RPT Realty - Annual Report: 2009 (Form 10-K)

 

UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549

 

 

 

 

Form 10-K

 

 

Commission file number 1-10093

RAMCO-GERSHENSON PROPERTIES TRUST

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)

 

 

Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code: 248-350-9900

 

Securities Registered Pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

 

 

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 whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).  Yes o     No o

 

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of the registrant’s 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):

 

(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).  Yes o     No þ

 

The aggregate market value of the common equity held by non-affiliates of the registrant as of the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter (June 30, 2009) was $187,291,865.

 

Number of common shares outstanding as of March 9, 2010: 30,907,087

 

DOCUMENT INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

 

Portions of the registrant’s proxy statement for the annual meeting of shareholders to be held June 8, 2010 are in incorporated by reference into Part III of this Form 10-K.

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

Forward-Looking Statements

 

This document contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. These forward-looking statements represent our expectations, plans or beliefs concerning future events and may be identified by terminology such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “believe,” “expect,” “estimate,” “anticipate,” “continue,” “predict” or similar terms. Although the forward-looking statements made in this document are based on our good-faith beliefs, reasonable assumptions and our best judgment based upon current information, certain factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements, including: our success or failure in implementing our business strategy; economic conditions generally and in the commercial real estate and finance markets specifically; the cost and availability of capital, which depends in part on our asset quality and our relationships with lenders and other capital providers; our business prospects and outlook; changes in governmental regulations, tax rates and similar matters; our continuing to qualify as a real estate investment trust (“REIT”); and other factors discussed elsewhere in this document and our other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). Given these uncertainties, you should not place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements. Except as required by law, we assume no obligation to update these forward-looking statements, even if new information becomes available in the future.

 

 

General

 

Ramco-Gershenson Properties Trust is a fully integrated, self-administered, publicly-traded Maryland REIT organized on October 2, 1997. The terms “Company,” “we,” “our” or “us” refer to Ramco-Gershenson Properties Trust, the Operating Partnership (defined below) and/or its subsidiaries, as the context may require. Our principal office is located at 31500 Northwestern Highway, Suite 300, Farmington Hills, Michigan 48334. Our predecessor, RPS Realty Trust, a Massachusetts business trust, was formed on June 21, 1988 to be a diversified growth-oriented REIT. In May 1996, RPS Realty Trust acquired the Ramco-Gershenson interests through a reverse merger, including substantially all of the shopping centers and retail properties as well as the management company and business operations of Ramco-Gershenson, Inc. and certain of its affiliates. The resulting trust changed its name to Ramco-Gershenson Properties Trust and Ramco-Gershenson, Inc.’s officers assumed management responsibility. The trust also changed its operations from a mortgage REIT to an equity REIT and contributed certain mortgage loans and real estate properties to Atlantic Realty Trust, an independent, newly formed liquidating REIT. In 1997, with approval from our shareholders, we changed our state of organization by terminating the Massachusetts trust and merging into a newly formed Maryland REIT.

 

We conduct substantially all of our business, and hold substantially all of our interests in our properties, through our operating partnership, Ramco-Gershenson Properties, L.P. (the “Operating Partnership”). The Operating Partnership, either directly or indirectly through partnerships or limited liability companies, holds fee title to all owned properties. As general partner of the Operating Partnership, we have the exclusive power to manage and conduct the business of the Operating Partnership. As of December 31, 2009, we owned approximately 91.4% of the interests in the Operating Partnership.

 

We are a REIT under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), and are therefore required to satisfy various provisions under the Code and related Treasury regulations. We are generally required to distribute annually at least 90% of our “REIT taxable income” (as defined in the Code), excluding any net capital gain, to our shareholders. Additionally, at the end of each fiscal quarter, at least 75% of the value of our total assets must consist of real estate assets (including interests in mortgages on real property and interests in other REITs) as well as cash, cash equivalents and government securities. We are also subject to limits on the amount of certain types of securities we can hold. Furthermore, at least 75% of our gross income for the tax year must be derived from certain sources, which include “rents from real property” and interest on loans secured by mortgages on real property. Additionally, 95% of our gross income must be derived from these same sources or from dividends and interest from any source, gains from the sale or other disposition of stock or securities or any combination of the foregoing.

Certain of our operations, including property management and asset management, are conducted through taxable REIT subsidiaries (each, a “TRS”). A TRS is a C corporation that has not elected REIT status and, as such, is subject to federal corporate income tax. We use the TRS format to facilitate our ability to provide certain services and conduct certain activities that are not generally considered as qualifying REIT activities.

 

Operations of the Company

 

We are a publicly-traded REIT which owns, develops, acquires, manages and leases community shopping centers and one regional mall, in the Midwestern, Southeastern and Mid-Atlantic regions of the United States. At December 31, 2009, we owned interests in 88 shopping centers, comprised of 65 community centers, 21 power centers, one single tenant retail property, and one enclosed regional mall, totaling approximately 19.8 million square feet of gross leaseable area (“GLA”). We and our joint venture partners own approximately 15.3 million square feet of such GLA, with the remaining portion owned by various anchor stores.

 

Shopping centers can generally be organized in five categories: convenience, neighborhood, community, regional and super regional centers. Shopping centers are distinguished by various characteristics, including center size, the number and type of anchor tenants and the types of products sold. Community shopping centers provide convenience goods and personal services offered by neighborhood centers, but with a wider range of soft and hard line goods. The community shopping center may include a grocery store, discount department store, super drug store, and several specialty stores. Average GLA of a community shopping center ranges between 100,000 and 500,000 square feet. A “power center” is a community shopping center that has over 500,000 square feet of GLA and includes several discount anchors of 20,000 or more square feet. These anchors typically emphasize hard goods such as consumer electronics, sporting goods, office supplies, home furnishings and home improvement goods.

 

Strategy

 

We are predominantly a community shopping center company with a focus on managing and adding value to our portfolio of centers that are primarily anchored by grocery stores and/or nationally recognized discount department stores. We believe that centers with a grocery and/or discount component attract consumers seeking value-priced products. Since these products are required to satisfy everyday needs, customers usually visit the centers on a weekly basis. Based on annualized base rents, over 93% of our shopping centers are grocery and/or value-oriented discount department store anchored. Our common anchor tenants include TJ Maxx/Marshalls, Publix, Home Depot, Wal-Mart, Kohl’s, Lowe’s Home Centers, Best Buy, Target, Kroger, Jewel, and Meijer.

 

Our shopping centers are primarily located in major metropolitan areas in the Midwestern, Mid-Atlantic and Southeastern regions of the United States. By focusing our energies on these areas, we have developed a thorough understanding of the unique characteristics of our markets. In both of our primary regions, we have concentrated a number of centers in reasonable proximity to each other in order to achieve efficiencies in management, oversight and purchasing.

 

In our existing centers, we focus on aggressive rental and leasing strategies and the value-added redevelopment of such properties. We strive to increase rental income over time through contractual rent increases and leasing and re-leasing of available space at higher rental levels, while balancing the needs for an attractive and diverse tenant mix. See Item 2, “Properties” for additional information on rental revenue and lease expirations. In addition, we assess each of our centers periodically to identify improvement opportunities and proactively engage in renovation and expansion activities based on tenant demands, market conditions and capital availability. We also recognize the importance of customer satisfaction and spend a significant amount of resources to ensure that our centers have sufficient amenities, appealing layouts and proper maintenance.

 

As opportunities arise and market conditions permit, we may sell mature properties or non-core assets, which have less potential for growth or are not viable for redevelopment. We intend to utilize the proceeds from such sales to reduce outstanding debt, or to fund development and redevelopment activities, or fund selective acquisition opportunities.

In the third quarter of 2009, the Company’s Board of Trustees completed a review of financial and strategic alternatives announced in the first quarter of 2009. The Company believes it is best positioned going forward to optimize shareholder value through a stand-alone business strategy focused on the following initiatives:

 

 

Significant Transactions and De-leveraging Activities

 

In December 2009, the Company closed on a new $217 million secured credit facility (the “Credit Facility”) consisting of a $150 million secured revolving credit facility and a $67 million amortizing secured term loan facility. The terms of the Credit Facility provide that the revolving credit facility may be increased by up to $50 million at the Company’s request, dependent upon there being one or more lenders willing to acquire the additional commitment, for a total secured credit facility commitment of $267 million. The secured revolving credit facility matures in December 2012 and bears interest at LIBOR plus 350 basis points with a 2% LIBOR floor. The amortizing secured term loan facility also bears interest at LIBOR plus 350 basis points with a 2% LIBOR floor and requires a $33 million payment by September 2010 and a final payment of $34 million by June 2011. The new Credit Facility amended and restated the Company’s former $250 million unsecured credit facility, which was comprised of a $150 million unsecured revolving credit facility and $100 million unsecured term loan facility.

 

Also in December 2009, the Company amended its secured revolving credit facility for The Towne Center at Aquia, reducing the facility from $40 million to $20 million. The revolving credit facility securing The Town Center at Aquia bears interest at LIBOR plus 350 basis points with a 2% LIBOR floor and matures in December 2010, with two, one-year extension options.

 

In September 2009, the Company successfully completed an equity offering of 12.075 million common shares, which included 1.575 million shares purchased pursuant to an over-allotment option granted to the underwriters. The offering price was $8.50 per common share ($0.01 par value per share) generating net proceeds of $96.2 million. The net proceeds from the equity offering were used to pay down the Company’s outstanding debt.

 

During the third quarter of 2009, the Company sold three unencumbered net leased real estate assets for net proceeds of approximately $27.4 million. The net proceeds from these asset sales were used to pay down the Company’s outstanding debt.

 

Corporate Governance

 

In 2009, the Company’s Board of Trustees made a number of significant best practices corporate governance changes further aligning the Company’s interests with those of its shareholders. These changes included the expansion of the Board with the addition of two outside trustees and the termination of the Company’s Shareholders Rights Plan. The Board also committed to declassify the Board of Trustees by seeking shareholder approval to amend the Company’s declaration of trust at the 2010 Annual Meeting of Shareholders. Furthermore, the roles of Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer were separated with the election of a non-executive Chairman of the Board.

 

Asset Management — Value-added Redevelopment

 

During 2009, the redevelopment projects at certain shopping centers remained a vital part of the Company’s business plan. We continued to identify opportunities within our portfolio to add value. In 2010, the Company plans

to focus on completing the eight redevelopment projects currently in progress. All of the redevelopment projects have signed leases for the expansion or addition of an anchor or one or more out-lot tenants. At December 31, 2009, the following redevelopment projects were in progress:

 

Wholly-Owned

 

 

Joint Ventures

 

 

We estimate the total project costs of the eight redevelopment projects in process to be $46.0 million. For the four redevelopment projects at our wholly owned, consolidated properties, we estimate project costs of $18.8 million of which $11.1 million had been spent as of December 31, 2009. For the four redevelopment projects at properties held by joint ventures, we estimate off-balance sheet project costs of $27.2 million (our share is estimated to be $7.9 million) of which $17.4 million had been spent as of December 31, 2009 (our share was $5.1 million).

 

While we anticipate redevelopment projects will increase rental revenue upon completion, a majority of the projects required taking some retail space off-line to accommodate the new/expanded tenancies. These measures have resulted in the loss of rents and recoveries from tenants for those spaces removed from our pool of leasable space. Based on the number of value-added redevelopments currently in process, the revenue loss has created a short-term negative impact on net operating income and funds from operations (“FFO”). All of the Company’s redevelopment projects are expected to be substantially complete by the end of 2010.

Developments

 

Given the dramatic changes in the retail and capital market landscape, the Company is taking a selective and conservative approach to potential developments.

 

At December 31, 2009, the Company had four projects in development or pre-development, for which we have a joint venture partner or intend to seek one or more joint venture partners once appropriate pre-leasing has been completed. These four projects are:

 

The Town Center at Aquia in Stafford, Virginia involves the complete value-added redevelopment of an existing shopping center owned by us and will be completed in phases in response to tenant demand. Phase I was finished with the completion of the first office/retail building on the site, the majority of which is occupied by Northrop Grumman. The office building was approximately 90% leased as of December 31, 2009 and was included in “buildings and improvements” as part of “investment in real estate, net” on the consolidated balance sheets. Future phases may include a residential component and additional retail and office space. The cost of future phases of this project to date as of December 31, 2009 was $38.2 million, which includes our basis in the existing shopping center.

 

Gateway Commons in Lakeland, Florida is planned to be developed as a 375,000 square foot center. The project is located in central Florida in close proximity to a number of our existing centers. The cost to date of this project at December 31, 2009 was $20.3 million, primarily land acquisition costs, excluding two outlot parcels held by a wholly-owned taxable REIT subsidiary.

 

Parkway Shops in Jacksonville, Florida is planned to be developed as a 350,000 square foot shopping center. The project is located in close proximity to our River City Marketplace center in Jacksonville. The cost to date of this project at December 31, 2009 was $14.0 million, primarily land acquisition costs.

 

Hartland Towne Square in Hartland, Michigan is being developed through a joint venture in which we have a 20% ownership interest. In addition, we wholly-own, through taxable REIT subsidiaries, several land parcels that comprise part of this project. Hartland Towne Square is planned to be developed as a power center featuring two major anchors. Meijer, which owns its anchor location in the center, opened a 192,000 square foot discount department superstore in September 2009. The development is expected to also include a 200,000 square foot power center phase, including two to three mid-box national retailers, retail shops, and outlots. We are currently seeking a second anchor for the project. The total project cost to date, excluding land held by our taxable subsidiaries, as of December 31, 2009 was $25.6 million.

 

The Company plans to utilize 2010 to secure necessary entitlements, as well as sign a critical mass of tenants before moving forward with its planned projects. It is the Company’s policy to only start vertical construction on new development projects after the project has received entitlements, significant leasing commitments, construction financing and joint venture partner commitments, if appropriate. In 2010, the Company expects to be active in the entitlement and pre-leasing phases at its planned projects. The Company does not expect to proceed to secure financing and to identify joint venture partners until the entitlement and pre-leasing phases are nearing completion.

 

As of December 31, 2009, we have spent $98.1 million on the four development and pre-development projects.

 

Acquisitions

 

In order to focus on strengthening the Company’s balance sheet, the Company had no significant acquisition activity in 2009. Future acquisition activity will depend upon a number of factors, including market conditions, the availability of capital to the Company, and the prospects for creating value at acquired properties.

 

Joint Ventures

 

In 2009, the Company had no joint venture acquisition or disposition activity. The Company sold certain properties to joint ventures in which we have an ownership interest as noted in “Dispositions” below. In May 2008, a joint venture in which we have a 20% ownership interest acquired the Rolling Meadows Shopping Center in Rolling Meadows, Illinois.

Dispositions

 

In August 2009, the Company sold Taylor Plaza, a stand-alone Home Depot in Taylor, MI, to a third party for net proceeds of $5.0 million. The Company recognized a gain on the sale of Taylor Plaza of approximately $2.9 million. Income from operations and the gain on the sale of Taylor Plaza are classified in discontinued operations on the consolidated statements of income and comprehensive income for all periods presented.

 

In June 2008, the Company sold Highland Square Shopping Center in Crossville, Tennessee, to a third party for $9.2 million in net proceeds. The transaction resulted in a loss on the sale of $0.4 million, net of minority interest, for the year ended December 31, 2008. Income from operations and the loss on sale in relation to Highland Square are classified in discontinued operations on the consolidated statements of income and comprehensive income for all periods presented.

 

In August 2008, the Company sold the Plaza at Delray shopping center in Delray Beach, Florida, to a joint venture in which it has a 20% ownership interest. In connection with the sale of this center, the Company recognized a gain of $8.2 million, net of taxes, which represents the gain attributable to the joint venture partner’s 80% ownership interest.

 

Competition

 

See page 10 of Item 1A. “Risk Factors” for a description of competitive conditions in our business.

 

Environmental Matters

 

See pages 14-15 of Item 1A. “Risk Factors” for a description of environmental risks for our business.

 

Employment

 

As of December 31, 2009, we had 126 full-time corporate employees and 19 full-time on-site shopping center maintenance personnel. None of our employees is represented by a collective bargaining unit. We believe that our relations with our employees are good.

 

Available Information

 

All reports we electronically file with, or furnish to, the SEC, including our Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and amendments to such reports, are available on our website at www.rgpt.com, as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such reports with, or furnish those reports to, the SEC. Our Corporate Governance Guidelines, Code of Business Conduct and Ethics and Board of Trustees’ committee charters also are available at the same location on our website.

 

Shareholders may request free copies of these documents from:

 

Ramco-Gershenson Properties Trust

Attention: Investor Relations

31500 Northwestern Highway, Suite 300

Farmington Hills, MI 48334

 

 

You should carefully consider each of the risks and uncertainties described below and elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, as well as any amendments or updates reflected in subsequent filings with the SEC. We believe these risks and uncertainties, individually or in the aggregate, could cause our actual results to differ materially from expected and historical results and could materially and adversely affect our business operations, results of operations and financial condition. Further, additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial may also impair our results and business operations.

Business Risks

 

Recent disruptions in the financial markets could affect our ability to obtain financing for development or redevelopment of our properties and other purposes on reasonable terms and have other adverse effects on us and the market price of our common shares.

 

The United States financial and credit markets have recently experienced significant price volatility, dislocations and liquidity disruptions, which have caused market prices of many financial instruments to fluctuate substantially and the spreads on prospective debt financings to widen considerably. These circumstances have materially impacted liquidity in the financial markets, making terms for certain financings less attractive, and in some cases have resulted in the unavailability of financing.

 

Continued uncertainty in the stock and credit markets may negatively impact our ability to access additional financing for development and redevelopment of our properties and other purposes at reasonable terms, which may negatively affect our business. It may also be more difficult or costly for us to raise capital through the issuance of our common shares or preferred shares. The disruptions in the financial markets may have a material adverse effect on the market value of our common shares and other adverse effects on us and our business. In addition, there can be no assurance that the actions of the U.S. government, U.S. Federal Reserve, U.S. Treasury and other governmental and regulatory bodies for the purpose of stabilizing the financial markets will achieve the intended effects or that such actions will not result in adverse market developments.

 

The recent global economic and financial market crisis has had and may continue to have a negative effect on our business and operations.

 

The recent global economic and financial market crisis has caused, among other things, a general tightening in the credit markets, lower levels of liquidity, increases in the rates of default and bankruptcy, lower consumer and business spending, and lower consumer net worth, all of which has had and may continue to have a negative effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and liquidity. Many of our tenants and vendors have been severely affected by the current economic turmoil. Current or potential tenants and vendors may no longer be in business, which could lead to reduced demand for our shopping centers, reduced operating margins, and increased tenant payment delays or defaults. We are also limited in our ability to reduce costs to offset the results of a prolonged or severe economic downturn given certain fixed costs associated with our operations, difficulties if we overstrained our resources, and our long-term business approach that necessitates we remain in position to respond when market conditions improve.

 

The timing and nature of any recovery in the credit and financial markets remains uncertain, and there can be no assurance that market conditions will improve in the near future or that our results will not be materially and adversely affected. Such conditions make it very difficult to forecast operating results, make business decisions and identify and address material business risks. The foregoing conditions may also impact the valuation of certain long-lived or intangible assets that are subject to impairment testing, potentially resulting in impairment charges which may be material to our financial condition or results of operations.

 

Adverse market conditions and tenant bankruptcies could adversely affect our revenues.

 

The economic performance and value of our real estate assets are subject to all the risks associated with owning and operating real estate, including risks related to adverse changes in national, regional and local economic and market conditions. Our current properties are located in 13 states in the Midwestern, Southeastern and Mid-Atlantic regions of the United States. The economic condition of each of our markets may be dependent on one or more industries. An economic downturn in one of these industries may result in a business downturn for existing tenants, and as a result, these tenants may fail to make rental payments, decline to extend leases upon expiration, delay lease commencements or declare bankruptcy. In addition, we may have difficulty finding new tenants during economic downturns.

 

Any tenant bankruptcies, leasing delays or failure to make rental payments when due could result in the termination of the tenant’s lease and could cause material losses to us and adversely impact our operating results, unless we are able to re-let the vacant space or negotiate lease cancellation income. If our properties do not generate

sufficient income to meet our operating expenses, including future debt service, our business and results of operations would be adversely affected.

 

The retail industry has experienced some financial difficulties during the past few years and certain local, regional and national retailers have filed for protection under bankruptcy laws. Any bankruptcy filings by or relating to one of our tenants or a lease guarantor is likely to delay our efforts to collect pre-bankruptcy debts and could ultimately preclude full collection of these sums. If a lease is assumed by the tenant in bankruptcy, all pre-bankruptcy balances due under the lease must be paid to us in full. However, if a lease is rejected by a tenant in bankruptcy, we would have only a general unsecured claim for damages. Any unsecured claim we hold may be paid only to the extent that funds are available and only in the same percentage as is paid to all other holders of unsecured claims. It is possible that we may recover substantially less than the full value of any unsecured claims we hold, if at all, which may adversely affect our operating results and financial condition.

 

If any of our anchor tenants becomes insolvent, suffers a downturn in business or decides not to renew its lease, it may adversely impact our business at such center. In addition, a lease termination by an anchor tenant or a failure of an anchor tenant to occupy the premises could result in lease terminations or reductions in rent by some of our non-anchor tenants in the same shopping center pursuant to the terms of their leases. In that event, we may be unable to re-let the vacated space.

 

Similarly, the leases of some anchor tenants may permit them to transfer their leases to other retailers. The transfer to a new anchor tenant could cause customer traffic in the retail center to decrease, which would reduce the income generated by that retail center. In addition, a transfer of a lease to a new anchor tenant could also give other tenants the right to make reduced rental payments or to terminate their leases with us.

 

Concentration of our credit risk could reduce our operating results.

 

Several of our tenants represent a significant portion of our leasing revenues. As of December 31, 2009, we received 4.0% of our annualized base rent from TJ Maxx/Marshalls, 3.0% of our annualized base rent from Publix and 2.1% of our annualized base rent from OfficeMax. No other tenant represented at least 2% of our total annualized base rent. The concentration in our leasing revenue from a small number of tenants creates the risk that, should these tenants experience financial difficulties, our operating results could be adversely affected.

 

REIT distribution requirements limit our available cash.

 

As a REIT, we are subject to annual distribution requirements which limit the amount of cash we retain for other business purposes, including amounts to fund our growth. We generally must distribute annually at least 90% of our REIT taxable income, excluding any net capital gain, in order for our distributed earnings not to be subject to corporate income tax. We intend to make distributions to our shareholders to comply with the requirements of the Code. However, differences in timing between the recognition of taxable income and the actual receipt of cash could require us to sell assets or borrow funds on a short-term or long-term basis to meet the 90% distribution requirement.

 

Our redevelopment projects may not yield anticipated returns, which would adversely affect our operating results.

 

A key component of our business strategy is exploring redevelopment opportunities at existing properties within our portfolio and in connection with property acquisitions. To the extent that we engage in these redevelopment activities, they will be subject to the risks normally associated with these projects, including, among others, cost overruns and timing delays as a result of the lack of availability of materials and labor, the failure of tenants to commit or live up to their commitments, weather conditions, and other factors outside of our control. Any substantial unanticipated delays or expenses could adversely affect the investment returns from these redevelopment projects and adversely impact our operating results.

We face competition for the acquisition and development of real estate properties, which may impede our ability to grow our operations or may increase the cost of these activities.

 

We compete with many other entities for the acquisition of retail shopping centers and land that is appropriate for new developments, including other REITs, private institutional investors and other owner-operators of shopping centers. These competitors may increase the price we pay to acquire properties or may succeed in acquiring those properties themselves. In addition, the sellers of properties we wish to acquire may find our competitors to be more attractive buyers because they may have greater resources, may be willing to pay more, or may have a more compatible operating philosophy. In particular, larger REITs may enjoy significant competitive advantages that result from, among other things, a lower cost of capital. In addition, the number of entities and the amount of funds competing for suitable properties may increase. This would increase demand for these properties and therefore increase the prices paid for them. If we pay higher prices for properties or are unable to acquire suitable properties at reasonable prices, our ability to grow may be adversely affected.

 

Competition may affect our ability to renew leases or re-let space on favorable terms and may require us to make unplanned capital improvements.

 

We face competition from similar retail centers within the trade areas in which our centers operate to renew leases or re-let space as leases expire. Some of these competing properties may be newer and better located or have a better tenant mix than our properties, which would increase competition for customer traffic and creditworthy tenants. We may not be able to renew leases or obtain replacement tenants as leases expire, and the terms of renewals or new leases, including the cost of required renovations or concessions to tenants, may be less favorable to us than current lease terms. Increased competition for tenants may also require us to make capital improvements to properties which we would not have otherwise planned to make. In addition, we and our tenants face competition from alternate forms of retailing, including home shopping networks, mail order catalogues and on-line based shopping services, which may limit the number of retail tenants that desire to seek space in shopping center properties generally and may decrease revenues of existing tenants. If we are unable to re-let substantial amounts of vacant space promptly, if the rental rates upon a renewal or new lease are significantly lower than expected, or if reserves for costs of re-letting prove inadequate, then our earnings and cash flows will decrease.

 

We may be restricted from re-letting space based on existing exclusivity lease provisions with some of our tenants.

 

In a number of cases, our leases contain provisions giving the tenant the exclusive right to sell clearly identified types of merchandise or provide specific types of services within the particular retail center or limit the ability of other tenants to sell that merchandise or provide those services. When re-letting space after a vacancy, these provisions may limit the number and types of prospective tenants suitable for the vacant space. If we are unable to re-let space on satisfactory terms, our operating results would be adversely impacted.

 

We hold investments in joint ventures in which we do not control all decisions, and we may have conflicts of interest with our joint venture partners.

 

As of December 31, 2009, 33 of our shopping centers were partially owned by non-affiliated partners through joint venture arrangements, none of which we have a controlling interest in. We do not control all decisions in our joint ventures and may be required to take actions that are in the interest of the joint venture partners but not our best interests. Accordingly, we may not be able to favorably resolve any issues which arise, or we may have to provide financial or other inducements to our joint venture partners to obtain such resolution.

 

Various restrictive provisions and rights govern sales or transfers of interests in our joint ventures. These may work to our disadvantage because, among other things, we may be required to make decisions as to the purchase or sale of interests in our joint ventures at a time that is disadvantageous to us.

 

Bankruptcy of our joint venture partners could adversely affect us.

 

We could be adversely affected by the bankruptcy of one of our joint venture partners. The profitability of shopping centers held in a joint venture could also be adversely affected by the bankruptcy of one of our joint

venture partners if, because of certain provisions of the bankruptcy laws, we were unable to make important decisions in a timely fashion or became subject to additional liabilities.

 

Rising operating expenses could adversely affect our operating results.

 

Our properties are subject to increases in real estate and other tax rates, utility costs, insurance costs, repairs and maintenance and administrative expenses. Our current properties and any properties we acquire in the future may be subject to rising operating expenses, some or all of which may be out of our control. If any property is not fully occupied or if revenues are not sufficient to cover operating expenses, then we could be required to expend funds for that property’s operating expenses. In addition, while most of our leases require that tenants pay all or a portion of the applicable real estate taxes, insurance and operating and maintenance costs, renewals of leases or future leases may not be negotiated on these terms, in which event we will have to pay those costs. If we are unable to lease properties on a basis requiring the tenants to pay all or some of these costs, or if tenants fail to pay such costs, it could adversely affect our operating results.

 

The illiquidity of our real estate investments could significantly impede our ability to respond to adverse changes in the performance of our properties, which could adversely impact our financial condition.

 

Because real estate investments are relatively illiquid, our ability to promptly sell one or more properties in our portfolio in response to changing economic, financial and investment conditions is limited. The real estate market is affected by many factors, such as general economic conditions, availability of financing, interest rates and other factors, including supply and demand, that are beyond our control. We cannot predict whether we will be able to sell any property for the price and other terms we seek, or whether any price or other terms offered by a prospective purchaser would be acceptable to us. We also cannot predict the length of time needed to find a willing purchaser and to complete the sale of a property. We may be required to expend funds to correct defects or to make improvements before a property can be sold, and we cannot assure you that we will have funds available to correct those defects or to make those improvements. These factors and any others that would impede our ability to respond to adverse changes in the performance of our properties could significantly adversely affect our financial condition and operating results.

 

If we suffer losses that are not covered by insurance or that are in excess of our insurance coverage limits, we could lose invested capital and anticipated profits.

 

Catastrophic losses, such as losses resulting from wars, acts of terrorism, earthquakes, floods, hurricanes, tornadoes or other natural disasters, pollution or environmental matters, generally are either uninsurable or not economically insurable, or may be subject to insurance coverage limitations, such as large deductibles or co-payments. Although we currently maintain “all risk” replacement cost insurance for our buildings, rents and personal property, commercial general liability insurance and pollution and environmental liability insurance, our insurance coverage may be inadequate if any of the events described above occurred to, or caused the destruction of, one or more of our properties. Under that scenario, we could lose both our invested capital and anticipated profits from that property.

 

Capitalization Risks

 

We have substantial debt obligations, including variable rate debt, which may impede our operating performance and put us at a competitive disadvantage.

 

Required repayments of debt and related interest can adversely affect our operating performance. As of December 31, 2009, we had $552.6 million of outstanding indebtedness, of which $93.5 million bore interest at a variable rate. At December 31, 2009, we had the ability to borrow an additional $56.7 million under our existing secured revolving credit facility and to increase the availability under our secured revolving credit facility by up to $50 million under the terms of the Credit Facility. Increases in interest rates on our existing indebtedness would increase our interest expense, which could adversely affect our cash flow and our ability to pay dividends. For example, if market rates of interest on our variable rate debt outstanding as of December 31, 2009 increased by 1.0%, the increase in interest expense on our existing variable rate debt would decrease future earnings and cash flows by approximately $0.9 million annually.

The amount of our debt may adversely affect our business and operating results by:

 

 

The global economic crisis has exacerbated these risks.

 

Subject to compliance with the financial covenants in our borrowing agreements, our management and Board have discretion to increase the amount of our outstanding debt at any time. We could become more highly leveraged, resulting in an increase in debt service costs that could adversely affect our cash flow and the amount available for distribution to our shareholders. If we increase our debt, we may also increase the risk of default on our debt.

 

Capital markets are currently experiencing a period of dislocation and instability, which has had and could continue to have a negative impact on the availability and cost of capital.

 

The general disruption in the U.S. capital markets has impacted the broader financial and credit markets and reduced the availability of debt and equity capital for the market as a whole. These conditions could persist for a prolonged period of time or worsen in the future. Our ability to access the capital markets may be restricted at a time when we would like, or need, to access those markets, which could have an impact on our flexibility to react to changing economic and business conditions. The resulting lack of available credit, lack of confidence in the financial sector, increased volatility in the financial markets and reduced business activity could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and our ability to obtain and manage our liquidity. In addition, the cost of debt financing and the proceeds of equity financing may be materially adversely impacted by these market conditions.

 

Credit market developments may reduce availability under our credit agreements.

 

Due to the current volatile state of the credit markets, there is risk that lenders, even those with strong balance sheets and sound lending practices, could fail or refuse to honor their legal commitments and obligations under existing credit commitments, including but not limited to: extending credit up to the maximum permitted by a credit facility, allowing access to additional credit features and otherwise accessing capital and/or honoring loan commitments. If our lender(s) fail to honor their legal commitments under our Credit Facility, it could be difficult in the current environment to replace our credit facility on similar terms. Although we believe that our operating cash flow, access to capital markets and existing credit facilities will give us the ability to satisfy our liquidity needs for at least the next 12 months, the failure of any of the lenders under our credit facility may impact our ability to finance our operating or investing activities.

 

Because we must annually distribute a substantial portion of our income to maintain our REIT status, we will continue to need additional debt and/or equity capital to grow.

 

In general, we must annually distribute at least 90% of our REIT taxable income, excluding net capital gain, to our shareholders to maintain our REIT status. As a result, those earnings will not be available to fund acquisition, development or redevelopment activities. We have historically funded acquisition, development and redevelopment activities by:

 

 

 

We expect to continue to fund our development and redevelopment activities and any acquisition activities we determine to conduct, in this way. Our failure to obtain funds from these sources could limit our ability to grow, which could have a material adverse effect on the value of our securities.

 

Our financial covenants may restrict our operating or acquisition activities, which may adversely impact our financial condition and operating results.

 

The financial covenants contained in our mortgages and debt agreements reduce our flexibility in conducting our operations and create a risk of default on our debt if we cannot continue to satisfy them. The mortgages on our properties contain customary negative covenants such as those that limit our ability, without the prior consent of the lender, to further mortgage the applicable property or to discontinue insurance coverage. In addition, if we breach covenants in our debt agreements, the lender can declare a default and require us to repay the debt immediately and, if the debt is secured, can ultimately take possession of the property securing the loan.

 

In particular, our outstanding Credit Facility contains customary restrictions, requirements and other limitations on our ability to incur indebtedness, including limitations on the ratio of total liabilities to assets and minimum fixed charge coverage and tangible net worth ratios. Our ability to borrow under our Credit Facility is subject to compliance with these financial and other covenants. We rely in part on borrowings under our Credit Facility to finance acquisition, development and redevelopment activities and for working capital. If we are unable to borrow under our Credit Facility or to refinance existing indebtedness, our financial condition and results of operations would likely be adversely impacted.

 

Mortgage debt obligations expose us to increased risk of loss of property, which could adversely affect our financial condition.

 

Incurring mortgage debt increases our risk of loss because defaults on indebtedness secured by properties may result in foreclosure actions by lenders and ultimately our loss of the related property. We have entered into mortgage loans which are secured by multiple properties and contain cross-collateralization and cross-default provisions. Cross-collateralization provisions allow a lender to foreclose on multiple properties in the event that we default under the loan. Cross-default provisions allow a lender to foreclose on the related property in the event a default is declared under another loan. For federal income tax purposes, a foreclosure of any of our properties would be treated as a sale of the property for a purchase price equal to the outstanding balance of the debt secured by the mortgage. If the outstanding balance of the debt secured by the mortgage exceeds our tax basis in the property, we would recognize taxable income on foreclosure but would not receive any cash proceeds.

 

Tax Risks

 

Our failure to qualify as a REIT would result in higher taxes and reduced cash available for our shareholders.

 

We believe that we currently operate in a manner so as to qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes. Our continued qualification as a REIT will depend on our satisfaction of certain asset, income, investment, organizational, distribution, shareholder ownership and other requirements on a continuing basis. Our ability to satisfy the asset requirements depends upon our analysis of the fair market values of our assets, some of which are not susceptible to a precise determination, and for which we will not obtain independent appraisals. In addition, our compliance with the REIT income and asset requirements depends upon our ability to manage successfully the composition of our income and assets on an ongoing basis. Moreover, the proper classification of an instrument as debt or equity for federal income tax purposes may be uncertain in some circumstances, which could affect the application of the REIT qualification requirements. Accordingly, there can be no assurance that the IRS will not

contend that our interests in subsidiaries or other issuers constitute a violation of the REIT requirements. Moreover, future economic, market, legal, tax or other considerations may cause us to fail to qualify as a REIT.

 

If we were to fail to qualify as a REIT in any taxable year, we would be subject to federal income tax, including any applicable alternative minimum tax, on our taxable income at regular corporate rates, and distributions to shareholders would not be deductible by us in computing our taxable income. Any such corporate tax liability could be substantial and would reduce the amount of cash available for distribution to our shareholders, which in turn could have an adverse impact on the value of, and trading prices for, our common shares. Unless entitled to relief under certain Code provisions, we also would be disqualified from taxation as a REIT for the four taxable years following the year during which we ceased to qualify as a REIT.

 

We have been the subject of IRS examinations for prior years. With respect to the IRS examination of our taxable years ended December 31, 1991 through December 31, 1995, we entered into a closing agreement with the IRS on December 4, 2003. Pursuant to the terms of the closing agreement, we agreed, among other things, to pay deficiency dividends, and we consented to the assessment and collection of tax deficiencies and to the assessment and collection of interest on such tax deficiencies and deficiency dividends. All amounts assessed by the IRS to date have been paid. We have advised the relevant taxing authorities for the state and local jurisdictions where we conducted business during the taxable years ended December 31, 1991 through December 31, 1995 of the terms of the closing agreement. We believe that our exposure to state and local tax, penalties, interest and other miscellaneous expenses will not exceed $1.0 million as of December 31, 2009. It is our belief that any liability for state and local tax, penalties, interest and other miscellaneous expenses that may exist with respect to the taxable years ended December 31, 1991 through December 31, 1995 will be covered under a Tax Agreement that we entered into with Atlantic Realty Trust (“Atlantic”) and/or Kimco SI 1339, Inc. (formerly known as SI 1339, Inc.), its successor in interest. However, no assurance can be given that Atlantic or Kimco SI, 1339, Inc. will reimburse us for future amounts paid in connection with our taxable years ended December 31, 1991 through December 31, 1995. See Note 21 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8.

 

Even if we qualify as a REIT, we may be subject to various federal income and excise taxes, as well as state and local taxes.

 

Even if we qualify as a REIT, we may be subject to federal income and excise taxes in various situations, such as if we fail to distribute all of our REIT taxable income. We also will be required to pay a 100% tax on non-arm’s length transactions between us and a TRS (described below) and on any net income from sales of property that the IRS successfully asserts was property held for sale to customers in the ordinary course. Additionally, we may be subject to state or local taxation in various state or local jurisdictions, including those in which we transact business. The state and local tax laws may not conform to the federal income tax treatment. Any taxes imposed on us would reduce our operating cash flow and net income.

 

Legislative or other actions affecting REITs could have a negative effect on us.

 

The rules dealing with federal income taxation are constantly under review by persons involved in the legislative process and by the IRS and the United States Treasury Department. Changes to tax laws, which may have retroactive application, could adversely affect our shareholders or us. We cannot predict how changes in tax laws might affect our shareholders or us.

 

We are subject to various environmental laws and regulations which govern our operations and which may result in potential liability.

 

Under various Federal, state and local laws, ordinances and regulations relating to the protection of the environment (“Environmental Laws”), a current or previous owner or operator of real estate may be liable for the costs of removal or remediation of certain hazardous or toxic substances disposed, stored, released, generated, manufactured or discharged from, on, at, onto, under or in such property. Environmental Laws often impose such liability without regard to whether the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the presence or release of such hazardous or toxic substance. The presence of such substances, or the failure to properly remediate such substances when present, released or discharged, may adversely affect the owner’s ability to sell or rent such

property or to borrow using such property as collateral. The cost of any required remediation and the liability of the owner or operator therefore as to any property is generally not limited under such Environmental Laws and could exceed the value of the property and/or the aggregate assets of the owner or operator. Persons who arrange for the disposal or treatment of hazardous or toxic substances may also be liable for the cost of removal or remediation of such substances at a disposal or treatment facility, whether or not such facility is owned or operated by such persons. In addition to any action required by Federal, state or local authorities, the presence or release of hazardous or toxic substances on or from any property could result in private plaintiffs bringing claims for personal injury or other causes of action.

 

In connection with ownership (direct or indirect), operation, management and development of real properties, we have the potential to be liable for remediation, releases or injury. In addition, Environmental Laws impose on owners or operators the requirement of ongoing compliance with rules and regulations regarding business-related activities that may affect the environment. Such activities include, for example, the ownership or use of transformers or underground tanks, the treatment or discharge of waste waters or other materials, the removal or abatement of asbestos-containing materials (“ACMs”) or lead-containing paint during renovations or otherwise, or notification to various parties concerning the potential presence of regulated matters, including ACMs. Failure to comply with such requirements could result in difficulty in the lease or sale of any affected property and/or the imposition of monetary penalties, fines or other sanctions in addition to the costs required to attain compliance. Several of our properties have or may contain ACMs or underground storage tanks; however, we are not aware of any potential environmental liability which could reasonably be expected to have a material impact on our financial position or results of operations. No assurance can be given that future laws, ordinances or regulations will not impose any material environmental requirement or liability, or that a material adverse environmental condition does not otherwise exist.

 

 

None.

 

 

For all tables in this Item 2, Annualized Base Rental Revenue is equal to December 2009 base rental revenue multiplied by 12.

 

The properties in which we own interests are located in 13 states throughout the Midwestern, Southeastern and Mid-Atlantic regions of the United States as follows:

 

 

The above table includes 33 properties owned by joint ventures in which we have an ownership interest and are reflected at 100%.

Our properties, by type of center, consist of the following:

 

 

See Note 24 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 for a description of the encumbrances on each property. Additional information regarding the Properties is included in the Property Schedule on the following pages.

 

 

Portfolio
Property Summary
As of December 31, 2009