingly, no tabular disclosures regarding executive
compensation, compensation discussion and analysis, compensation
committee report or information regarding compensation committee
interlocks is being provided in this
Form 10-K.
The Board of Managers of Burlington effectively acts as our
board of directors. Although Burlington is not a public company
and its securities are not listed on any stock market or
otherwise publicly traded, its Board of Managers is constituted
in a manner that complies with rules of the Securities and
Exchange Commission and the NASDAQ Stock Market related to
public companies with securities listed on the NASDAQ Global
Market in order for the Company and its BUCs to comply with
these rules. Among other things, a majority of the Board of
Managers of Burlington consists of managers who meet the
definitions of independence under the rules of the SEC and the
NASDAQ Stock Market. These independent managers are Patrick J.
Jung, Mariann Byerwalter, Martin A. Massengale, Clayton Yeutter,
and William S. Carter. During 2007, we paid Burlington a total
of $125,736 in order to reimburse it for a portion of the fees
it pays to these five independent managers. We did not pay any
other compensation of any nature to any of the managers of
Burlington or reimburse Burlington for any other amounts
representing compensation to its Board of Managers.
78
The following table sets forth the total compensation paid to
the Managers of Burlington in fiscal 2007 for their services to
the Partnership.
Manager
Compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Fees Earned or
|
|
Name
|
|
Paid in Cash ($)
|
|
|
Michael B. Yanney
|
|
|
|
|
Lisa Y. Roskens
|
|
|
|
|
Mariann Byerwalter
|
|
|
24,264
|
|
Dr. William S. Carter
|
|
|
22,060
|
|
Patrick J. Jung
|
|
|
24,264
|
|
George H. Krauss
|
|
|
|
|
Dr. Martin A. Massengale
|
|
|
28,676
|
|
Dr. Gail Walling Yanney
|
|
|
|
|
Clayton K. Yeutter
|
|
|
26,472
|
|
|
|
Item 12.
|
Security
Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and
Management.
|
(a) No person is known by the Partnership to own
beneficially more than 5% of the Partnerships BUCs.
(b) The Partnership does not have any directors or officers
of its own. Management of the Partnership consists of the
general partner of the Partnership, and its general partner,
Burlington. The following table and notes set forth information
with respect to the beneficial ownership of the
Partnerships BUCs by each of the Managers and executive
officers of Burlington and by such persons as a group. Unless
otherwise indicated, the information is as of December 31,
2007, and is based upon information furnished to us by such
persons. Unless otherwise noted, all persons listed in the
following table have sole voting and investment power over the
BUCs they beneficially own and own such BUCs directly. For
purposes of this table, the term beneficial owner
means any person who, directly or indirectly, has or shares the
power to vote, or to direct the voting of, a BUC or the power to
dispose, or to direct the disposition of, a BUC or has the right
to acquire BUCs within 60 days.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of BUCs
|
|
|
Percent of
|
|
Name
|
|
Beneficially Owned
|
|
|
Class
|
|
|
Michael B. Yanney, Chairman of the Board and Manager of
Burlington
|
|
|
12,500
|
(1)
|
|
|
|
*
|
Lisa Y. Roskens, President, Chief Executive Officer and Manager
of Burlington
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael J. Draper, Chief Financial Officer of Burlington
|
|
|
2,000
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Mariann Byerwalter, Manager of Burlington
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dr. William S. Carter, Manager of Burlington
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Patrick J. Jung, Manager of Burlington
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
George H. Krauss, Manager of Burlington
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dr. Martin A. Massengale, Manager of Burlington
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dr. Gail Walling Yanney, Manager of Burlington
|
|
|
12,500
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Clayton K. Yeutter, Manager of Burlington
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All current executive officers and Managers of Burlington as a
group (10 persons)
|
|
|
14,500
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* |
|
denotes ownership of less than 1%. |
|
(1) |
|
Consists of 12,500 BUCs held by Mr. Yanneys spouse,
Dr. Gail Walling Yanney, a Manager of Burlington, for which
he disclaims beneficial ownership. |
79
|
|
|
(c) |
|
There are no arrangements known to the Partnership, the
operation of which may at any subsequent date result in a change
in control of the Partnership. |
|
(d) |
|
The Partnership does not maintain any equity compensation plans
as defined in Item 201(d) of
Regulation S-K. |
|
|
Item 13.
|
Certain
Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director
Independence.
|
The general partner of the Partnership is AFCA 2 and the sole
general partner of AFCA 2 is Burlington.
Except as described in Note 8 to the Companys
Financial Statements filed in response to Item 8 of this
report, the Partnership is not a party to any transaction or
proposed transaction with AFCA 2, Burlington or with any person
who is: (i) a manager or executive officer of Burlington or
any general partner of AFCA 2; (ii) a nominee for election
as a manager of Burlington; (iii) an owner of more than 5%
of the BUCs; or, (iv) a member of the immediate family of
any of the foregoing persons.
|
|
Item 14.
|
Principal
Accountant Fees and Services.
|
The Audit Committee of Burlington has engaged
Deloitte & Touche LLP as the independent registered
public accounting firm for the Company. The Audit Committee
regularly reviews and determines whether any non-audit services
provided by Deloitte & Touche LLP potentially affects
their independence with respect to the Company. The Audit
Committees policy is to pre-approve all audit and
permissible non-audit services provided by Deloitte &
Touche LLP. Pre-approval is generally provided by the Audit
Committee for up to one year, is detailed as to the particular
service or category of services to be rendered, and is generally
subject to a specific budget. The Audit Committee may also
pre-approve additional services or specific engagements on a
case-by-case
basis. Management provides annual updates to the Audit Committee
regarding the extent of any services provided in accordance with
this pre-approval, as well as the cumulative fees for all
non-audit services incurred to date. During 2007, all services
performed by Deloitte & Touche LLP, with respect to
the Partnership, were pre-approved by the Audit Committee in
accordance with this policy.
The following table sets forth the aggregate fees billed by
Deloitte & Touche LLP with respect to audit and
non-audit services for the Company during the year ended
December 31, 2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Audit Fees(1)
|
|
$
|
336,310
|
|
|
$
|
211,175
|
|
Audit-Related Fees
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax Fees(2)
|
|
|
79,615
|
|
|
|
38,927
|
|
All Other Fees
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Audit Includes fees and expenses for
professional services rendered for the audit of the
Companys annual financial statements and internal control
over financial reporting, reviews of the financial statements
included in the Companys quarterly reports on
Form 10-Q
during 2007, and services associated with registration
statements, periodic reports and other documents filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission or other documents issued in
connection with securities offerings, such as consents. |
|
(2) |
|
Tax Includes fees and expenses for the
professional services rendered for the preparation and review of
tax returns and for various consultations. |
80
PART IV
|
|
Item 15.
|
Exhibits
and Financial Statement Schedules. Update
|
(a) The following documents are filed as part of this
report:
1. Financial Statements. The following
financial statements of the Company are included in response to
Item 8 of this report:
Reports of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firms.
Consolidated Balance Sheets of the Company as of
December 31, 2007 and 2006.
Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income
of the Company for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006
and 2005.
Consolidated Statements of Partners Capital of the Company
for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005.
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows of the Company for the
years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements of the Company.
2. Financial Statement Schedules. The
information required to be set forth in the financial statement
schedules is included in the notes to consolidated financial
statements of the Company filed in response to Item 8 of this
report.
3. Exhibits. The following exhibits are
filed as required by Item 15(a)(3) of this report. Exhibit
numbers refer to the paragraph numbers under Item 601 of
Regulation S-K:
|
|
|
|
|
|
3
|
.
|
|
Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws of America First Fiduciary
Corporation Number Five (incorporated herein by reference to
Registration Statement on
Form S-11
(No. 2-99997)
filed by America First Tax Exempt Mortgage Fund Limited
Partnership on August 30, 1985).
|
|
4(a)
|
|
|
Form of Certificate of Beneficial Unit Certificate (incorporated
herein by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to Registration
Statement on
Form S-4
(No. 333-50513)
filed by the Partnership on April 17, 1998).
|
|
4(b)
|
|
|
Agreement of Limited Partnership of the Partnership
(incorporated herein by reference to the Amended Annual Report
on
Form 10-K
(No. 000-24843),
filed by the Partnership on June 28, 1999).
|
|
4(c)
|
|
|
Amended Agreement of Merger, dated June 12, 1998, between
the Partnership and America First Tax Exempt Mortgage
Fund Limited Partnership (incorporated herein by reference
to Exhibit 4.3 to Amendment No. 3 to Registration
Statement on
Form S-4
(No. 333-50513)
filed by the Partnership on September 14, 1998).
|
|
10(a)
|
|
|
Contract and Agreement dated January 15, 2003 between
America First Tax Exempt Investors, L.P. and Bank of America,
N.A., to confirm the terms of the interest rate cap transaction
between the parties (incorporated herein by reference to
Exhibit 4 to Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(No. 000-24843)
filed by the Partnership on March 27, 2003).
|
|
10(b)
|
|
|
Purchase and Sale Agreement, dated May 7, 2007, by and
among America First LP Holding Corp. (a wholly-owned subsidiary
of the Partnership), Atlantic Development GP Holding Corp.,
Joint Development & Housing Corporation, Boston
Financial Institutional Tax Credits II, a Limited Partnership,
Boston Financial Institutional Tax Credits III, a Limited
Partnership, Boston Financial Institutional Tax Credits IV, a
Limited Partnership, and SLP, Inc. (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10(a) to Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
filed by the registrant on August 14, 2007).
|
81
|
|
|
|
|
|
10(c)
|
|
|
Second Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of
Crescent Village Townhomes Limited Partnership, dated
June 29, 2007, by and between Atlantic Development GP
Holding Corp. and America First LP Holding Corp. (as continuing
partners) and Joint Development & Housing Corporation
(as Withdrawing General Partner) (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed by the registrant on July 6, 2007).
|
|
10(d)
|
|
|
Second Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of
Eagle Ridge Townhomes Limited Partnership, dated June 29,
2007, by and between Atlantic Development GP Holding Corp. and
America First LP Holding Corp. (as continuing partners) and
Joint Development & Housing Corporation (as
Withdrawing General Partner) (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.2 to Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed by the registrant on July 6, 2007).
|
|
10(e)
|
|
|
Second Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of
Meadowbrook Apartments Limited Partnership, dated June 29,
2007, by and between Atlantic Development GP Holding Corp. and
America First LP Holding Corp. (as continuing partners) and
Joint Development & Housing Corporation (as
Withdrawing General Partner) (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.3 to Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed by the registrant on July 6, 2007).
|
|
10(f)
|
|
|
Second Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of
Post Wood Townhomes Limited Partnership, dated June 29,
2007, by and between Atlantic Development GP Holding Corp. and
America First LP Holding Corp. (as continuing partners) and
Joint Development & Housing Corporation (as
Withdrawing General Partner) (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.4 to Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed by the registrant on July 6, 2007).
|
|
10(g)
|
|
|
Second Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of
Post Woods Townhomes II Limited Partnership, dated
June 29, 2007, by and between Atlantic Development GP
Holding Corp. and America First LP Holding Corp. (as continuing
partners) and Joint Development & Housing Corporation
(as Withdrawing General Partner) (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.5 to Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed by the registrant on July 6, 2007).
|
|
10(h)
|
|
|
Second Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of
Willow Bend Townhomes Limited Partnership, dated June 29,
2007, by and between Atlantic Development GP Holding Corp. and
America First LP Holding Corp. (as continuing partners) and
Joint Development & Housing Corporation (as
Withdrawing General Partner) (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.6 to Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed by the registrant on July 6, 2007).
|
|
10(i)
|
|
|
Guaranty, dated June 29, 2007, of Registrant in favor of JP
Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.7 to Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed by the registrant on July 6, 2007).
|
|
23
|
.1
|
|
Consent of Deloitte & Touche LLP
|
|
23
|
.2
|
|
Consent of Katz, Sapper & Miller, LLP
|
|
23
|
.3
|
|
Consent of Katz, Sapper & Miller, LLP
|
|
24
|
.
|
|
Powers of Attorney.
|
|
31
|
.1
|
|
Certification of CEO pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
31
|
.2
|
|
Certification of CFO pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
32
|
.1
|
|
Certification of CEO pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|
|
32
|
.2
|
|
Certification of CFO pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|
82
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused
this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned,
thereunto duly authorized.
AMERICA FIRST TAX EXEMPT INVESTORS, L.P.
|
|
|
|
By
|
America First Capital
Associates Limited Partnership Two,
General Partner of the Partnership
|
|
|
By
|
The Burlington Capital Group LLC,
General Partner of
America First Capital Associates
Limited Partnership Two
|
Lisa Y. Roskens
Chief Executive Officer
Date: March 12, 2008
83
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities and Exchange Act
of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following
persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on
the dates indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By /s/ Michael
B. Yanney*
Michael
B. Yanney,
|
|
Chairman of the Board and Manager of Burlington Capital Group LLC
|
|
Date: March 12, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
By /s/ Lisa
Y. Roskens
Lisa
Y. Roskens,
|
|
President, Chief Executive Officer and Manager of The Burlington
Capital Group LLC
(Principal Executive Officer)
|
|
Date: March 12, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
By /s/ Michael
J. Draper
Michael
J. Draper,
|
|
Chief Financial Officer of The Burlington Capital Group LLC
(Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)
|
|
Date: March 12, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
By /s/ Mariann
Byerwalter*
Mariann
Byerwalter,
|
|
Manager of The Burlington Capital Group LLC
|
|
Date: March 12, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
By /s/ William
S. Carter*
William
S. Carter,
|
|
Manager of The Burlington Capital Group LLC
|
|
Date: March 12, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
By /s/ Patrick
J. Jung*
Patrick
J. Jung,
|
|
Manager of The Burlington Capital Group LLC
|
|
Date: March 12, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
By /s/ George
H. Krauss*
George
H. Krauss,
|
|
Manager of The Burlington Capital Group LLC
|
|
Date: March 12, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
By /s/ Martin
A. Massengale*
Martin
A. Massengale,
|
|
Manager of The Burlington Capital Group LLC
|
|
Date: March 12, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
By /s/ Gail
Walling Yanney*
Gail
Walling Yanney,
|
|
Manager of The Burlington Capital Group LLC
|
|
Date: March 12, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
By /s/ Clayton
K. Yeutter*
Clayton
K. Yeutter,
|
|
Manager of The Burlington Capital Group LLC
|
|
Date: March 12, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
*By /s/ Michael
J. Draper
Attorney-in-Fact
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Michael
J. Draper
Michael
J. Draper
|
|
|
|
|
84