UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-K
þ Annual report pursuant to the Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004
Or
¨ 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: 1-07533
FEDERAL REALTY INVESTMENT TRUST
(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Declaration of Trust)
Maryland
(State of Organization)
1626 East Jefferson Street, Rockville, Maryland
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)
52-0782497
(IRS Employer Identification No.)
20852
(Zip Code)
(301) 998-8100
(Registrants Telephone Number, Including Area Code)
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Title of Each Class
Common Shares of Beneficial Interest, $.01 par valueper share, with associated Common Share PurchaseRights
Name Of Each Exchange On Which Registered
New York Stock Exchange
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None
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. þ Yes ¨ No
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 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.¨
Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Exchange Act Rule 12b-2). þ Yes ¨ No
The aggregate market value of the Registrants common shares held by non-affiliates of the Registrant, based upon the closing sales price of the Registrants common shares on June 30, 2004 was $2.1 billion.
The number of Registrants common shares outstanding on March 2, 2005 was 52,446,262.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Portions of the Registrants Proxy Statement to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission for its 2005 annual meeting of shareholders to be held in May 2005 will be incorporated by reference into Part III hereof.
FEDERAL REALTY INVESTMENT TRUST ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K
FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2004
TABLE OF CONTENTS
2
PART I
Item 1. Business
References to we, us, our or the Trust refer to Federal Realty Investment Trust and our business and operations conducted through our directly or indirectly owned subsidiaries.
GENERAL
We are an equity real estate investment trust (REIT) specializing in the ownership, management, development and redevelopment of high-quality retail and mixed-use properties. As of December 31, 2004, we owned or had a majority ownership interest in 106 community and neighborhood shopping centers and retail mixed-use properties comprising approximately 16.9 million square feet, located primarily in densely populated and affluent communities throughout the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic United States, as well as California and one apartment complex in Maryland. In total, these 106 commercial properties were 95.1% leased at December 31, 2004. A joint venture in which we own a 30% interest owned four neighborhood shopping centers totaling approximately 0.5 million square feet as of December 31, 2004. We have paid quarterly dividends to our shareholders continuously since our founding in 1962, and have increased our dividend rate for 37 consecutive years. Revenue, profit and total assets of each reportable segment are described in the financial statements contained in Item 8 of this Form 10-K.
We were founded in 1962 under the laws of the District of Columbia and reformed as a real estate investment trust in the state of Maryland in 1999. Our principal executive offices are located at 1626 East Jefferson Street, Rockville, Maryland 20852 and our telephone number is (301) 998-8100. Our Web site address is www.federalrealty.com. The information contained on our Web site is not a part of this report.
BUSINESS OBJECTIVES AND STRATEGIES
Our primary business objective is to own, manage, acquire and redevelop a portfolio of commercial retail properties, with the dominant property type being grocery anchored community and neighborhood shopping centers, that will:
Our traditional focus has been on grocery anchored community and neighborhood shopping centers. Late in 1994, recognizing a trend of increased consumer acceptance and retailer expansion to main streets; we expanded our investment strategy to include street retail and mixed-use properties. The mixed-use properties are typically centered around a retail component but may also include office, residential and hotel components in established main street shopping areas. In addition, from 1997 through 2001, we undertook the ground-up development in urban areas of mixed-use projects that center around the retail component. In 2002, our Board of Trustees approved the adoption of a business plan which returned our primary focus to our traditional business of owning, managing, acquiring and redeveloping high quality retail properties in our core markets.
Operating Strategies
Our core operating strategy is to actively manage our properties to maximize rents and maintain high occupancy levels by attracting and retaining a strong and diverse base of tenants and replacing weaker, underperforming tenants with stronger ones. Our properties are generally located in some of the most densely
3
populated and affluent areas of the country. In addition, because of the in-fill nature of our locations, our centers generally face less competition per capita than centers owned by our peers. These strong demographics help our tenants generate higher sales, which has enabled us to maintain high occupancy rates, charge higher rental rates, and maintain steady rent growth, all of which increases the value of our portfolio. Our operating strategies also include:
Investing Strategies
Our investment strategy calls for deploying capital at risk-adjusted rates of return that exceed our weighted average cost of capital in projects that have potential for future net income growth equal to, or in excess of, the historical net income growth of our core portfolio of properties.
Our investments primarily fall into one of the following four categories:
Investment Criteria
When we evaluate potential redevelopment, retenanting, expansion and acquisition opportunities, we consider such factors as:
4
Financing Strategies
Our financing strategies are designed to enable us to maintain a strong balance sheet while retaining sufficient flexibility to fund our operating and investing activities in the most cost-efficient way possible. Our financing strategies include:
EMPLOYEES
At December 31, 2004, we had 262 full-time employees and 140 part-time employees. None of the employees is represented by a collective bargaining unit. We believe that our relationship with our employees is good.
TAX STATUS
We elected to be taxed as a REIT for federal income tax purposes beginning with our taxable year ended December 31, 1962. As a REIT we are generally not subject to federal income tax on REIT taxable income that
5
we distribute to our shareholders. Under the internal revenue Code of 1986, as amended, which we prefer as to the Code, REITs are subject to numerous organizational and operational requirements, including the requirement to distribute at least 90% of REIT taxable income each year. We will be subject to federal income tax on our taxable income (including any applicable alternative minimum tax) at regular corporate rates if we fail to qualify as a REIT for tax purposes in any taxable year, or to the extent we distribute less than 100% of REIT taxable income. We will also not be permitted to qualify for treatment as a REIT for federal income tax purposes for four years following the year during which qualification is lost. Even if we qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes, we may be subject to certain state and local income and franchise taxes and to federal income and excise taxes on our undistributed REIT taxable income. In addition, certain of our subsidiaries are subject to federal, state and local income taxes.
GOVERNMENTAL REGULATIONS AFFECTING OUR PROPERTIES
We and our properties are subject to a variety of federal, state and local environmental, health, safety and similar laws, including:
The application of these laws to a specific property that we own depends on a variety of property-specific circumstances, including the former uses of the property, the building materials used at each property and the physical layout of the property. Under certain environmental laws, principally CERCLA, we, as the owner or operator of properties currently or previously owned, may be required to investigate and clean up certain hazardous or toxic substances, asbestos-containing materials, or petroleum product releases at the property. We may also be held liable to a governmental entity or third parties for property damage and for investigation and clean up costs incurred in connection with the contamination, whether or not we knew of, or were responsible for, the contamination. In addition, some environmental laws create a lien on the contaminated site in favor of the government for damages and costs it incurs in connection with the contamination. As the owner or operator of real estate, we also may be liable under common law to third parties for damages and injuries resulting from environmental contamination emanating from the real estate. Such costs or liabilities could exceed the value of the affected real estate. The presence of contamination or the failure to remediate contamination may adversely affect our ability to sell or lease real estate or to borrow using the real estate as collateral.
Neither existing environmental, health, safety and similar laws nor the costs of our compliance with these laws has had a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations, and management does not believe they will in the future. In addition, we have not incurred, and do not expect to incur, any material costs or liabilities due to environmental contamination at properties we currently own or have owned in the past. However, we cannot predict the impact of new or changed laws or regulations on properties we currently own or may acquire in the future. We have no current plans for substantial capital expenditures with respect to compliance with environmental, health, safety and similar laws and we carry environmental insurance which covers a number of environmental risks for most of our properties.
6
COMPETITION
Numerous commercial developers and real estate companies compete with us with respect to the tenant leasing and the acquisition of properties. Some of these competitors may possess greater capital resources than we do, although no single competitor or group of competitors in any of the primary markets where our properties are located is believed to be dominant in that market. This competition may:
Retailers at our properties also face increasing competition from outlet stores, discount shopping clubs, and other forms of marketing of goods and services, such as direct mail, internet marketing and telemarketing. This competition could contribute to lease defaults and insolvency of tenants.
AVAILABLE INFORMATION
Copies of our Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 are available free of charge through the Investor Information section of our website at www.federalrealty.com as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file the material with, or furnish the material to, the Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC.
Our Corporate Governance Guidelines, Code of Business Conduct, Code of Ethics applicable to our Chief Executive Officer and senior financial officers, Whistleblower Policy, organizational documents and the charters of our audit committee, compensation committee and nominating and corporate governance committee are all available in the Corporate Governance section of the Investor Information section of our website.
You may obtain a printed copy of any of the foregoing materials from us by writing to us at Federal Realty Investment Trust, 1626 East Jefferson Street, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
Amendments to the Code of Ethics or Code of Business Conduct or waivers that apply to any of our executive officers or our senior financial officers will be disclosed in that section of our website as well.
Item 2. Properties
General
As of December 31, 2004, we owned or had a majority ownership interest in 106 community and neighborhood shopping centers and retail mixed-used properties comprising approximately 16.9 million square feet, located primarily in densely populated and affluent communities throughout the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic United States, as well as California. In addition we own one apartment complex in Maryland. No single property accounted for over 10% of our 2004 total revenue or net income. We believe that our properties are adequately covered by commercial general liability, fire, flood, earthquake, terrorism and business interruption insurance provided by reputable companies, with commercially reasonable exclusions, deductibles and limits.
We operate our business on an asset management model, where small, focused teams are responsible for a portfolio of assets. We have divided our portfolio of properties into two operating regions: the East and West. Each region is operated under the direction of an asset manager, with dedicated leasing, property management and financial staff, and operates largely autonomously with respect to day-to-day operating decisions.
7
Tenant Diversification
As of December 31, 2004, we had approximately 2,200 tenants, ranging from sole proprietors to major national retailers. No one tenant or affiliated group of tenants accounted for more than 2.3% of our annualized base rent as of December 31, 2004. As a result of our tenant diversification, we believe our exposure to recent and future bankruptcy filings in the retail sector has not been and will not be significant.
Geographic Diversification
Our 107 properties are located in 14 states and the District of Columbia. The following table shows, by region and state within the region, the number of properties, the gross leasable area and the percentage of total portfolio gross leasable area in each state as of December 31, 2004.
Region and State
East
Virginia
New Jersey
Pennsylvania
New York
Illinois
Massachusetts
Connecticut
Michigan
District of Columbia
North Carolina
Florida
Subtotal
West
California
Texas
Arizona
Total
Leases, Lease Terms and Lease Expirations
Our leases are classified as operating leases and typically are structured to require the monthly payment of minimum rents in advance, subject to periodic increases during the term of the lease; percentage rents based on our tenants gross sales volumes, and reimbursement of a majority of on-site operating expenses and real estate taxes. These features in our leases reduce our exposure to higher costs caused by inflation and allow us to participate in improved tenant sales.
Commercial property leases generally range from 3 to 10 years; however, certain leases with anchor tenants may be longer. Many of our leases contain tenant options that enable the tenant to extend the term of the lease at expiration at pre-established rates that often include fixed rent increases, consumer price index adjustments or other market rate adjustments from the prior base rent. Leases on apartments are generally for a period of one year or less and, in 2004, represented approximately 3.2% of total revenues.
8
The following table sets forth the schedule of lease expirations for our commercial leases in place as of December 31, 2004 for each of the 10 years beginning with 2005, assuming that none of the tenants exercise their future renewal options. Annualized base rents reflect in-place contractual rents as of December 31, 2004.
Year of LeaseExpiration
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Thereafter
Retail and Residential Properties
The following table sets forth information concerning all properties, in which we own an equity interest or have a leasehold interest and are consolidated as of December 31, 2004. Except as otherwise noted, we are the sole owner of our retail properties. Principal tenants are the largest tenants in the property based on square feet leased or are tenants important to a propertys success due to their ability to attract retail customers.
EAST REGION
Square Feet (1)
/ApartmentUnits
AllwoodClifton, NJ 07013 (3)
AndorraPhiladelphia, PA 19128 (4)
Bala CynwydBala Cynwyd, PA 19004
Barracks RoadCharlottesville, VA 22905
Bethesda RowBethesda, MD 20814 (8)
Blue StarWatchung, NJ 07060 (3)
9
Retail and Residential Propertiescontinued
Brick PlazaBrick Township, NJ 08723 (7)
BristolBristol, CT 06010
BrunswickNorth Brunswick, NJ 08902 (3)
Congressional PlazaRockville, MD 20852 (5)
Congressional Plaza ResidentialRockville, MD 20852 (5)
Courthouse CenterRockville, MD 20852 (6)
CliftonClifton, NJ 07013 (3)
CrossroadsHighland Park, IL 60035
DedhamDedham, MA 02026
EastgateChapel Hill, NC 27514
Ellisburg CircleCherry Hill, NJ 08034
Falls PlazaFalls Church, VA 22046
Falls Plaza EastFalls Church, VA 22046
FeastervilleFeasterville, PA 19047
Federal PlazaRockville, MD 20852
Finley SquareDowners Grove, IL 60515
FlourtownFlourtown, PA 19031
Forest HillsForest Hills, NY
Friendship CenterWashington, D.C 20015
10
Fresh MeadowsQueens, NY 11365
Gaithersburg SquareGaithersburg, MD 20878
Garden MarketWestern Springs, IL 60558
Governor PlazaGlen Burnie, MD 21961 (4)
Gratiot PlazaRoseville, MI 48066
Greenlawn PlazaGreenlawn, NY 11740
Greenwich AvenueGreenwich Avenue, CT
HamiltonHamilton, NJ 08690 (3)
HauppaugeHauppauge, NY 11788
HuntingtonHuntington, NY 11746 (3)
Idylwood PlazaFalls Church, VA 22030
LancasterLancaster, PA 17601 (3)
Langhorne SquareLevittown, PA 19056
Laurel CentreLaurel, MD 20707 (4)
Lawrence ParkBroomall, PA 19008
Leesburg PlazaLeesburg, VA 20176 (6)
Loehmanns PlazaFairfax, VA 22042
Mercer MallLawrenceville, NJ 08648 (3)
11
Mid-Pike PlazaRockville, MD 20852 (3)
Mount Vernon PlazaAlexandria, VA 22306 (6) (7)
NortheastPhiladelphia, PA 19114
North Lake CommonsLake Zurich, IL 60047
Old Keene MillSpringfield, VA 22152
Pan AmFairfax, VA 22031
Pentagon RowArlington, VA 22202 (7)
Perring PlazaBaltimore, MD 21134 (4)
Pike 7 PlazaVienna, VA 22180 (6)
Queen Anne PlazaNorwell, MA 02061
Quince OrchardGaithersburg, MD 20877 (7)
Rollingwood ApartmentsSilver Spring, MD 209109 three-story buildings
RutgersFranklin, N.J. 08873 (3)
Sams Park & ShopWashington, DC 20008
Saugus PlazaSaugus, MA 01906
Shaws PlazaCarver, MA 02330
ShirlingtonArlington, VA 22206
South Valley Shopping CenterAlexandria, VA 22306 (6)
Tower Shopping CenterSpringfield, VA 22150
12
TroyParsippany-Troy, NJ 07054
Tysons StationFalls Church, VA 22043
WildwoodBethesda, MD 20814
Willow GroveWillow Grove, PA 19090
The Shops at Willow LawnRichmond, VA 23230 (4)
Winter ParkOrlando, FL
WynnewoodWynnewood, PA 19096
Total East Region
WEST REGION
Colorado BlvdPasadena, CA
Escondido PromenadeEscondido, CA 92029 (9)
Fifth AvenueSan Diego, CA (12)
Hermosa AvenueHermosa Beach, CA (11)
Hollywood BlvdHollywood, CA (11)
Houston StreetSan Antonio, TX
Kings CourtLos Gatos, CA 95032 (6) (7)
Mill AvenuePhoenix-Mesa, AZ (14)
Old Town CenterLos Gatos, CA 95030
150 Post StreetSan Francisco, CA 94108
Santana Row RetailSan Jose, CA 95128 (13)
13
Santana Row ResidentialSan Jose, CA 95128
Third Street PromenadeSanta Monica, CA (10)
Westgate Shopping CenterSan Jose, CA
Total West Region
Total All Regions
Item 3. Legal Proceedings
Neither we nor any of our properties are currently subject to any legal proceeding which we believe creates material exposure to us nor, to our knowledge, is any material litigation currently threatened against us or any of our properties. Under our leases, tenants are typically obligated to indemnify us from and against all liabilities, costs and expenses imposed upon or asserted against us (1) as owner of the properties due to certain matters relating to the operation of the properties by the tenant, and (2) where appropriate, due to certain matters relating to the ownership of the properties prior to their acquisition by us.
Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Shareholders
No matters were submitted to a vote of our shareholders during the fourth quarter of the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004.
14
PART II
Item 5. Market for Our Common Equity and Related Shareholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
Our common shares trade on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol FRT. Listed below are the high and low closing prices of our common shares as reported on the New York Stock Exchange and the dividends declared for each of the periods indicated.
DividendsDeclared
Per Share
2004
Fourth quarter
Third quarter
Second quarter
First quarter
2003
On March 2, 2005, there were 4,937 holders of record of our common shares.
Our ongoing operations generally will not be subject to federal income taxes as long as we maintain our REIT status and distribute to shareholders at least 100% of our REIT taxable income. Under the Code, REITs are subject to numerous organizational and operational requirements, including the requirement to distribute at least 90% of REIT taxable income. State income taxes are not material to our operations or cash flows.
Future distributions will be at the discretion of our Board of Trustees and will depend on our actual net income available for common shareholders, financial condition, capital requirements, the annual distribution requirements under the REIT provisions of the Code and such other factors as the Board of Trustees deems relevant. We have paid quarterly dividends to our shareholders continuously since our founding in 1962 and have increased our annual dividend rate for 37 consecutive years.
Our total annual dividends paid per share for 2004 and 2003 were $1.975 per share and $1.945 per share, respectively. The annual dividend amounts are different from dividends as calculated for federal income tax purposes. Distributions to the extent of our current and accumulated earnings and profits for federal income tax purposes generally will be taxable to a shareholder as ordinary dividend income. Distributions in excess of current and accumulated earnings and profits will be treated as a nontaxable reduction of the shareholders basis in such shareholders shares, to the extent thereof, and thereafter as taxable capital gain. Distributions that are treated as a reduction of the shareholders basis in its shares will have the effect of increasing the amount of gain, or reducing the amount of loss, recognized upon the sale of the shareholders shares. No assurances can be given regarding what portion, if any, of distributions in 2005 or subsequent years will constitute a return of capital for federal income tax purposes. During a year in which a REIT earns a net long-term capital gain, the REIT can elect under Code Sec. 857(b)(3) to designate a portion of dividends paid to shareholders as capital gain dividends. If this election is made, then the capital gain dividends are taxable to the shareholder as long-term capital gains. For 2004, a portion of our distributions was designated as a capital gain dividend.
Recent Sales of Unregistered Shares
During 2004 and 2003, we issued 123,130 and 76,952 common shares, respectively, upon the redemption of operating partnership units held by persons who received units in earlier periods in exchange for contribution of real estate to limited partnerships that we control. The common shares were issued without registration under the Securities Act of 1933 in reliance on Section 4(2) of that Act.
15
In 2005, we issued 190,000 common shares without registration under the Securities Act of 1933 in reliance on Section 4(2) of that Act upon the redemption of operating partnership units. We intend to ultimately register these shares under the Securities Act of 1933.
The following table reflects the income tax status of distributions paid during the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003 to common shareholders:
Ordinary dividend income
Capital gain
Return of capital
Distributions on our 8.5% Series B Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Shares are payable at the rate of $2.125 per share per annum, prior to distributions on our common shares. Our 7.95% Series A Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Shares paid distributions at a rate of $1.9875 per share per annum and were redeemed in full in June 2003. We do not believe that the preferential rights available to the holders of our preferred shares or the financial covenants contained in our debt agreements will have an adverse effect on our ability to pay dividends in the normal course of business to our common shareholders or to distribute amounts necessary to maintain our qualification as a REIT.
16
Item 6. Selected Financial Data
The following table includes certain financial information on a consolidated historical basis. You should read this section in conjunction with Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data. Our selected operating data, other data and balance sheet data for the years ended 2000 through 2003 may have been reclassified to conform to the presentation for the year ended 2004.
Rental income
Property operating income
Income from continuing operations
Income before gain on sale of real estate
Gain on sale of real estate
Loss on abandoned developments held for sale
Net income
Net income available for common shareholders
Net cash provided by operating activities (1)
Net cash (used in) investing activities (1)
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities (1)
Dividends declared on common shares
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding:
Basic
Diluted
Earnings per common share, basic:
Discontinued operations
Earnings per common share, diluted:
Dividends declared per common share
Other Data:
Funds from operations available to common shareholders (2) (3)
Ratio of earnings to fixed charges (4)
EBITDA
Adjusted EBITDA
Ratio of earnings to combined fixed charges and preferred share dividends (4)
Ratio of Adjusted EBITDA to combined fixed charges and preferred share dividends (4)(5)
17
Real estate at cost
Total assets
Mortgage, construction loans and capital lease obligations
Notes payable
Senior notes and debentures
Convertible subordinated debentures
Redeemable preferred shares
Shareholders equity
Number of common shares outstanding
We consider FFO available for common shareholders a meaningful, additional measure of operating performance primarily because it excludes the assumption that the value of the real estate assets diminishes predictably over time, as implied by the historical cost convention of GAAP and the recording of depreciation. We use FFO primarily as one of several means of assessing our operating performance in comparison with other REITs. Comparison of our presentation of FFO to similarly titled measures for other REITs may not necessarily be meaningful due to possible differences in the application of the NAREIT definition used by such REITs. Additional information regarding our calculation of FFO is contained in Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.
The reconciliation of net income to funds from operations available for common shareholders is as follows:
Depreciation and amortization of real estate assets
Amortization of initial direct costs of leases
Depreciation of joint venture real estate assets
Funds from operations
Dividends on preferred stock
Income attributable to operating partnership units
Preferred stock redemption costs
Funds from operations available for common shareholders
18
The reconciliation of Adjusted EBITDA to net income for the periods presented is as follows:
Depreciation and amortization
Interest expense
Other interest income
Gain loss on sale of real estate
Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
The following discussion should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and notes thereto appearing in Item 8 of this report.
This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Also, documents that we incorporate by reference into this Annual Report on Form 10-K, including documents that we subsequently file with the Securities and Exchange Commission, which we refer to as the SEC, will contain forward-looking statements. When we refer to forward-looking statements or information, sometimes we use words such as may, will, could, should, plans, intends, expects, believes, estimates, anticipates and continues. In particular, the risk factors included or incorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K describe forward-looking information. The risk factors describe risks that may affect these statements but are not all-inclusive, particularly with respect to possible future events. Many things can happen that can cause actual results to be different from those we describe. These factors include, but are not limited to the risk factors described in our current report in Form 8-K filed on March 2, 2005, and include the following:
19
Given these uncertainties, readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements that we make, including those in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Except as may be required by law, we make no promise to update any of the forward-looking statements as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. You should carefully review the risks and the risk factors incorporated herein by reference from our Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 2, 2005 before making any investments in us.
Overview
We are an equity real estate investment trust specializing in the ownership, management, development and redevelopment of high-quality retail and mixed-use properties. As of December 31, 2004, we owned or had a majority interest in 106 community and neighborhood shopping centers and retail mixed-use properties comprising approximately 16.9 million square feet, located primarily in densely populated and affluent communities throughout the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic United States, as well as California and one apartment complex in Maryland. In total, the 106 commercial properties were 95.1% leased at December 31, 2004. A joint venture in which we own a 30% interest owned four neighborhood shopping centers totaling approximately 0.5 million square feet as of December 31, 2004. We have paid quarterly dividends to our shareholders continuously since our founding in 1962, and have increased our dividend rate for 37 consecutive years.
Critical Accounting Policies
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, which we refer to as GAAP, requires management to make estimates and assumptions that in certain circumstances affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities, and revenues and expenses. These estimates are prepared using managements best judgment, after considering past and current events and economic conditions. In addition, information relied upon by
20
management in preparing such estimates includes internally generated financial and operating information, external market information when available, and when necessary, information obtained from consultations with third party experts. Actual results could differ from these estimates. Management considers an accounting estimate to be critical if changes in the estimate or accrual results could have a material impact on our consolidated results of operations or financial condition.
The most significant accounting policies, which involve the use of estimates and assumptions as to future uncertainties and, therefore, may result in actual amounts that differ from estimates, are as follows.
Revenue Recognition and Accounts Receivable
Leases with tenants are classified as operating leases. Base rents are recognized on a straight-line basis over the terms of the related leases, net of valuation adjustments, based on managements assessment of credit, collection and other business risk. We make estimates of the collectibility of our accounts receivable related to base rents, including receivables from recording rent on a straight-line basis, expense reimbursements and other revenue or income taking into account payment history, industry trends and the period of recovery. In doing so, we generally do not recognize income from straight-line rents due to be collected beyond ten years because of uncertainty of collection. In most cases, the ultimate collectibility of these claims extends beyond one year. These estimates have a direct impact on our net income. Historically, we have recognized bad debt expense between 1.0% and 1.5% of rental income and was 1.5% in 2004. An increase in our bad debt expense would decrease our net income. For example, if we had experienced an increase in bad debt of 0.5% of rental income in 2004, our net income would have been reduced by approximately $1.9 million.
Real Estate
The nature of our business as an owner, re-developer and operator of retail shopping centers means that we invest significant amounts of capital. Depreciation and maintenance costs relating to our shopping centers and mixed-use properties constitutes a substantial cost for the Trust as well as the industry as a whole. The Trust capitalizes real estate investments and depreciates it in accordance with GAAP and consistent with industry standards based on our best estimates of the assets physical and economic useful lives. The cost of our real estate investments, less salvage value, if any, is charged to depreciation expense over the estimated life of the asset using straight-line rates for financial statement purposes. We periodically review the estimated lives of our assets and implement changes, as necessary, to these estimates and, therefore, to our depreciation rates. These reviews take into account the historical retirement and replacement of our assets, the repairs required to maintain the condition of our assets, the cost of redevelopments that may extend the useful lives of our assets and general economic and real estate factors. A newly developed neighborhood shopping center building would typically have an economic useful life of 50 to 60 years, but since many of our assets are not newly developed buildings, estimating the useful lives of assets that are long-lived as well as their salvage value requires significant management judgment. The longer the economic useful life, the lower the depreciation charged to that asset in a fiscal period will be, which in turn will increase our net income. Similarly, using a shorter economic useful life would increase the depreciation for a fiscal period and decrease our net income.
Land, buildings and real estate under development are recorded at cost. Depreciation is computed using the straight-line method with useful lives ranging generally from 35 years to a maximum of 50 years on buildings and improvements. Maintenance and repair costs are charged to operations as incurred. Tenant work and other major improvements, which improve or extend the life of the asset, are capitalized and depreciated over the life of the lease or the estimated useful life of the improvements, whichever is shorter. Minor improvements, furniture and equipment are capitalized and depreciated over useful lives ranging from three to 15 years. Certain external and internal costs directly related to the development, redevelopment and leasing of real estate, including applicable salaries and the related direct costs, are capitalized. The capitalized costs associated with developments and redevelopments are depreciated over the life of the improvement. Capitalized costs associated with leases are depreciated or amortized over the base term of the lease. Unamortized leasing costs are charged to
21
operations if the applicable tenant vacates before the expiration of its lease. Undepreciated tenant work is charged to operations if the applicable tenant vacates and the tenant work is replaced.
When applicable, as lessee, we classify our leases of land and building as operating or capital leases in accordance with the provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (SFAS) No. 13, Accounting for Leases. We are required to use judgment and make estimates in determining the lease term, the estimated economic life of the property and the interest rate to be used in applying the provisions of SFAS No. 13. These estimates determine whether or not the lease meets the qualification of a capital lease and is recorded as an asset.
We are required to make subjective assessments as to the useful lives of our real estate for purposes of determining the amount of depreciation to reflect on an annual basis. These assessments have a direct impact on net income. Certain events could occur that would materially affect our estimates and assumptions related to depreciation. Unforeseen competition or changes in customer shopping habits could substantially alter our assumptions regarding our ability to realize the return on investment in the property and therefore reduce the economic life of the asset and affect the amount of depreciation expense to charge against both the current and future revenues. We will continue to periodically review the lives of assets and any decrease in asset lives could have the effect of increasing depreciation expense while any analysis indicating that lives are longer than we have assumed could have the effect of decreasing depreciation expense. In order to determine the impact on depreciation expense of a different average life of our real estate assets taken as a whole, we used 25 years, which is the approximate average life of all assets being depreciated at the end of 2004. If the estimated useful lives of all assets being depreciated were increased by one year, the consolidated depreciation expense would have decreased by approximately $3.2 million.
Interest costs on developments and major redevelopments are capitalized as part of developments and redevelopments not yet placed in service. Capitalization of interest commences when development activities and expenditures begin and end upon completion, which is when the asset is ready for its intended use. Generally, rental property is considered substantially complete and ready for its intended use upon completion of tenant improvements, but no later than one year from completion of major construction activity. We make judgments as to the time period over which to capitalize such costs and these assumptions have a direct impact on net income because capitalized costs are not subtracted in calculating net income. If the time period for capitalizing interest is extended, more interest is capitalized, thereby decreasing interest expense and increasing net income during that period.
Long-Lived Assets
There are estimates and assumptions made by management in preparing the consolidated financial statements for which the actual results will emerge over long periods of time. This includes the recoverability of long-lived assets, including our properties that have been acquired or developed. Management must evaluate properties for possible impairment of value and, for those properties where impairment may be indicated, make estimates of future cash flows including revenues, operating expenses, required maintenance and development expenditures, market conditions, demand for space by tenants and rental rates over very long periods. Because our properties typically have a very long life, the assumptions used to estimate the future recoverability of book value requires significant management judgment.
In August 2001 the FASB issued SFAS No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets (effective for us on January 1, 2002). SFAS No. 144 requires that one accounting model be used for long-lived assets to be disposed of by sale, whether previously held and used or newly-acquired, and broadens the presentation of discontinued operations to include components of an entity comprising operations and cash flows that can be distinguished operationally and for financial reporting purposes from the rest of the entity. As a result, the sale of a property, or the classification of a property as held for sale, requires us to report the results of operations and cash flows of that property as discontinued operations.
22
We are required to make estimates of undiscounted cash flows in determining whether there is an impairment of an asset. Actual results could be significantly different from the estimates. These estimates have a direct impact on net income, because recording an impairment charge results in a negative adjustment to net income.
Contingencies
We are sometimes involved in lawsuits and environmental matters arising in the ordinary course of business. Management makes assumptions and estimates concerning the amount and likelihood of loss relating to these matters. The estimates and assumptions relating to potential loss result in a decrease in net income.
Self-Insurance
We are self-insured for general liability costs up to predetermined retained amounts, and we believe that we maintain adequate accruals to cover our retained liability. We maintain third party stop-loss insurance policies to cover liability costs in excess of predetermined retained amounts. Our accrual for self-insurance liability is determined by management and is based on claims filed and an estimate of claims incurred but not yet reported. Management considers a number of factors, including third-party actuary valuations, when making these determinations. If our liability costs exceed these accruals, it will reduce our net income.
Recent Developments
On February 15, 2005 we sold two properties located in Tempe, Arizona for $13.7 million, resulting in a gain of $4.0 million.
On March 2, 2005, we acquired Assembly Square, an approximately 330,000 square foot enclosed mall that is currently being redeveloped into a power center, and an adjacent 220,000 square foot retail/industrial complex for $64 million. The properties are located in the City of Somerville, Massachusetts. The acquisition was financed through available cash and borrowings under our revolving credit facility.
The Trust expects to invest an additional $38 million to complete the redevelopment of the mall into a power center, with stabilization anticipated within 12 months. The acquisition of Assembly Square also includes zoning entitlements to add four mixed-use buildings on 3.5 acres, which will include approximately 41,000 square feet of retail space, 51,000 square feet of office and 239 residential units.
The 10-acre parcel, which comprises approximately 220,000 square feet of improvements, is currently 100% leased to a mix of quasi-retail and industrial uses. This parcel also includes an option to purchase adjacent land parcels from the Somerville Redevelopment Authority, all of which are zoned for dense, mixed-use development.
2004 Property Acquisitions and Dispositions
On March 31, 2004, we acquired Westgate Mall, a 637,000 square foot shopping center located in San Jose, California. The purchase price of the property of $97.0 million was paid from borrowings under our revolving credit facility, which were subsequently repaid from the net proceeds of our April 2004 common equity offering.
On June 3, 2004, we sold a parcel of land at the Village at Shirlington in Arlington, Virginia for $4.9 million. This transaction related to a previous land sale to Arlington County, Virginia, for $0.3 million, which closed in March 2004 and resulted in an insignificant loss. The combined transactions resulted in a net gain of $2.8 million.
On June 14, 2004, Magruders Center in Rockville, Maryland, which was owned by one of our partnerships, was condemned by the City of Rockville in order to facilitate the redevelopment of the Rockville Town Center. We received $14.3 million in condemnation proceeds from the City of Rockville, resulting in a gain of $5.4 million.
23
In July 2004, at a contribution value of approximately $20.6 million, we contributed Plaza del Mercado to a newly formed joint venture in exchange for a 30% ownership interest in the joint venture and $18.6 million of proceeds. The joint venture simultaneously financed the property with a $13.3 million 10-year secured loan. We recognized a gain of $0.1 million on this transaction.
On September 16, 2004 we sold 3.1 acres of land at the Village at Shirlington in Arlington, Virginia in two separate transactions for a total of $2.8 million, resulting in a gain of $0.9 million. The funds were used to pay down borrowings under our line of credit.
On September 30, 2004 we paid $2.3 million to purchase 10% of the partnership interests in Street Retail West 6, LP, giving us 100% ownership of the property at 140-168 W. Colorado located in Pasadena, California.
On October 1, 2004 we paid $0.8 million to purchase 15% of the partnership interests in Street Retail Tempe I, LLC, giving us 100% ownership of 501 South Mill located in Tempe, Arizona.
On October 12, 2004 we purchased Shaws Plaza, located in Carver, Massachusetts, for $4.0 million.
On November 10, 2004 we issued 40,201 of our common shares to purchase 10% of the partnership interests in Street Retail West 10, LP, giving us 100% ownership of 214 Wilshire Boulevard, located in Santa Monica, California.
On December 15, 2004 we sold one building in West Hartford, Connecticut and two buildings in Avon, Connecticut for a total of $11.2 million, resulting in a gain of approximately $3.6 million.
On December 29, 2004 we sold one property in Evanston, Illinois for $4.0 million, resulting in a gain of $1.3 million.
2004 Financing Developments
On January 26, 2004, we issued $75 million of fixed rate notes, which mature in February 2011 and bear interest at 4.50%. The proceeds of this note offering were used to pay down our revolving credit facility by $50 million and the remainder was used for general corporate purposes.
Also in January 2004, to hedge our exposure to interest rate fluctuations on our $150 million term loan obtained in October 2003, we entered into an interest rate swap, which fixed the LIBOR portion of the interest rate on the term loan at 2.401% through October 2006. The term loan bears interest at LIBOR plus 95 basis points (0.95%). The interest rate on the term note was 2.1% as of December 31, 2003. The current interest rate, taking into account the swap, is 3.351% (2.401% plus 0.95%) on notional amounts totaling $150 million and is 2.95% without the swap.
We paid off our 6.74% Medium Term Notes on their due date of March 10, 2004 for their full principal balance of $39.5 million plus accrued interest of $1.2 million.
On April 7, 2004, we issued 2.2 million common shares at a net price of $45.33 per share (after taking into account underwriters discount and commissions) netting approximately $99 million in cash proceeds before other expenses of the offering. The proceeds were used to repay the borrowings outstanding under our revolving credit facility that were drawn to acquire Westgate Mall and for general corporate purposes.
Outlook
We believe that in 2005 we will experience growth in earnings from operations when compared to 2004. We expect this growth in earnings to be generated by a combination of the following:
24
Our earnings in 2003 and 2004 were positively impacted by the reimbursement to us of lost rents of $11.0 million from an insurance settlement received in December 2003 related to a fire at Santana Row in 2002. Of the $11 million reimbursement, approximately $8 million was recognized in the fourth quarter of 2003 and approximately $3 million was recognized during 2004.
Earnings in our same center portfolio are anticipated to grow as a recovering economy in each of our regions is expected to result in improved occupancy rates and increasing rents on lease rollovers. Please see Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of OperationsResults of OperationsSame Center below for the definition of the properties that constitute our same center portfolio. The economic environment in the Northern California retail market, while improving, continues to be weak, resulting in lower occupancy rates and limiting our ability to increase rents in properties in that area. We believe the economies of our other markets are generally improving. Our same center growth has also been slowed during the past two fiscal years by the increase in our redevelopment activity at certain centers, which will, by design, keep leasable space out of service until the redevelopments are complete. The competitive retail environment has resulted in the loss of some of our anchor retailers, but we have been successful in replacing a number of those anchors and other weaker tenants with tenants that we believe are more credit worthy. In other cases, we have taken advantage of the opportunity to redevelop the space that became vacant when the anchor tenant vacated. While this redevelopment and retenanting activity has resulted in increased capital investment in those centers, it should also increase the rental income from new leases as these tenants commence operations, add to the economic life of the centers, and increase the appeal of the centers to retail customers. These factors should extend the number of years during which we can reasonably expect growth in earnings from those properties beyond the period we would have expected if we had not made the additional capital investment.
The current development at Santana Row consists of four phases. Seven of the eight buildings of Phase I, which include retail, residential and a 213-room hotel, opened in 2002. The retail portion of the remaining building, Building 7, opened in early 2003. The delay in opening Building 7 was the result of a fire in August 2002 that destroyed all but 11 of the planned 246 residential units located on that building. The rebuilding of the residential rental units on Building 7 (Phase IV) commenced in 2004. We anticipate delivery of the units will start in 2005 and, when completed in 2006, Building 7 will add 96 townhomes and 160 flats. Phase II of the project, which includes approximately 84,000 square feet of retail space, was completed in late 2003 and Phase III, which consists of an arts cinema and 4,000 square feet of retail space, opened in August 2004. The total cost of Phase I is estimated to be $449 million (excluding the Building 7 reconstruction). The costs to date for Phase I are net of $129 million of insurance proceeds, $11 million of which was recognized as income in 2004 and 2003. The cost of Phase II is approximately $27 million. The total cost of Phase III is estimated to be approximately $5 million, and we estimate the cost Phase IV, will be approximately $58 million. We are exploring in 2005 the possibility of selling as many as 219 residential units at Santana as condominiums. In the event we determine it is financially feasible to sell residential units and we are able to obtain all necessary approvals, sales of units could begin in mid-2005.
The financial success of Santana Row will depend on many factors, which cannot be assured. These factors include, among others:
25
We anticipate further growth in earnings from continuing investments in our primary markets in the East and West regions, partly offset by selective dispositions. We expect to continue growth through acquisition of neighborhood and community shopping centers in 2005 and beyond. This growth is contingent, however, on our ability to find properties that meet our qualitative hurdles at prices that meet our financial hurdles. Changes in interest rates also may affect our success in achieving growth through acquisitions by affecting both the price which must be paid to acquire a property, as well as our ability to finance the property acquisitions.
As one method of enhancing our growth and strengthening our market share in the regions in which we operate, in July 2004, we entered into a joint venture arrangement by forming a limited partnership in which we own 30% of the equity. The venture intends to acquire up to $350 million of stabilized, supermarket-anchored shopping centers in our East coast and West coast markets which will be financed through secured borrowings and equity contributions. We will be the manager of the venture and its properties, earning fees for acquisitions, management, leasing and financing. Through our partnership interest, we also will have the opportunity to earn performance-based income.
Results of Operations
Same Center
Throughout this section, we have provided certain information on a same center basis. Information provided on a same center basis is provided for only those properties that we owned and operated for the entirety of both periods being compared and includes properties, for which redevelopment or expansion had been completed prior to the beginning of either of the periods being compared. Properties purchased or sold and properties under development at any time during the periods being compared are excluded.
Our same center-basis results of operations for the year ended December 31, 2004 compared to the year ended December 31, 2003 exclude the four properties acquired in 2004 and the five properties acquired in 2003, respectively including Westgate Mall, Shaws Plaza, Mount Vernon Plaza, South Valley Shopping Center, Plaza del Mercado and Mercer Mall as well as the eight and ten dispositions in 2004 and 2003, respectively including Magruders Center, Plaza del Mercado and other properties. We also exclude properties under development in 2004 or 2003, primarily Santana Row.
On a same center basis, results of operations for the year ended December 31, 2003 compared to the year ended December 31, 2002 excludes the 10 properties sold in 2003 and the six properties sold in 2002. It also excludes properties under development in 2003 and 2002, including Pentagon Row and Santana Row.
26
YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2004 COMPARED TO YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2003
Other property income
Mortgage interest income
Total revenues
Rental expenses
Real estate taxes
Total expenses
Income from real estate partnership
General and administrative expense
Total other expenses
Income before minority interests and discontinued operations
Minority interests
Operating income from discontinued operations
PROPERTY REVENUES
Total revenues in 2004 were $394.3 million which represents an increase of $41.7 million, or 11.8%, over total revenues of $352.6 million in 2003. The primary drivers of this increase are acquisitions, Santana Row, which was phased into service, and an increase in same center revenues as a result of increased occupancy and increased rental revenue on tenant rollovers as detailed below. In addition, we experienced increased cost recoveries from our tenants attributable to higher operating costs at the properties.
The percentage leased at our shopping centers increased to 95.1% at December 31, 2004 compared to 93.1% at year-end 2003 due primarily to new leases signed at existing properties.
Rental income. Rental income consists primarily of minimum rent, percentage rent and cost recoveries from tenants of common area maintenance costs and real estate taxes. Rental income increased $33.8 million, or 10.0%, in 2004 versus $338.1 million in 2003 due largely to the following:
27
Other Property Income. Other property income increased $7.1 million, or 68.2%, to $17.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2004, compared to $10.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2003. Included in other property income are items which, although recurring, tend to fluctuate more than rental income from period to period, such as lease termination fees and temporary tenant income. The increase in other property income in 2004 is primarily the result of higher lease termination fees, parking revenue and income from our restaurant joint ventures.
Mortgage Interest Income. Interest on mortgage notes receivable increased $0.8 million, or 19.8%, to $4.9 million 2004 versus $4.1 million in 2003 due to higher principal balances on notes outstanding.
PROPERTY EXPENSES
Total property operating expenses were $129.9 million in 2004, which represents an increase of $13.5 million, or 11.6%, when compared to $116.4 million in 2003. The increase in total expenses is due primarily to increased real estate tax assessments, utility and maintenance costs and other operating costs incurred during 2004 as detailed below.
Rental Expense. Rental expense increased $9.3 million, or 11.3%, to $91.6 million in 2004 from $82.3 million in 2003. Of this increase,
As a result of these changes in rental expenses, rental income and other property income, rental expense as a percentage of rental income plus other property income decreased from 23.6% in 2003 to 23.5% in 2004.
Real Estate Taxes. Real estate tax expense rose $4.2 million, or 12.2% to $38.3 million in 2004 compared to $34.1 million in 2003. The increase in 2004 is due largely to increased taxes of $2.8 million related to acquired and developed properties, including Santana Row, and higher tax assessments for our properties in the East.
Property Operating Income. Property operating income was $264.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2004, an increase of $28.2 million, or 11.9% compared to $236.2 million in 2003. Income recognized from fire insurance proceeds attributable to rental income lost at Santana Row due to the August, 2002 fire amounted to approximately $3.0 million and $8.0 million in 2004 and 2003, respectively. Excluding these proceeds, property operating income rose $33.1 million. This increase is due primarily to:
Same center property operating income rose 4.3%, or approximately $9.4 million, in 2004. This increase is primarily due to:
28
Interest Expense. Interest expense rose $9.8 million, or 13.1%, to $85.1 million in 2004 compared to $75.3 million in 2003. This increase is almost entirely due to lower capitalization of interest and therefore higher interest expense as most of our property under development, particularly at Santana Row, has been placed into service. Gross interest costs in 2004 were $90.2 million versus $88.7 million in 2003. Capitalized interest amounted to $5.1 million and $13.5 million in 2004 and 2003, respectively.
General and Administrative Expense. Administrative expenses increased by $6.3 million, or 53.7%, to $18.2 million in 2004 compared to $11.8 million in 2003. This increase resulted primarily from costs of personnel and compliance with Sarbanes-Oxley.
Depreciation and Amortization. Expenses attributable to depreciation and amortization rose $15.2 million or 20.5% to $89.7 million in 2004 from $74.5 million in 2003. The increase is due to depreciation on developments, same center increases and on new properties acquired.
OTHER
Minority Interests. Income to minority owners decreased $0.5 million, or 10.7% to $4.2 million in 2004 from $4.7 million in 2003. This is the result of increased earnings at properties owned in partnership offset by a decrease in the ownership percentage of several partnerships held by minority owners.
Operating Income from Discontinued Operations. Operating income from discontinued operations represents the operating income of properties that have been disposed of which, under SFAS No. 144, are required to be reported separately from results of ongoing operations. The reported operating income of $1.1 million and $3.2 million in 2004 and 2003, respectively, represent the operating income for the period during which we owned the eight properties sold in 2004 and the ten properties sold in 2003.
Gain on Sale of Real Estate. The gain on sale of real estate in 2004 decreased $6.0 million, or 29.9%, to $14.0 million from $20.0 million in 2003. None of the eight and ten properties sold in 2004 and 2003, respectively resulted in a loss.
29
YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2003 COMPARED TO YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2002
General and administrative
Restructuring expenses
Loss on abandoned developments
Total revenues in 2003 were $352.6 million which represents an increase of $42.5 million, or 13.7%, over total revenues of $310.1 million in 2002. The primary drivers of this increase are Santana Row, which has been phased into service, acquisitions, an increase in same center revenues from higher rent on tenant rollovers as detailed below and income of approximately $8.0 million from the portion of the settlement of our insurance claims for the August 2002 fire at Santana Row related to lost rent. In addition, we experienced increased cost recoveries related to higher operating costs.
The percentage leased at our shopping centers declined to 93.1% at December 31, 2003 compared to 94.7% at year end 2002 due to the acquisition of centers with lower occupancy rates and the bankruptcies of several large tenants (including K-mart and Todays Man) as well as an increase in redevelopment activity which results in leaseable space being taken out of service for more extended periods.
Rental Income. Rental income consists primarily of minimum rent, percentage rent and cost recoveries from tenants of common area maintenance costs and real estate taxes. Rental income increased $42.3 million, or 14.3%, in 2003 versus 2002 due largely to the following:
30
Other Property Income. Other property income decreased $0.2 million, or 1.5%, to $10.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2003, compared to $10.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2002. Included in other property income are items, which although recurring, tend to fluctuate more than rental income from period to period, such as lease termination fees and temporary tenant income. The decrease in other property income in 2003 is primarily the result of higher temporary tenant income offset by lower lease termination fees.
Mortgage Interest Income. Mortgage interest income increased $0.3 million, or 8.8%, in 2004 verses 2003.
Total property operating expenses in 2003 were $116.4 million, or an increase of $14.4 million when compared to $102.0 million in 2002. The total increase in expenses is due primarily to higher real estate taxes, increased maintenance costs related to snow removal in 2003 and the impact of acquisitions and developments as detailed below.
Rental Expense. Rental expense increased $10.5 million, or 14.7%, to $82.3 million in 2003 from $71.8 million in 2002. Of this increase,
Rental expense reductions related to disposed properties were not significant.
As a result of these changes in rental expenses, rental income and other property income, rental expense as a percentage of rental income plus other property income increased slightly from 23.4% in 2002 to 23.6% in 2003.
Real Estate Taxes. Real estate tax expense rose 12.9% in 2003 to $34.1 million compared to $30.2 million in 2003. The increase in 2004 is due largely to higher tax assessments for our properties in the East as well as increased taxes of $1.8 million related to acquired and developed properties, including Santana Row, which was brought into service starting in late 2002.
Property Operating Income. Property operating income was $236.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2003, an increase of $28.1 million compared to $208.1 million in 2003. Of this amount approximately $8.0 million relates to the Santana Row fire insurance proceeds attributable to rental income lost as a result of the fire. Excluding these proceeds, property operating income rose $20.1 million during 2004 due primarily to:
Same center property operating income rose 13.5% or $28.1 million in 2003 due to increased rental income associated with tenant rollovers and higher real estate tax recoveries and reduced property administrative expenses partly offset by property expenses which rose higher than the related recoveries, particularly the snow removal costs.
31
Interest Expense. Interest expense rose $10.2 million, or 15.7%, to $75.2 million in 2003. This increase is almost entirely due to lower capitalization of interest and therefore higher interest expense as much of our property under development, particularly at Santana Row, was placed into service. Gross interest costs in 2003 was $88.7 million versus $88.6 million in 2002. Capitalized interest amounted to $13.5 million and $23.5 million in 2003 and 2002, respectively.
General and Administrative Expense. Administrative expenses decreased by $2.0 million during 2003, or 14.3% to $11.8 million compared to $13.8 million in 2002. This $2.0 million decrease resulted primarily from payroll and related benefits savings resulting from the management restructuring which began in February 2002. In addition, we experienced savings in legal costs and costs to support and maintain our information systems. These savings were largely offset by increased expensing of costs which had previously had been capitalized related to personnel involved in the development of Santana Row.
Restructuring Expense. The restructuring expenses incurred in 2002 related to our adoption of a new business and management succession plan and resulted in a charge of $8.5 million, all of which was expended in 2002. In December 2002, we recorded a charge of $13.8 million as a result of an accelerated executive transition plan of which $12.7 million was expended in 2003.
Depreciation and Amortization. Expenses attributable to depreciation and amortization rose $11.3 million to $74.5 million in 2003 from $63.2 million in 2002, an increase of 17.9%. The increase is due to depreciation on properties which were acquired in 2003 as well as depreciation of Santana Row which opened in late 2002, and Pentagon Row, which came fully into service during 2002.
Minority Interests. The increase in income to minority interests of $0.6 million from $4.1 million in 2002 to $4.7 million in 2003 is the result of increased earnings at properties owned in partnership as well as an increase in the number of operating partnership units held by minority investors. Units which were issued in connection with our acquisition of Mount Vernon Shopping Center were partially offset by a decrease in units outstanding as a results of redemptions during the year.
Operating Income from Discontinued Operations. Operating income from discontinued operations represents the operating income of properties that have been disposed of which, under SFAS No. 144, are required to be reported separately from results of ongoing operations. The reported operating income of $3.2 million and $4.7 million in 2003 and 2002, respectively, represent the operating income for the period during which we owned the ten properties sold in 2003 and the six properties sold in 2002.
Loss on Abandoned Developments and Gain on Sale of Real Estate. The gain on sale of real estate in 2003 was $20.1 million from the disposal of properties. None of the properties sold in 2003 resulted in a loss. The gain in 2002 of $19.1 million is the result of the sale of six properties. The loss on abandoned developments in 2002 resulted from our change in business plan.
Segment Results
We operate our business on an asset management model, where property management teams are responsible for a portfolio of assets. Prior to June 30, 2004, we divided our portfolio of properties into three operating regions: Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, and West.
Beginning with the three months ended September 30, 2004, we determined that our portfolio should be divided into two operating regions, rather than three. Property management teams consisting of regional directors, leasing agents, development staff and financial personnel each have responsibility for a distinct portfolio. The two regions into which we have divided our portfolio of properties are: East and West. As a result, our segment information for prior periods has been recalculated by combining our Northeast and Mid-Atlantic segments into the new East region.
32
The following selected key segment data presented is for the twelve months ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, except total assets and gross leasable area which are presented as of December 31 of each year. The results of operations of properties that have been sold during the period from January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2004 are excluded from property operating income data in the following table, in accordance with SFAS No. 144.
Property operating income consists of rental income, other property income and mortgage interest income, less rental expenses and real estate taxes. The measure is used internally to evaluate the performance of our regional operations, and we consider it to be a significant measure.
Total revenue
Property operating income as a percent of total revenue
Gross leasable area (square feet)
EAST
The East region extends roughly from New England south through metropolitan Washington, D.C. and further south through Virginia and North Carolina. This region also includes several properties in Florida, Illinois, and Michigan. As of December 31, 2004, the East segment consisted of 72 properties.
The ratio of property operating income to total revenue during the year ended December 31, 2004 decreased slightly from the same period of 2003 due mainly to increased rental revenues and cost recoveries being more than offset by increased operating expenses, primarily real estate tax expense. The ratio of property operating
33
income to total rental income during the year ended December 31, 2003 decreased slightly from the same period of 2002 due mainly to a lower recovery rate on higher common area expenses, particularly due to the snow removal costs incurred in the first quarter of 2003.
WEST
The West region extends from Texas to the West Coast. As of December 31, 2004, 35 of our properties, including Santana Row, were located in the West region.
Total revenue in the West in 2004 increased $22.8 million to $91.1 million compared to $68.3 million in 2003. The increase in total revenue of 33.3% is largely attributable to increased rental revenue of $16.7 million, primarily at Santana Row and from our acquisition of Westgate Mall, and to increased other income, including termination fees, of $6.1 million. The increase in rental revenue was partially offset by a decrease in insurance proceeds of approximately $5.0 million. The insurance proceeds were reported as part of rental income as they relate largely to lost rents on the delayed opening of the residential and retail units and rental concessions to tenants due to the August 2002 fire at Santana Row.
Total revenue in the West in 2003 increased $30.0 million, or 78.2%, to $68.3 million compared to $38.3 million in 2002. The increase in total revenue is largely attributable to increased total revenues at Santana Row of approximately $21.3 million. In addition, approximately $8.0 million of the rental income from the insurance proceeds received related to the fire at Santana Row was recorded in 2003. Excluding the Santana Row revenue growth and the insurance proceeds, total revenue growth in 2003 was 4% as higher income in San Antonio, Texas and southern California more than offset lower revenue at our property at 150 Post Street in San Francisco, California.
For the West region, the percentage leased was 93%, 88% and 84% at December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. The Santana Row development added approximately 558,000 square feet of retail space to the West region since the end of 2001. The improved occupancy as of year-end 2004 compared to the end of 2003 is due largely to the acquisition of Westgate Mall and the leasing of additional space at Santana Row. The improved occupancy as of year-end 2003 compared to the end of 2002 is due largely to increases at Santana Row and Houston Street in San Antonio, Texas.
The West regions property operating income margin to total revenue improved in 2004 over 2003 due primarily to growth in revenue at Santana Row and the acquisition of Westgate Mall. In 2003, we incurred a full year of operating expenses but rental revenues continued to grow as occupancy increased at this project. The Wests property operating income margin increased in 2003 compared to 2002 due increased revenues at Santana Row and decreased operating expenses resulting from leasing, marketing and other start-up activities related to the opening of Santana Row. The success of Santana Row and Houston Street in San Antonio, Texas will depend on many factors which are not entirely within our control. We monitor current and long-term economic forecasts for these markets in order to evaluate the long-term financial returns of these projects. The overall return on investment in the West segment significantly lags the East due to a generally lower basis in our East properties related to their earlier acquisition and to the phasing into service of Santana Row and Houston Street. We expect that the returns on investment in the West will continue to rise as these projects come into service but not necessarily to the same level of overall returns as generated in the other segments.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Due to the nature of our business and strategy, we generally generate significant amounts of cash from operations. The cash generated from operations is primarily paid to our shareholders in the form of dividends. Our status as a REIT requires that we distribute at least 90% of our REIT taxable income each year, as defined in
34
the Internal Revenue Code. Therefore, cash needed to execute our strategy and invest in new properties, as well as to pay our debt at maturity, must come from one or more of the following sources:
It is managements intention that we continually have access to the capital resources necessary to expand and develop our business. As a result, we intend to operate with and maintain a conservative capital structure that will allow us to maintain strong debt service coverage and fixed-charge coverage ratios as part of our commitment to investment-grade debt ratings. We may, from time to time, seek to obtain funds by the following means:
Cash and cash equivalents were $30.5 million and $35.0 million at December 31, 2004 and December 31, 2003, respectively.
Summary of Cash Flows
Cash provided by operating activities
Cash used in investing activities
Cash used by financing activities
Decrease in cash and cash equivalents
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period
The cash provided by operating activities is primarily attributable to the operation of our properties and the change in working capital related to our operations.
We used cash of $154.3 million during the twelve months ended December 31, 2004 in investing activities, including the following:
offset by
35
Our financing activities used $11.3 million of cash, which was composed of:
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements. Other than the joint venture described in the next paragraph and items disclosed in the Contractual Commitments Table below, we have no off-balance sheet arrangements as of December 31, 2004 that are reasonably likely to have a current or future material effect on our financial condition, changes in our financial condition, revenues or expenses, results of operations, liquidity, capital expenditures or capital resources.
In July 2004, we entered into a joint venture arrangement by forming a limited partnership with affiliates of Clarion Lion Properties Fund (Clarion), a discretionary fund created and advised by ING Clarion Partners. We own 30% of the equity in the partnership, and Clarion owns 70%. The partnership plans to acquire up to $350 million of stabilized, supermarket-anchored, shopping centers in the Trusts East and West regions. Federal Realty and Clarion have committed to contribute to the partnership up to $42 million and $98 million, respectively, of equity capital to acquire properties through June 2006. Initially Clarion contributed $5.3 million in cash to the partnership, and we contributed Plaza del Mercado, a shopping center in Montgomery County, Maryland, which we acquired in 2003, at a contribution value of approximately $20.6 million. Concurrently with the contribution of Plaza del Mercado, the partnership obtained a $13.3 million, 10-year loan secured by the property, and we received proceeds of $18.6 million. We are the manager of the partnership and its properties, earning fees for acquisitions, management, leasing, and financing. We also have the opportunity to receive performance-based earnings through our partnership interest. In 2004 the venture acquired three shopping centers in the East for $55.2 million. We account for our interest in the partnership using the equity method. In total, at December 31, 2004, the partnership had $47.2 million of mortgage notes outstanding.
Contractual Commitments
The following table provides a summary of our fixed, noncancelable obligations as of December 31, 2004:
Less than1 year
2006 2007
1-3 years
2008 2009
4-5 years
2010
after 5years
Current and long-term debt
Capital lease obligations, principal only
Operating leases
Real estate commitments
Development and redevelopment obligations
Restaurant joint ventures
Contractual operating obligations
Total contractual cash obligations
In addition to the amounts set forth in the table above, the following potential commitments exist:
(a) Under the terms of the Congressional Plaza partnership agreement, from and after January 1, 1986, an unaffiliated third party has the right to require us and the two other minority partners to purchase between one-
36
half to all of its 29.47% interest in Congressional Plaza at the interests then-current fair market value. Based on managements current estimate of fair market value as of December 31, 2004, our estimated maximum liability upon exercise of the put option would range from approximately $34 million to $38 million.
(b) Under the terms of two other partnerships which own properties in southern California with a cost of approximately $29 million, if certain leasing and revenue levels are obtained for the properties owned by the partnerships, the other partners may require us to purchase their partnership interests at a formula price based upon property operating income. The purchase price for one of the partnerships will be paid in cash and the purchase price for the other partnership will be paid using a limited number of our common shares or, subject to certain conditions, cash. In those partnerships, if the other partners do not redeem their interests, we may choose to purchase the limited partnership interests upon the same terms.
(c) Street Retail San Antonio LP, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Trust, entered into a Development Agreement (the Agreement) in 2000 with the City of San Antonio, Texas (the City) related to the redevelopment of land and buildings that we own along Houston Street. Under the Agreement, we are required to issue an annual letter of credit, commencing on October 1, 2002 and ending on September 30, 2014, that covers our designated portion of the debt service should the incremental tax revenue generated in the area specified in the Agreement, or the Zone not cover the debt service. We posted a letter of credit with the City on September 25, 2002 for $795,000, and the letter of credit remains outstanding. Our obligation under the Agreement is estimated to range from $1.6 million to $3.0 million. During the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003 we funded approximately $434,000 and $360,000, respectively. In anticipation of a shortfall of incremental tax revenues to the City, we have accrued $700,000 as of December 31, 2004 to cover additional payments we may be obligated to make as part of the project costs. Prior to the expiration of the Agreement on September 30, 2014, we could be required to provide funding beyond the $700,000 currently accrued. We do not anticipate, however, that our obligation would exceed $600,000 in any year or $3 million in total. If the Zone creates sufficient tax increment funding to repay the Citys debt prior to the expiration of the Agreement, we will be eligible to receive reimbursement of amounts paid for debt service shortfalls together with interest thereon.
(d) Under the terms of various other partnerships, which own shopping center properties with a cost of approximately $88.5 million, including one of the two shopping centers purchased in the first quarter of 2003, the partners have the right to exchange their operating units for cash or the same number of our common shares, at our option. In 2004 we paid $399,000 to redeem 9,767 of these operating units and issued 203,130 of our common shares to redeem the same amount of operating units.
On September 27, 2004, we issued 190,000 of our common shares valued at $8.6 million to a subsidiary. The shares have been pledged to secure a note in the amount of $8.6 million, which was issued in connection with the redemption by that subsidiary of certain of its outstanding limited partnership interests. The shares were issued in a private offering in reliance upon an exemption from the registration requirements of the federal securities laws pursuant to Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933. On February 1, 2004 the shares were sold. The proceeds from the sale were used to repay the $8.6 million note in full.
As of December 31, 2004, a total of 449,325 operating units are outstanding.
(e) A master lease for Mercer Mall includes a fixed purchase option for $55 million in 2023. If we fail to exercise our purchase option, the owner of Mercer Mall has a put option which would require us to purchase Mercer Mall for $60 million in 2025.
(f) In addition to our contractual obligations, we have other short-term liquidity requirements consisting primarily of normal recurring operating expenses, regular debt service requirements (including debt service relating to additional and replacement debt), recurring corporate expenditures including compensation agreements, non-recurring corporate expenditures (such as tenant improvements and redevelopments) and dividends to common and preferred shareholders. In addition, future rental commitments are not reflected as commitments until the underlying leased space has been delivered for use. Overall capital requirements will depend upon acquisition opportunities, the level of improvements and redevelopments on existing properties and the timing and cost of future phases of Santana Row.
37
Debt Financing Arrangements
As of December 31, 2004, we had total debt outstanding of $1.3 billion.
The following is a summary of our total debt outstanding as of December 31, 2004:
Description of Debt
Principal Balance
as of
December 31, 2004
Interest Rate
Mortgage Loans (1)
Secured Fixed Rate
Leesburg Plaza
164 E. Houston Street
Mercer Mall
Federal Plaza
Tysons Station
Barracks Road
Hauppauge
Lawrence Park
Wildwood
Wynnewood
Brick Plaza
Mount Vernon (2)
Total Mortgage Loans
Notes Payable
Unsecured Fixed Rate
Perring Plaza Renovation
Other
Unsecured Variable Rate
Revolving credit facilities (3)
Term note with banks
Term note with banks (4)
Escondido (Municipal Bonds) (5)
Loehmanns Redemption Note (6)
Total Notes Payable
Senior Notes and Debentures
6.625% Notes
6.99% Medium Term Notes (7)
6.125% Notes (8)
8.75% Notes
4.50% Notes
7.48% Debentures (9)
6.82% Medium Term Notes (10)
Unamortized Discount
Total Senior Notes and Debentures
Capital Lease Obligations
Various
Total Debt and Capital Lease Obligations
The maximum amount drawn under the facility during the first twelve months of 2004 was $165 million. The weighted average interest rate on borrowings under the facility for the twelve months ended December 31, 2004 was 2.2%.
38
Our credit facility and other debt agreements include financial covenants that may limit our operating activities in the future. These covenants require us to comply with a number of financial provisions using calculations of ratios and other amounts that are not normally useful to a financial statement reader and that are calculated in a manner that is not in accordance with GAAP. Accordingly, the numeric information set forth below is calculated as required by our various loan agreements rather than in accordance with GAAP. We have not included a reconciliation of this information to GAAP information because, in this case, there is no directly comparable GAAP measure, similarly titled GAAP measures are not relevant in determining whether or not we are in compliance with our financial covenants and we believe that the ratios on our material covenants are relevant to the reader. These covenants require us to:
We are also obligated to comply with other covenants, including, among others, provisions:
As of December 31, 2004, we were in compliance with all of the financial covenants. If we were to breach any of our debt covenants, including the listed covenants, and did not cure the breach within any applicable cure period, our lenders could require us to repay the debt immediately, and, if the debt is secured, could immediately begin proceedings to take possession of the property securing the loan. Many of our debt arrangements, including our public notes and our credit facility, are cross-defaulted, which means that the lenders under those debt
39
arrangements can put us in default and require immediate repayment of their debt if we breach and fail to cure a covenant under certain of our other debt obligations. As a result, any default under our debt covenants could have an adverse effect on our financial condition, our results of operations, our ability to meet our obligations and the market value of our shares.
Below are the aggregate principal payments required as of December 31, 2004 under our debt financing arrangements by year. Scheduled principal installments and amounts due at maturity are included.
2010 and thereafter (2)
Our organizational documents do not limit the level or amount of debt that we may incur.
Interest Rate Hedging
We enter into derivative contracts, which qualify as cash flow hedges under SFAS No. 133 Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, in order to manage interest rate risk. Derivatives are not purchased for speculation. We use derivative financial instruments to convert a portion of our variable rate debt to fixed rate debt and to manage our fixed to variable rate debt ratio. As of September 30, 2004, the Company had three cash flow hedge agreements, which are accounted for in conformity with SFAS No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, as amended by SFAS No. 138, Accounting for Certain Derivative Instruments and Certain Hedging Activitiesan Amendment of FASB Statement No. 133.
In January 2004, to hedge our exposure to interest rate fluctuations on our $150 million, five-year term loan issued in October 2003, we entered into an interest rate swap, which fixed the LIBOR portion of the interest rate on the term loan at 2.401% through October 2006. The interest rate on the term loan as of December 31, 2003 was 2.1% based on LIBOR plus 95 basis points. Upon entering into the swap, the interest rate was fixed, assuming no change to our debt rating, at 3.351% on notional amounts totaling $150 million through October 2006. On the January 2004 hedge, we are exposed to credit loss in the event of non-performance by the counterparty to the interest rate protection agreement should interest rates exceed the cap. However, management does not anticipate non-performance by the counterparty. The counterparty has a long-term debt rating of A by Standard and Poors Ratings Service and A1 by Moodys Investors Service as of December 31, 2004. Although our swap is not exchange traded, there are a number of financial institutions which enter into these types of transactions as part of their day-to-day activities. The swap has been documented as a cash flow hedge and designated as effective at inception of the swap contract. Consequently, the unrealized gain or loss upon measuring the swap at its fair value is recorded as a component of other comprehensive income within shareholders equity and either a derivative instrument asset or liability is recorded on the balance sheet.
The two remaining hedging instruments involved an interest rate swap associated with our 6.99% Medium Term Notes and an interest rate lock purchased in 2002 in connection with our 6.125% Notes and are described in more detail in Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk Interest Rate Hedging.
40
Liquidity Requirements
Our short-term liquidity requirements consist primarily of obligations under our capital and operating leases, normal recurring operating expenses, regular debt service requirements (including debt service relating to additional or replacement debt, as well as scheduled debt maturities), recurring trust expenditures, non-recurring trust expenditures (such as tenant improvements and redevelopments) and dividends to common and preferred shareholders. Overall capital requirements in 2004 and 2005 will depend upon acquisition opportunities, the level of improvements and redevelopments on existing properties and the timing and cost of future phases of Santana Row. To the extent that we require additional funds to meet our capital requirements, and normal recurring operating costs, we expect to fund these amounts from one or more of the following sources:
Our long-term capital requirements consist primarily of maturities under our long-term debt, development and redevelopment costs and potential acquisition opportunities. We expect to fund these through a combination of sources which we believe will be available to us, including additional and replacement secured and unsecured borrowings, issuance of additional equity, joint venture relationships relating to existing properties or new acquisitions and property dispositions.
The following factors could affect our ability to meet our liquidity requirements:
REIT Qualification
We intend to maintain our qualification as a REIT under Section 856(c) of the Code. As a REIT, we generally will not be subject to corporate federal income taxes as long as we satisfy certain technical requirements of the Code, including the requirement to distribute 90% of our REIT taxable income to our shareholders.
Funds From Operations
Funds FFO is a supplemental non-GAAP financial measure of real estate companies operating performance NAREIT defines FFO as follows: net income, computed in accordance with the U.S. GAAP, plus depreciation and amortization of real estate assets and excluding extraordinary items and gains on the sale of real estate. We compute FFO in accordance with the NAREIT definition, and we have historically reported our FFO available for common shareholders in addition to our net income and net cash provided by operating activities. It should be noted that FFO:
41
We consider FFO available for common shareholders a meaningful, additional measure of operating performance primarily because it excludes the assumption that the value of the real estate assets diminishes predictably over time, as implied by the historical cost convention of GAAP and the recording of depreciation. We use FFO primarily as one of several means of assessing our operating performance in comparison with other REITs. Comparison of our presentation of FFO to similarly titled measures for other REITs may not necessarily be meaningful due to possible differences in the application of the NAREIT definition used by such REITs.
An increase or decrease in FFO available for common shareholders does not necessarily result in an increase or decrease in aggregate distributions because our Board of Trustees is not required to increase distributions on a quarterly basis unless necessary for us to maintain REIT status. However, we must distribute 90% of our REIT taxable income (as defined in the Code) to remain qualified as a REIT. Therefore, a significant increase in FFO will generally require an increase in distributions to shareholders although not necessarily on a proportionate basis.
(Gain) on sale of real estate
Weighted average number of common shares, diluted
Funds from operations available for common shareholders, per diluted share
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
Our use of financial instruments, such as debt instruments, subjects us to market risk which may affect our future earnings and cash flows, as well as the fair value of our assets. Market risk generally refers to the risk of loss from changes in interest rates and market prices. We manage our market risk by attempting to match anticipated inflow of cash from our operating, investing and financing activities with anticipated outflow of cash to fund debt payments, dividends to common and preferred shareholders, investments, capital expenditures and other cash requirements. We also enter into certain types of derivative financial instruments to further reduce interest rate risk. We use interest rate protection and swap agreements, for example, to convert some of our variable rate debt to a fixed-rate basis or to hedge anticipated financing transactions. We use derivatives for hedging purposes rather than speculation and do not enter into financial instruments for trading purposes.
Interest Rate Risk
The following discusses the effect of hypothetical changes in market rates of interest on interest expense for variable rate debt and on the fair value of total outstanding debt, including our fixed-rate debt. Interest risk amounts were determined by considering the impact of hypothetical interest rates on our debt. This analysis does not purport to take into account all of the factors that may affect our debt, such as the effect that a changing interest rate environment could have on the overall level of economic activity or the action that our management likely would take to reduce our exposure to the change. This analysis assumes no change in our financial structure.
Fixed Interest Rate Debt. The majority of our outstanding debt obligations (maturing at various times through 2028 or through 2077 including capital lease obligations) have fixed interest rates which limit the risk of
42
fluctuating interest rates. Interest rate fluctuations may affect the fair value of our fixed rate debt instruments, however. At December 31, 2004 we had $1.1 billion of fixed-rate debt outstanding. If interest rates on our fixed-rate debt instruments at December 31, 2004 had been 1.0% higher, the fair value of those debt instruments on that date would have decreased by approximately $11.4 million. If interest rates on our fixed-rate debt instruments at December 31, 2004 had been 1.0% lower, the fair value of those debt instruments on that date would have increased by approximately $11.4 million.
Variable Interest Rate Debt. We believe that our primary interest rate risk is due to fluctuations in interest rates on our variable rate debt. At December 31, 2004, we had $164.4 million of variable rate debt outstanding. Based upon this balance of variable rate debt, if interest rates increased 1.0%, our interest expense would increase by approximately $1.6 million, and our net income and cash flows for the year would decrease by approximately $1.6 million. If interest rates decreased 1.0%, our interest expense would decrease by approximately $1.6 million, and our net income and cash flows for the year would increase by approximately $1.6 million.
Our objective in using derivatives is to add stability to interest expense and to manage our exposure to interest rate movements or other identified risks. We use derivative financial instruments to convert a portion of our variable rate debt to fixed rate debt and to manage our fixed to variable rate debt ratio.
Cash Flow Hedging. To accomplish this objective, the Company primarily uses interest rate swaps as part of its cash flow hedging strategy. Interest rate swaps designated as cash flow hedges involve the payment of fixed rate amounts in exchange for variable rate payments over the life of the agreements without exchange of the underlying principal amount. During the year ended December 31, 2004, these derivatives were used to hedge the variable cash flows associated with existing variable rate debt. As of December 31, 2004, the Company had entered into three cash flow hedge agreements, which are accounted for in conformity with SFAS No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, as amended by SFAS No. 138, Accounting for Certain Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activitiesan Amendment of FASB Statement No. 133.
A more detailed description of these derivative financial instruments is contained in Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of OperationsLiquidity and Capital ResourcesInterest Rate Hedging.
Hedging of Unsecured Notes. We have entered into several interest rate swaps or interest rate locks that hedged certain unsecured notes. In January 2004, to hedge our exposure to interest rates on the $150 million five-year term loan, we entered into an interest rate swap, which fixed the LIBOR portion of the interest rate on the term loan at 2.401% through October 2006. The interest rate on the term loan as of December 31, 2003 was 2.1% based on LIBOR plus 95 basis points. The current interest rate, taking into account the swap, is 3.351% (2.401% plus 0.95%) on notional amounts totaling $150 million.
In anticipation of a $150 million Senior Unsecured Note offering, on August 1, 2002, we entered into a treasury lock that fixed the benchmark five year treasury rate at 3.472% through August 19, 2002. The rate lock was documented as a cash flow hedge of a forecasted transaction and designated as effective at the inception of the contract. On August 16, 2002, we priced the Senior Unsecured Notes with a scheduled closing date of August 21, 2002 and closed out the associated rate lock. Five-year treasury rates declined between the pricing period and the settlement of the hedge purchase; therefore, to settle the rate lock, we paid $1.5 million. As a result of the August 19, 2002 fire at Santana Row, we were not able to proceed with the note offering at that time. However, we consummated a $150 million Senior Unsecured Note offering on November 15, 2002, and thus, the hedge loss is being amortized into interest expense over the life of the related Notes.
We also purchased an interest rate swap with a face amount of $40.5 million upon issuance of our 6.99% Medium Term Notes, which reduced the effective interest rate from 6.99% to 6.894%.
43
Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data
Index to Consolidated Financial Statements
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm on Internal Controls
Management Assessment Report on Internal Controls
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
Consolidated Balance Sheets
Consolidated Statements of Operations
Consolidated Statements of Common Shareholders Equity
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
Financial Statement Schedules
Schedule III Summary of Real Estate and Accumulated Depreciation
Schedule IV Mortgage Loans on Real Estate
44
Trustees and shareholders of Federal Realty Investment Trust
We have audited managements assessment, included in the accompanying Management Assessment Report on Internal Controls, that Federal Realty Investment Trust (a Maryland real estate investment trust) and subsidiaries (the Trust) maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2004, based on criteria established in Internal Control Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). The Trusts management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on managements assessment and an opinion on the effectiveness of the Trusts internal control over financial reporting based on our audit.
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, evaluating managements assessment, testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control, and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinions.
An organizations internal control over financial reporting is a process designed 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. An organizations 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 organization; (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 organization are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the organization; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the organizations assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that 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, managements assessment that the Trust maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2004, is fairly stated, in all material respects, based on Internal Control Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Also in our opinion, the Trust maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2004, based on Internal Control Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).
We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheets of the Trust and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2004 and 2003, and the related consolidated statements of operations, common shareholders equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2004, and our report dated March 2, 2005, expressed an unqualified opinion on those financial statements.
/s/ GRANT THORNTON LLP
Vienna, Virginia
March 2, 2005
F-1
The management of Federal Realty is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting. Establishing and maintaining internal control over financial reporting is a process designed by, or under the supervision of, our President and Chief Executive officer and Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate, and effected by our employees, including management and our board of trustees, 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. This process includes policies and procedures that:
Management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, do not expect that our internal control over financial reporting will prevent all errors and fraud. In designing and evaluating our control system, management recognized that any control system, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance of achieving the desired control objectives. Further, the design of a control system must reflect the fact that there are resource constraints, and management necessarily was required to apply its judgment in evaluating the cost-benefit relationship of possible controls and procedures. Because of the inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that all control issues and instances of fraud, if any, that may affect our operation have been detected. These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty, and that breakdowns can occur because of simple error or mistake. Additionally, controls can be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more people, or by managements override of the control. The design of any system of controls also is based in part upon certain assumptions about the likelihood of future events, and there can be no assurance that any design will succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future conditions.
Management conducted an assessment of the effectiveness of the Trusts internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2004. In making this assessment, it used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) in Internal Control Integrated Framework. Based on this assessment, management concluded that our internal control over financial reporting is effective based on those criteria, as of the end of our most recent fiscal year.
Federal Realtys independent registered public accounting firm have issued an attestation report on managements assessment of our internal control over financial reporting. This report appears on page F-1.
F-2
Trustees and Shareholders of Federal Realty Investment Trust
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Federal Realty Investment Trust (a Maryland real estate investment trust) and subsidiaries (the Trust) as of December 31, 2004 and 2003, and the related consolidated statements of operations, common shareholders equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2004. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Trusts management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.
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 audits 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 provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of Federal Realty Investment Trust and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2004 and 2003, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2004 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
Our audits were conducted for the purpose of forming an opinion on the basic consolidated financial statements taken as a whole. The Schedules III and IV are presented for the purposes of additional analysis and are not a required part of the basic consolidated financial statements. These schedules have been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic consolidated financial statements and, in our opinion, are fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the basic consolidated financial statements taken as a whole.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the effectiveness of the Trusts internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2004, based on criteria established in Internal ControlIntegrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO), and our report dated March 2, 2005, expressed an unqualified opinion.
F-3
Federal Realty Investment Trust
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
ASSETS
Real estate, at cost
Operating
Less accumulated depreciation and amortization
Net real estate investments
Cash and cash equivalents
Accounts and notes receivable
Mortgage notes receivable
Investment in real estate partnership
Prepaid expenses and other assets
Debt issuance costs, net of accumulated amortization of $5,549, and $3,111, respectively
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY
Liabilities
Mortgages payable
Obligations under capital leases
Accounts payable and accrued expenses
Dividends payable
Security deposits payable
Other liabilities and deferred credits
Total liabilities
Preferred stock, authorized 15,000,000 shares, $.01 par:
8.5% Series B Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Shares, (stated at liquidation preference $25 per share), 5,400,000 shares issued in 2001
Common shares of beneficial interest, $.01 par, 100,000,000 shares authorized, 53,616,827 and 50,670,851 issued, respectively
Additional paid in capital
Accumulated dividends in excess of Trust net income
Less:
1,480,202 and 1,470,275 common shares in treasuryat cost, respectively
Deferred compensation on restricted shares
Notes receivable from employee stock plans
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)
Total shareholders equity
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated statements.
F-4
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
Revenue
Expenses
Rental
Restructuring
Operating income
Results from discontinued operations
EARNINGS PER COMMON SHARE, BASIC
Income from continuing operations available for common shareholders
Income from discontinued operations
Weighted average number of common shares, basic
EARNINGS PER COMMON SHARE, DILUTED
F-5
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMMON SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY
Additional
Paid-inCapital
Common shares of beneficial interest
Balance, beginning of year
Exercise of stock options
Shares issued under dividend reinvestment plan
Performance and restricted shares granted, net of restricted shares retired
Reclassification for preferred stock redemption
Issuance of shares in public offering
Shares issued to purchase operating partnership units
Accelerated vesting of options and restricted shares
Shares issued to purchase partnership interest
Stock compensation associated with variable accounting
Balance, end of period
Dividends declared to common shareholders
Preferred share dividends and redemption costs
Common shares of beneficial interest in Treasury
Performance and restricted shares forfeited
Performance and restricted shares issued, net of forfeitures
Vesting of performance and restricted shares
Subscriptions receivable from employee stock plans
Subscription loans issued
Subscription loans paid
Change due to recognizing (loss) gain on securities
Change in valuation on interest rate swap
Loss on interest rate hedge transaction
Comprehensive income
Change due to recognizing loss on securities
Total comprehensive income
F-6
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
OPERATING ACTIVITIES
Items not requiring cash outlays
Depreciation and amortization, including discontinued operations
Equity in income from real estate partnership
Non-cash portion of restructuring expense
Other, net
Changes in assets and liabilities
Increase in accounts and notes receivable
Increase in prepaid expenses and other assets
Increase in accounts payable, security deposits and prepaid rent
Increase in accrued expenses
Net cash provided by operating activities
INVESTING ACTIVITIES
Acquisition of real estate
Capital expendituresdevelopment and redevelopment
Capital expendituresother
Santana Row fire insurance proceeds reducing cost basis
Proceeds from sale of real estate
(Issuance) repayment of mortgage notes receivable, net
Net cash used in investing activities
FINANCING ACTIVITIES
Net (repayment) borrowings under revolving credit facility
Repayment of construction financing, net of costs
Issuance of notes, net of costs
Issuance of senior debentures
Repayment of senior debentures
Repayment of mortgages, capital leases and notes payable, net
Redemption of Series A preferred shares
Issuance of common shares
Dividends paid
Decrease of minority interests, net
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities
(Decrease) increase in cash
Cash, beginning of year
Cash, end of year
F-7
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002
NOTE 1. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Federal Realty Investment Trust (the Trust) is an equity real estate investment trust specializing in the ownership, management, development and redevelopment of high quality community and neighborhood shopping centers and main street mixed-use properties located primarily in densely developed urban and suburban areas in strategic metropolitan markets in the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast regions and California.
We operate in a manner intended to enable us to qualify as a real estate investment trust for federal income tax purposes. A trust which distributes at least 90% of its real estate investment trust taxable income to its shareholders each year and which meets certain other conditions will not be taxed on that portion of its taxable income which is distributed to its shareholders. Therefore, federal income taxes have been and are generally expected to be immaterial. We are obligated to pay state taxes, generally consisting of franchise or gross receipts taxes in certain states. Such state taxes have not been material.
Our consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Trust, its corporate subsidiaries, and numerous partnerships and limited liability companies, which we control. The equity interests of other investors are reflected as minority interests. All significant intercompany transactions and balances are eliminated in consolidation. We account for our interests in joint ventures, which we do not control or manage, using the equity method of accounting.
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, referred to as GAAP, requires management to make estimates and assumptions that in certain circumstances affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities, and revenues and expenses. These estimates are prepared using managements best judgment, after considering past, current and expected events and economic conditions. Actual results could differ from these estimates.
Revenue Recognition and Accounts Receivable. Our leases with tenants are classified as operating leases. Minimum rents are recognized on a straight-line basis over the terms of the related leases net of valuation adjustments based on managements assessment of credit, collection and other business risk. Percentage rents, which represent additional rents based on gross tenant sales, are recognized at the end of the lease year or other period in which we have determined that tenants sales thresholds have been reached and the percentage rents are collectible. Real estate tax and other cost reimbursements are recognized on an accrual basis over the periods in which the expenditures occurred. We make estimates of the collectibility of our accounts receivable related to base rents, including straight line rentals, expense reimbursements and other revenue or income. In some cases the ultimate collectibility of these claims extends beyond one year. We generally do not recognize income from straight-line rents due beyond ten years due to uncertainty of collection. At December 31, 2004 and December 31, 2003 our allowance for doubtful accounts was $7.6 million and $8.5 million, respectively.
Real Estate. Land, buildings and real estate under development are recorded at cost. Depreciation is computed using the straight-line method. Estimated useful lives range generally from 35 years to a maximum of 50 years on buildings and improvements. Maintenance and repair costs are charged to operations as incurred. Tenant work and other major improvements are capitalized and depreciated over the life of the related lease or their estimated useful life, respectively. Upon termination of a lease, undepreciated tenant improvement costs are charged to operations if the assets are replaced and the asset and the corresponding accumulated depreciation are retired. Minor improvements, furniture and equipment are capitalized and depreciated over useful lives ranging from three to 15 years. In accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (SFAS) No. 66, Accounting for Sales of Real Estate, sales are recognized at closing only when sufficient down payments have
F-8
been obtained, possession and other attributes of ownership have been transferred to the buyer and we have no significant continuing involvement. The gain or loss resulting from the sale of properties is included in net income at the time of sale.
In accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (SFAS) No. 141, Business Combinations our methodology of allocating the cost of acquisitions to assets acquired and liabilities assumed is based on estimated fair values, replacement cost and appraised values. When we acquire operating real estate properties, the purchase price is allocated to land and buildings, intangibles such as values of individual leases in place at the time of acquisition and to current assets and liabilities acquired, if any. The value allocated to in place leases is amortized over the original lease term and reflected as rental income in the statement of operations.
When applicable as lessee, we classify our leases of land and buildings as operating or capital leases in accordance with the provisions of SFAS No. 13, Accounting for Leases.
Certain external and internal costs directly related to the development, redevelopment and leasing of real estate including applicable salaries and their related direct costs are capitalized in accordance with GAAP. The capitalized costs associated with developments, redevelopments and leasing are depreciated or amortized over the life of the improvement or lease, whichever is shorter. Unamortized leasing costs are charged to operations if the applicable tenant vacates before the expiration of its lease.
Interest costs on developments and major redevelopments are capitalized as part of the development and redevelopment until it is placed in service. Capitalization of interest commences when development activities and expenditures begin and end upon completion, i.e. when the asset is ready for its intended use. Generally, rental property is considered substantially complete and ready for its intended use upon completion of tenant improvements, but no later than one year from the completion of major construction activity.
In August 2001, the FASB issued SFAS No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets (effective for us on January 1, 2002). SFAS No. 144 requires that one accounting model be used for long-lived assets to be disposed of by sale, whether previously held and used or newly-acquired, and broadens the presentation of discontinued operations to include components of an entity comprising operations and cash flows that can be distinguished, operationally and for financial reporting purposes from the rest of the entity.
In June 2002, the FASB issued SFAS No. 146, Accounting for Costs Associated with Exit or Disposal Activities, which addresses accounting and processing for costs associated with exit or disposal activities. SFAS No. 146 requires the recognition of a liability for a cost associated with an exit or disposal activity when the liability is incurred versus the date the Trust commits to an exit plan. In addition, SFAS No. 146 states that the liability should be initially measured at fair value. The requirements of SFAS No. 146 are effective for exit or disposal activities that are initiated after December 31, 2002. This pronouncement has not had a material impact on our financial position or results of operations.
Cash and Cash Equivalents. We define cash as cash on hand, demand deposits with financial institutions and short term liquid investments with an initial maturity under three months. Cash balances in individual banks may exceed insurable amounts.
Prepaid Expenses and Other Assets. Consists primarily of lease commissions and property taxes. Also included are the premiums paid for split dollar life insurance covering several officers and former officers which were approximately $4.4 million and $3.8 million at December 31, 2004 and December 31, 2003.
Debt Issue Costs. Costs related to the issuance of debt instruments are capitalized and are amortized as interest expense over the life of the related issue using the effective interest method. Upon conversion or in the event of early redemption, any unamortized costs are expensed.
F-9
Risk Management. We enter into derivative contracts, which qualify as cash flow hedges under SFAS No. 133 Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, in order to manage interest rate risk. Derivatives are not purchased for speculation. There were no open derivative contracts at December 31, 2003. In January 2004, to hedge our exposure to interest rates on our $150 million five-year term loan issued in October 2003, we entered into interest rate swaps, which fixed the LIBOR portion of the interest rate on the term loan at 2.401% through October 2006.
Acquisition, Development and Construction Loan Arrangements. We have made certain mortgage loans that, because of their nature, qualify as loan receivables. At the time the loans were made, we did not intend for the arrangement to be anything other than a financing and did not contemplate a real estate investment. Using guidance set forth in the Third Notice to Practitioners issued by the AICPA in February 1986 entitled ADC Arrangements (the Third Notice), we evaluate each investment to determine whether the loan arrangement qualifies under the Third Notice as a loan, joint venture or real estate investment and the appropriate accounting thereon. Such determination affects our balance sheet classification of these investments and the recognition of interest income derived therefrom. Generally, we receive additional interest on these loans, however we never receive in excess of 50% of the residual profit in the project (as defined in the Third Notice) and because the borrower has either a substantial investment in the project or has guaranteed all or a portion of our loan (or a combination thereof) the loans qualify for loan accounting. The amounts under ADC arrangements at December 31, 2004 and 2003 were $42.9 million and $41.5 million respectively and interest income recognized thereon was $4.9 million and $4.1 million, respectively.
Comprehensive Income. Our interest rate swaps were documented as cash flow hedges and designated as effective at inception of the swap contract, therefore, the unrealized gain or loss upon measuring the swaps at their fair market value is recorded as a component of other comprehensive income within shareholders equity. In accordance with SFAS No. 115, Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities, investments purchased in connection with our nonqualified deferred compensation plan are classified as available for sale securities and reported at fair value. Unrealized gains or losses on these investments purchased to match our obligation to the participants is also recorded as a component of other comprehensive income. At December 31, 2004 these investments consisted of mutual funds and are stated at market value.
Earnings Per Share. We calculate basic and diluted earnings per share in accordance with SFAS No. 128, Earnings Per Share. Basic EPS excludes dilution and is computed by dividing net income available for common shareholders by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding for the period. Diluted EPS reflects the potential dilution that could occur if securities or other contracts to issue common shares were exercised or converted into common shares and then shared in our earnings. In 2004 the inclusion of operating partnership units had an anti-dilutive effect upon the calculation of income from continuing operations per share. Accordingly, the impact of these 709,700 units have not been included in the determination of diluted earnings per share calculations.
F-10
The following table sets forth the reconciliation between basic and diluted EPS:
Income for calculation of basic earnings per share
Less: Preferred stock dividends
Less: Preferred stock redemption costs
Net income available for common shareholders, basic
Basic Earnings Per Share
Income for calculation of diluted earnings per share
Income from continuing operations for diluted earnings per share
Net income available for common shareholders, diluted
Effect of dilutive securities
Stock option awards
Operating partnership units
Diluted earnings per share
F-11
Stock-Based Compensation. In December 2002 the FASB issued SFAS No. 148, Accounting for Stock Based Compensation-Transition and Disclosure as an amendment of FASB Statement No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation. SFAS No. 148 amends the disclosure provisions to require prominent disclosure about the effects on reported net income of an entitys accounting policy decisions with respect to stock-based compensation. Stock options are accounted for using the intrinsic method in accordance with APB No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees, as interpreted, whereby if options are priced at fair market value or above at the date of grant and the number of shares is fixed or certain, no compensation expense is recognized. In addition, certain of our stock-based compensation arrangements provide for performance-based vesting which calls for the use of variable plan accounting whereby compensation expense is periodically recorded for the intrinsic value of vested shares. Historically, compensation arising from such arrangements has not been material to operations. In November 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued FASB No. 123(R) which changes the accounting required for stock options. FASB No. 123(R) is required to be implemented in fiscal quarters which begin after June 15, 2005. When implemented by the Trust, we estimate the impact to be a reduction of net income of $0.2 million and $0.4 million in fiscal 2005 and 2006, respectively.
The pro forma information required under SFAS No. 148 is as follows:
Net income, as reported
Stock-based employee compensation cost included in net income
Stock-based employee compensation cost under the fair value method of SFAS No. 123, net of tax
Pro Forma Net IncomeBasic
Earnings Per Share:
Basic, as reported
Basic, pro forma
Net income available for common shareholdersdiluted
Pro Forma Net IncomeDiluted
Diluted, as reported
Diluted, pro forma
Reclassifications. Certain components of rental income, other property income, rental expense, real estate tax expense and depreciation and amortization on the December 31, 2002 Consolidated Statements of Operations have been reclassified to operating income from discontinued operations to assure comparability of all periods presented. In addition, certain income statement accounts and balance sheet accounts have been reclassified to assure comparability of all periods presented.
Redemption of preferred stock. On June 13, 2003, we redeemed our $100 million 7.95% Series A Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Shares at their face value. The original issuance costs of $3.4 million were charged to shareholders equity in 1997, when the shares were issued. On July 31, 2003, the Emerging Issues Task Force provided clarification on the treatment of the difference between the redemption value and the carrying value, adjusting for issuance costs, for GAAP financial reporting. As a result of this change in accounting presentation, our Consolidated Statement of Operations for the year ended December 31, 2003 reflects a charge of $3.4 million in Preferred stock redemption costs as a reduction of net income in computing net income available for common shareholders.
F-12
Variable Interest Entities. In January 2003, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued FASB Interpretation No. 46 (revised December 2003) (FIN 46-R), Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities. FIN 46-R clarifies the application of Accounting Research Bulletin 51, Consolidated Financial Statements, for certain entities that do not have sufficient equity at risk for the entity to finance its activities without additional subordinated financial support from other parties or in which equity investors do not have the characteristics of a controlling financial interest (variable interest entities). Variable interest entities within the scope of FIN 46-R will be required to be consolidated by their primary beneficiary. The primary beneficiary of a variable interest entity is determined to be the party that absorbs a majority of the entitys expected losses, receives a majority of its expected returns, or both. We have evaluated the applicability of FIN 46-R to our investments in certain restaurant joint ventures at Santana Row and our joint venture with Clarion Lion Properties Fund and determined that these joint ventures do not meet the requirements of a variable interest entity and, therefore, consolidation of these ventures is not required. Accordingly, these investments will continue to be accounted for using the equity method. We have also evaluated the applicability of FIN 46-R to our mortgage loans receivable and determined that they are not variable interest entities. Accordingly, these loans will continue to be accounted for as mortgage notes receivable rather than equity investments. The adoption of FIN 46-R did not have a material impact on our financial position or results of operations.
As of December 31, 2004, we have invested approximately $8.1 million in the restaurant joint ventures, principally to fund buildout costs of each restaurant. Of this amount, $6.8 million has been capitalized as an investment in these ventures and $1.3 million was expensed in 2002 to reflect our estimate of the permanent impairment of our investment in two of these ventures due principally to declining economic conditions. During 2004 and 2003, respectively, we recognized $1.1 million in income and $0.2 million in loss from restaurant joint ventures and received distributions of $2.0 million and $0.6 million. We are currently committed to invest a total of $11 million in these ventures and as such, our maximum exposure to further losses as a result of involvement in these ventures is $9.7 million at December 31, 2004.
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 149. In April 2003, the FASB issued SFAS No. 149, Amendment of Statement 133 on Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities which clarifies the accounting and reporting for derivative instruments. The statement is effective for contracts entered into or modified after June 30, 2003. The adoption of SFAS 149 did not have a material effect on the Trusts financial statements.
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 150. In May 2003, the FASB issued SFAS No 150 Accounting for Certain Financial Instruments with Characteristics of Both Liabilities and Equity. SFAS No. 150 addresses the classification and measurement of freestanding financial instruments, including mandatorily redeemable preferred and common stock, and requires an issuer to classify certain instruments as liabilities. The adoption of SFAS No. 150 did not have material effect on the Trusts financial Statements.
F-13
NOTE 2. REAL ESTATE AND ENCUMBRANCES
A summary of our real estate investments at December 31, 2004 and 2003 is as follows:
Retail and mixed-use properties
Retail properties under capital leases
Residential
Retail and mixed-use properties includes the residential portion of our Santana Row development property. The residential property investments comprised our investments in Rollingwood Apartments and Crest Apartments at Congressional Plaza.
Real Estate Transactions2004
On March 31, 2004, we acquired Westgate Mall, a 637,000 square foot shopping center located in San Jose, California. The purchase price of the property of $97.0 million was paid from borrowings under our revolving credit facility, which were subsequently repaid from the proceeds of our April 2004 common equity offering. Approximately $1.7 million of the net assets acquired were allocated to prepaids and other assets for above-market leases, while $18.0 million was allocated to other liabilities and deferred credits for below-market leases, to account for the fair value assigned to the assumed leases at the property as non-cash transaction. Amounts associated with above and below market leases are amortized over the related lease terms. Amortization is included in rental income on the consolidated statement of operations.
On June 3, 2004, we sold a parcel of land at the Village at Shirlington in Arlington, Virginia, for $4.9 million. This transaction was related to a previous land sale to Arlington County for $0.3 million, which closed in March 2004. The combined transactions resulted in a net gain of $2.8 million.
In July 2004, at a contribution value of approximately $20.6 million, we contributed Plaza del Mercado to a newly formed joint venture in exchange for a 30% ownership interest and $18.6 million of proceeds. The joint venture simultaneously financed the property with a $13.3 million 10-year secured loan. We recognized a gain of $0.1 million on this transaction.
On August 12, 2004 we closed on a land exchange with Arlington County, Virginia. The exchange of one-acre parcels at the Village at Shirlington occurred in order to facilitate future redevelopment at the property.
On September 16, 2004 we sold 3.1 acres of land at the Village at Shirlington in Arlington, Virginia in two separate transactions for a total of $2.8 million, resulting in a gain of $0.9 million.
F-14
On September 30, 2004 we paid $2.3 million to purchase 10% of the partnership interests in Street Retail West 6, LP, giving us 100% ownership of 140-168 W. Colorado located in Pasadena, California.
On October 1, 2004 we paid $0.8 million to purchase 15% of the partnership interests in Street Retail Tempe, LLC, giving us 100% ownership of 501 South Mill located in Tempe, Arizona.
On October 12, 2004 we purchased Shaws Plaza, located in Carver, Massachusetts for $4.0 million. The allocation of the purchase price to assets acquired resulting in no value being allocated to above-market leases or below-market leases.
On November 10, 2004 we issued 40,201 of our common shares in a non-cash transaction to purchase 10% of the partnership interests in Street Retail West 10, LP, giving us 100% ownership of 214 Wilshire Boulevard, located in Santa Monica, California.
On December 15, 2004 we sold one building on West Hartford, Connecticut and two buildings in Avon, Connecticut for a total of $11.2 million, resulting in a gain of approximately $3.6 million.
Results of properties sold constitute discontinued operations and as such, the accompanying financial statements have been restated to reclassify the operations of these properties as discontinued operations. A summary of the financial information for the discontinued operations is as follows:
Revenue from discontinued operations
Income from operations of discontinued operations
Mortgages payable and capital lease obligations are due in installments over various terms extending to 2028 and 2060, respectively, with interest rates ranging from 3.14% to 11.25%. Certain of the capital lease obligations require additional interest payments based upon property performance.
The following is a summary of mortgages payable as of December 31, 2004:
Principal Balanceas of
December 31, 2003
Mortgage Loans
164 E. Houston St.
Mount Vernon
F-15
Scheduled principal payments on mortgage loan indebtedness as of December 31, 2004 are as follows:
Future minimum lease payments and their present value for property under capital leases as of December 31, 2004, are as follows:
Less amount representing interest
Present value
Our 106 retail properties at December 31, 2004 are located in 14 states and the District of Columbia. There are approximately 2,200 tenants providing a wide range of retail products and services. These tenants range from sole proprietorships to national retailers; no one tenant or corporate group of tenants accounts for more than 2.3% of annualized base rent.
Our leases with commercial property and residential tenants are classified as operating leases. Leases on apartments are generally for a period of one year or less. Commercial property leases generally range from three to ten years (certain leases with anchor tenants may be longer), and in addition to minimum rents, usually provide for contingent rentals based on the tenants gross sales and sharing of certain operating costs.
Minimum future commercial property rentals on noncancelable operating leases, before any reserve for uncollectible amounts, on operating properties as of December 31, 2004 are as follows:
Year ending December 31,
F-16
Income Statement Components
The principal components of rental income are as follows:
Minimum rents
Retail and commercial
Cost reimbursement
Percentage rent
Total rental income
The income statement adjustment recorded to recognize rent on a straight-line basis was an increase to minimum rents of $3.6 million, $1.9 million and $1.3 million for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. In addition, minimum rents includes $1.6 million and $0.3 million to recognize income for market lease adjustments in accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 141 for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively.
The principal components of rental expense are as follows:
Repairs and maintenance
Utilities
Management fees and costs
Insurance
Payrollproperties
Ground rent
NOTE 3. MORTGAGE NOTES RECEIVABLE
Mortgage notes receivable of $42.9 million are due over various terms from March 2005 to May 2021 and have a weighted average interest rate of 11.25%. Under the terms of certain of these mortgages, we will receive additional interest based upon the gross income of the secured properties and, upon sale of the properties, we will share in the appreciation of the properties. The carrying value of mortgage notes receivable was reduced in 2004 with an allowance for collectibility of $4.4 million. For one mortgagee note, the mortgage can accrue up to an additional $3.1 million of unpaid interest under the mortgage.
On February 1, 2002, we redeemed the minority partners interest in Santana Row in exchange for a $2.6 million investment in a partnership. We made a $5.9 million loan to the partnership in January 2001 that was due February 28, 2003 but was not repaid on the due date. The loan was renegotiated with an interest rate of 6.0%. The loan is secured by an office building in San Francisco, California and is due to mature on March 31, 2005. Interest on the loan is current through December 31, 2004 and based in part on the value of the underlying collateral, we believe the loan is collectible and as such, no reserve has been established at this time.
F-17
NOTE 4. REAL ESTATE PARTNERSHIP
In July 2004, we entered into a joint venture arrangement (the Partnership) by forming a limited partnership with affiliates of Clarion Lion Properties Fund (Clarion), a discretionary fund created and advised by ING Clarion Partners. We own 30% of the equity in the Partnership, and Clarion owns 70%. The Partnership plans to acquire up to $350 million of stabilized, supermarket-anchored shopping centers in the Trusts East and West regions. Federal Realty and Clarion have committed to contribute to the Partnership up to $42 million and $98 million, respectively, of equity capital to acquire properties through June 2006. Initially Clarion contributed $5.3 million in cash to the Partnership, and we contributed Plaza del Mercado, a shopping center in Montgomery County, Maryland, which we acquired in 2003, at a contribution value of approximately $20.6 million. Concurrently with the contribution of Plaza del Mercado, the Partnership obtained a $13.3 million, 10-year loan secured by the property, and we received proceeds of $18.6 million. We are the manager of the Partnership and its properties, earning fees for acquisitions, management, leasing, and financing. We also have the opportunity to receive performance-based earnings through our Partnership interest. In 2004, the Partnership acquired three shopping centers in the East for $55.2 million. We account for our interest in the Partnership using the equity method, as described in Note 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies Variable Interest Entities. In total, at December 31, 2004, the partnership had $47.2 million of mortgage notes outstanding.
The following are the summarized financial results from inception (July 1, 2004) to December 31, 2004 and the financial position of the Partnership as of December 31, 2004:
Period Ended
Other operating expenses
As of
Other assets
Other liabilities
Partners capital
Total liabilities and partners capital
For the loans secured by Plaza del Mercado, Campus Plaza and Pleasant Shops, we are the guarantor for the obligations of the joint venture, which are commonly referred to as non-recourse carve-outs. We are not guaranteeing repayment of the debt itself. The Partnership indemnifies us for any loss we incur under these guarantees.
F-18
NOTE 5. FAIR VALUE OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS
The following disclosure of estimated fair value was determined by us, using available market information and appropriate valuation methods. Considerable judgment is necessary to develop estimates of fair value. The estimates presented herein are not necessarily indicative of the amounts that could be realized upon disposition of the financial instruments.
We estimate the fair value of our financial instruments using the following methods and assumptions: (1) quoted market prices, when available, are used to estimate the fair value of investments in marketable debt and equity securities; (2) quoted market prices were used to estimate the fair value of our marketable convertible subordinated debentures; (3) discounted cash flow analyses are used to estimate the fair value of mortgage notes receivable and payable, using our estimate of current interest rates for similar notes in 2004, the carrying amount on the balance sheet was used to approximate fair value for mortgage notes receivable since these notes are for specific deals, some contain participation provisions based on the property performance and also are convertible into ownership of the properties; (4) carrying amounts on the balance sheet approximate fair value for cash, accounts payable, accrued expenses and short term borrowings. Notes receivable from officers are excluded from fair value estimation since they have been issued in connection with employee stock ownership programs.
Cash & equivalents
Investments
Mortgages and notes payable
Senior notes
NOTE 6. NOTES PAYABLE
Our notes payable consist of the following, as of December 31:
PrincipalBalance
as ofDecember 31,2003
December 31,2004
Maturity Date
Revolving credit facilities
Escondido (Municipal Bonds)
Loehmanns Redemption Note
We have a $550 million unsecured credit facility consisting of a $150 million five-year term loan, a $100 million three-year term loan, and a $300 million three-year revolving credit facility, with a one-year extension option. The term loans currently bear interest at LIBOR plus 95 basis points, while the revolving facility currently bears interest at LIBOR plus 75 basis points. The spread over LIBOR is subject to adjustment based on our credit rating.
F-19
In January 2004, to hedge our exposure to interest rate fluctuations on the $150 million five-year term loan, we entered into an interest rate swap, which fixed the LIBOR portion of the interest rate on the term loan at 2.401% through October 2006. The interest rate on the term loan as of December 31, 2003 was 2.1%, based on LIBOR plus 95 basis points. The current interest rate, taking into account the swap, is 3.351% (2.401% plus 0.95%) on notional amounts totaling $150 million.
The maximum amount drawn under these revolving credit facilities during 2004, 2003 and 2002 was $165.0 million, $215.0 million and $225.0 million, respectively. In 2004, 2003 and 2002, the weighted average interest rate on borrowings was 2.2%, 3.4% and 5.0%, respectively, and the average amount outstanding was $74.4 million, $96.9 million and $189.1 million, respectively. The facility requires us to comply with various financial covenants, including the maintenance of a minimum shareholders equity and a maximum ratio of debt to net worth. At December 31, 2004 we were in compliance with all loan covenants.
On September 27, 2004 we issued a note payable in the amount of $8.6 million. The note balance was paid in full on February 1, 2005. See Note 8. Commitments and Contingencies.
A more detailed description of our derivative instruments is contained below in Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk.
We have determined that our hedged derivatives qualify as effective cash-flow hedges under SFAS No. 133, resulting in our recording all changes in the fair value of the hedged derivatives in other comprehensive income. Amounts recorded in other comprehensive income will be reclassified into earnings in the period in which earnings are affected by the hedged cash flows. To adjust the hedged derivatives to their fair value, we recorded unrealized gains to other comprehensive income of $2.4 million and $3.6 million during the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. The estimated amount, included in accumulated other comprehensive income as of December 31, 2004, expected to be reclassified into earnings within the next twelve months to offset the variability of cash flows during this period, is not material.
We assess, both at inception and on an on-going basis, the effectiveness of all hedges in offsetting cash flows of hedged items. Hedge ineffectiveness did not have a material impact on earnings and we do not anticipate that it will have a material effect in the future. The fair values of the obligations under the hedged derivatives are included in prepaid expenses and other assets on the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets.
NOTE 7. SENIOR NOTES AND DEBENTURES
Unsecured senior notes and debentures at December 31, 2004 and 2003 consist of the following:
6.74% Medium-term notes due March 10, 2004
6.625% Notes due December 1, 2005
6.99% Medium-term notes due March 10, 2006
6.82% Medium-term notes due August 1, 2027, redeemable at par by holder August 1, 2007
6.125% Notes due November 15, 2007
7.48% Debentures due August 15, 2026, redeemable at par by holder August 15, 2008
8.75% Notes due December 1, 2009
4.5% Notes due February 15, 2011
Less: unamortized debt discount
F-20
These loan agreements contain various covenants, including limitations on the amount of debt and minimum debt service coverage ratios. We are in compliance with all covenants. No principal is due on these notes prior to maturity.
In October 2002, we filed a $500 million shelf registration statement, declared effective on November 6, 2002, with the Securities and Exchange Commission which allows the issuance of debt securities, preferred shares and common shares. As of December 31, 2004, $225 million was available under our shelf registration.
NOTE 8. DIVIDENDS
On December 14, 2004 the Trustees declared a quarterly cash dividend of $0.505 per common share, payable January 17, 2005 to common shareholders of record January 3, 2005. The total dividend declared per common share for 2004 was $1.975.
Also on December 14, 2004 the Trustees declared a quarterly cash dividend of $0.53125 per share on its Series B Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Shares, payable on January 31, 2005 to shareholders of record on January 17, 2005, respectively.
For the year ended December 31, 2004, $0.10 of dividends paid per common share represented a capital gain and $0.11 of dividends paid per Series B preferred share represented a capital gain. For the year ended December 31, 2003, $0.29 of dividends paid per common share represent a capital gain while $0.36 of dividends per Series B preferred share and $0.21 of dividends paid per Series A preferred share represented a capital gain.
NOTE 9. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
We are involved in various lawsuits and environmental matters arising in the normal course of business. Management believes that such matters will not have a material effect on our financial condition or results of operations.
We are committed to invest approximately $11.0 million in restaurant joint ventures at Santana Row, of which $8.1 million has been invested as of December 31, 2004. These restaurant joint ventures are accounted for using the equity method as described in Note 1. Summary of Significant Accounting PoliciesVariable Interest Entities.
Under the terms of the Congressional Plaza partnership agreement, from and after January 1, 1986, an unaffiliated third party has the right to require us and the two other minority partners to purchase between one-half to all of its 29.47% interest in Congressional Plaza at the interests then-current fair market value. Based on managements current estimate of fair market value as of December 31, 2004, our estimated maximum liability upon exercise of the put option would range from approximately $34 million to $38 million. In conjunction with the construction of the apartments at the property that were completed in 2003, 8.03% of the third partys interest in Congressional Plaza was re-allocated to us, effective January 1, 2004, thereby lowering the third partys ownership percentage from 37.50% to its current level of 29.47%, as a result of our having funded approximately $7 million of the third partys share of the redevelopment cost.
F-21
Under the terms of various other partnership agreements for entities, which own shopping center properties with a cost of approximately $88.5 million, the partners have the right to exchange their operating units for cash or the same number of our common shares, at our option. In 2004 we paid $399,000 to redeem 9,767 of these operating units and issued 203,130 of our common shares in non-cash transactions to redeem the same amount of units. As of December 31, 2004, a total of 449,325 operating units are outstanding.
On September 27, 2004, in a non-cash transaction, 190,000 operating units were redeemed by the issuance of a promissory note in the amount of $8.6 million. In connection with the issuance of that note, we issued to one of our subsidiaries 190,000 of our common shares, having a value of $8.6 million, which have been pledged as security for that note. On February 1, 2005 the shares were sold and the note balance of $8.6 million was paid in full.
Street Retail San Antonio LP, a wholly owned subsidiary of the Trust, entered into a Development Agreement (the Agreement) in 2000 with the City of San Antonio, Texas (the City) related to the redevelopment of land and buildings that we own along Houston Street. Under the Agreement, we are required to issue an annual letter of credit, commencing on October 1, 2002 and ending on September 30, 2014, that covers our designated portion of the debt service should the incremental tax revenue generated in the Zone not cover the debt service. We posted a letter of credit with the City on September 25, 2002 for $795,000, and the letter of credit remains outstanding. Our obligation under the Agreement is estimated to range from $1.6 million to $3.0 million. During the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, we funded approximately $434,000 and $360,000, respectively. In anticipation of further shortfalls of incremental tax revenues to the City, $700,000 remains accrued as of December 31, 2004 to cover additional payments we may be obligated to make as part of the project costs. Prior to the expiration of the Agreement on September 30, 2014, we could be required to provide funding beyond the $700,000 currently accrued. We do not anticipate, however, that our obligation would exceed $600,000 in any year or $3 million in total. If the Zone creates sufficient tax increment funding to repay the Citys debt prior to the expiration of the Agreement, we will be eligible to receive reimbursement of amounts paid for debt service shortfalls together with interest thereon.
We have three leases in which the lessor has a put option, which would require us to purchase the properties during the remaining lease term. If the lessor were to exercise this option in 2005, the purchase price would be approximately $63 million. A master lease for Mercer Mall includes a fixed purchase price option for $55 million in 2023. If we fail to exercise our purchase option, the owner of Mercer Mall has a put option which would require us to purchase Mercer Mall for $60 million in 2025.
As of December 31, 2004 in connection with renovation and development projects, the Trust has contractual obligations of approximately $50 million.
We are obligated under ground lease agreements on several shopping centers requiring minimum annual payments as follows, as of December 31, 2004:
F-22
NOTE 10. SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY
In May 1999, we reorganized as a Maryland real estate investment trust by amending and restating our declaration of trust and bylaws. The Amended Declaration of Trust changed the number of authorized shares of common and preferred shares from unlimited to 100,000,000 and 15,000,000, respectively. In addition, all common shares of beneficial interest, no par value, which were issued and outstanding were changed to common shares of beneficial interest, $0.01 par value per share and all Series A Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Shares of beneficial interest, no par value, which were issued and outstanding were changed to Series A Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Shares of beneficial interest, $0.01 par value per share.
In November 2001, we issued 5.4 million 8.5% Series B Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Shares at $25 per share in a public offering. The Series B Preferred Shares are not redeemable prior to November 27, 2006. On or after that date, the Preferred Shares may be redeemed, in whole or in part, at our option, at a redemption price of $25 per share plus all accrued and unpaid dividends. Dividends on the Preferred Shares are payable quarterly in arrears on the last day of January, April, July and October.
On June 12, 2002, we issued 2.2 million common shares at $25.9825 per share ($27.35 gross, before a 5.00% underwriters discount and selling concession) netting $56.6 million in cash proceeds after all expenses of the offering.
On May 14, 2003, we issued 3.2 million common shares at $30.457 per share ($31.48 gross, before an aggregate 3.25% underwriters discount and selling concession) netting $98.4 million in cash proceeds, after all expenses of the offering.
On April 7, 2004, we issued 2.2 million common shares at a net price of $45.33 per share (after taking into account underwriters discount and commissions) netting approximately $99 million in cash proceeds before other expenses of the offering. The proceeds were used to repay borrowings outstanding under our revolving credit facility that were drawn to acquire Westgate Mall and for general corporate purposes.
We have a Dividend Reinvestment Plan, whereby shareholders may use their dividends and optional cash payments to purchase shares. In 2004, 2003 and 2002, 82,391 shares, 109,835 shares and 134,247 shares, respectively, were issued under the Plan.
In December 1999, the Trustees authorized a share repurchase program for calendar year 2000 of up to an aggregate of 4 million of our common shares. During 2000, a total of 1,325,900 shares were repurchased, at a cost of $25.2 million. We did not repurchase shares in 2004, 2003 or 2002.
In 2004, 2003 and 2002, 84,617 common shares, 138,568 common shares and 98,092 common shares, respectively, were awarded to key employees, including our former Chief Executive Officer, under various incentive compensation programs designed to directly link a significant portion of their current and long term compensation to the prosperity of the Trust and its shareholders. The shares vest over terms from 3 to 5 years. Vesting of common shares awarded to the former Chief Executive Officer was accelerated in 2002 pursuant to his contractual arrangement. We recorded compensation expense of $3.5 million, $1.3 million and $4.4 million for 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively, under our 2001 Long Term Incentive Plan. The weighted-average grant-date fair value of stock awarded in 2004 was $42.94.
In February 2002 and February 2003, we granted Performance Awards of 30,000 and 120,000, respectively, to certain officers and employees of the Trust. Pursuant to the terms of these awards, 20% of the Performance Shares will vest for any calendar year in which we exceed certain performance targets for the same period. Any performance awards, which remain unvested after 2011 and 2012, respectively, will be forfeited. We employ variable accounting for these Performance Awards.
Pursuant to the 2004 Incentive Bonus Plan, vice presidents and certain key employees receive part of their bonus in our common shares, which vest over three years. Consequently, on February 15, 2005, 7,711 shares
F-23
were awarded under this plan. In addition, on February 15, 2004, 64,732 restricted shares, which will vest over three years, were awarded to the Trusts officers and certain key employees. We also granted 3,363 restricted shares on February 15, 2005 to our Trustees. All of the restricted share awards were made under the 2001 Plan.
Tax loans with a balance of $300,000 in 2004 and 2003 and $1.8 million in 2002 have been made in connection with restricted share grants to certain of our officers and in connection with the Share Purchase Plans. The loans bear interest at the 90-day LIBOR rate plus 75 basis points. No tax loans were repaid in 2004.
In March 1999, we entered into an Amended and Restated Rights Agreement with American Stock Transfer and Trust Company, pursuant to which (i) the expiration date of our shareholder rights plan was extended for an additional ten years to April 24, 2009, (ii) the beneficial ownership percentage at which a person becomes an Acquiring Person under the plan was reduced from 20% to 15%, and (iii) certain other amendments were made. On October 29, 2003, we further amended the Amended and Restated Rights Agreement to increase the beneficial ownership percentage at which a person becomes an Acquiring Person under the plan from 15% to 20% and to require that the Trusts Board of Trustees review the plan on a periodic basis.
NOTE 11. STOCK OPTION PLAN
The 1993 Long Term Incentive Plan (Plan) authorized the grant of options and other stock based awards for up to 5.5 million shares. Options granted under the Plan have ten year terms and vest in one to five years. The Plan expired in May 2003.
In May 2001 our shareholders approved the 2001 Long Term Incentive Plan (2001 Plan) which authorized an additional 1,750,000 shares for future option and other stock based awards.
The option price to acquire shares under the 2001 Plan and previous plans is required to be at least the fair market value at the date of grant. As a result of the exercise of options, we had outstanding from our officers and employees notes for $1.8 million, $3.3 million and $2.5 million at December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. Notes bear interest at LIBOR plus a market-rate spread with the rate adjusted annually. The notes are collateralized by the shares with recourse to the borrower and have five-year terms. Option awards made in 2001 and later do not provide for employees to be able to exercise their options with a loan from the Trust.
SFAS No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation requires pro forma information regarding net income and earnings per share as if we accounted for our stock options under the fair value method of SFAS No. 123. Where at the date of grant, either the numbers of shares or exercise prices are not known; we record compensation expense in accordance with variable accounting. The fair value for options issued in 2004, 2003 and 2002 has been estimated as $1.1 million, $582,000 and $536,000, respectively, as of the date of grant, using a Black Scholes model with the following weighted-average assumptions for 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively: risk-free interest rates of 4.5%, 3.2% and 4.5%; volatility factors of the expected market price of our shares of 20%, 16% and 20%; and a weighted average expected life of the option of 5.3 years, 6.0 years and 6.9 years. Our assumed weighted average dividend yield used to estimate the fair value of the options issued was 4.62% in 2004.
Because option valuation models require the input of highly subjective assumptions, such as the expected stock price volatility, and because changes in these subjective input assumptions can materially affect the fair value estimate, the existing model may not necessarily provide a reliable single measure of the fair value of its stock options.
F-24
A summary of our stock option activity for the years ended December 31, is as follows:
Outstanding at December 31, 2001
Options granted 2002
Options exercised 2002
Options forfeited 2002
Outstanding at December 31, 2002
Options granted 2003
Options exercised 2003
Options forfeited 2003
Outstanding at December 31, 2003
Options granted 2004
Options exercised 2004
Options forfeited 2004
Outstanding at December 31, 2004
Options exercisable at December 31, 2004
Options exercisable at December 31, 2003
Options exercisable at December 31, 2002
Information about options outstanding at December 31, 2004, is summarized below:
Range of Exercise Prices
$18.00$26.99
$27.00$51.65
$18.00$51.65
The average remaining contractual life of options outstanding at December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 was 6.7 years, 6.3 years and 5.4 years, respectively. The weighted average grant date fair value per option for options granted in 2004, 2003 and 2002 was $6.13, $1.32 and $1.23, respectively.
NOTE 12. SAVINGS AND RETIREMENT PLANS
We have a savings and retirement plan in accordance with the provisions of Section 401(k) of the Internal Revenue Code. For employees who choose to contribute, their contributions range, at their discretion, from 1% to 20% of compensation up to a maximum of $11,000. Under the plan, we contribute out of our current net income, 50% of each employees first 5% of contributions. In addition, we may make discretionary contributions within the limits of deductibility set forth by the Code. Our employees are immediately eligible to become plan participants. Effective as of January 1, 2005 employees are eligible to receive matching contributions immediately on their participation, however, these matching payments will not vest until their first anniversary of employment. Our expense for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 was $252,000, $237,000 and $239,000, respectively.
A nonqualified deferred compensation plan for our officers and certain other employees was established in 1994. The plan allows the participants to defer future income until the earlier of age 65 or termination of
F-25
employment. As of December 31, 2004, we are liable to participants for approximately $3.9 million under this plan. Although this is an unfunded plan, we have purchased certain investments with which to match this obligation. Our obligation under this plan and the related investments are both included in the accompanying financial statements.
NOTE 13. INTEREST EXPENSE
We incurred interest totaling $90.2 million, $88.7 million and $88.6 million in 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively, of which $5.1 million, $13.5 million, and $23.5 million respectively, was capitalized. Interest paid was $69.8 million in 2004, $85.7 million in 2003 and $86.2 million in 2002.
NOTE 14. CHANGE IN BUSINESS PLAN
In 2002, we adopted a new business plan which returned our primary focus to our traditional business of acquiring and redeveloping community and neighborhood shopping centers that are anchored by supermarkets, drug stores, or high volume, value oriented retailers that provide consumer necessities. Concurrent with the adoption of the business plan, we adopted a management succession plan and restructured our management team.
In connection with this change in our business plan, we recorded a charge of $18.2 million in 2002. This charge included a restructuring charge of $8.5 million made up of $6.9 million of severance and other compensation costs for several of our senior officers related to the management restructuring, as well as the write-off of $1.6 million of our development costs. All charges against the reserve, totaling $8.5 million, were expended during 2002. An additional component of the restructuring charge was an impairment loss of $9.6 million representing the estimated loss on the abandonment of development projects held for sale, primarily the Tanasbourne development project located in Washington County, Oregon, thereby adjusting the value of these assets to their estimated fair value. The Tanasbourne land was sold in 2003 for approximately $9.7 million resulting in a gain of $1.9 million.
In December 2002, we announced the resignation of Steven J. Guttman as Trustee, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of Trustees effective January 1, 2003. Donald C. Wood, our then President and Chief Operating Officer, was named Chief Executive Officer and a member of the Board of Trustees. Mark Ordan, a member of the Board of Trustees since 1996, was named non-executive chairman of the board. As a result of this restructuring, we recorded a charge of $13.8 million in the fourth quarter of 2002 for payments and benefits to Mr. Guttman pursuant to his contractual arrangements with the Trust and for other transition related costs, which we would not otherwise have incurred. Of this amount, $0.8 million had not been paid as of December 31, 2003 and $0.3 million remains to be expended as of December 31, 2004.
NOTE 15. SUBSEQUENT EVENTS
F-26
NOTE 16. SEGMENT INFORMATION
We operate our portfolio of properties in two geographic operating regions: East and West, which constitute our segments under Statement of Financial Accounting Standard No. 131, Disclosures about Segments of an Enterprise and Related Information. Based on changes in our property management structure in 2004, we determined that our portfolio should be divided into two operating regions (East and West), rather than three (Northeast, Mid-Atlantic and West as previously reported).
A summary of our operations by geographic region is presented below:
F-27
Restructuring expense
There are no transactions between geographic areas.
F-28
NOTE 17. QUARTERLY DATA (UNAUDITED)
The following summary represents the results of operations for each quarter in 2004 and 2003:
Rental income (1)
Earnings per common sharebasic
Earnings per common sharediluted
(1) As required by SFAS No. 144, revenue has been reduced to reflect the results of discontinued operations. Total revenue from these discontinued assets, by quarter, is summarized as follows:
2004 revenue from discontinued operations
2003 revenue from discontinued operations
F-29
SCHEDULE III
SUMMARY OF REAL ESTATE AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION
DECEMBER 31, 2004
COLUMN A
Descriptions
ALLWOOD (New Jersey)
ANDORRA (Pennsylvania)
ARIZONA BUILDINGS (2)
BALA CYNWYD (Pennsylvania)
BARRACKS ROAD (Virginia)
BETHESDA ROW (Maryland)
BLUESTAR (New Jersey)
BRICK PLAZA (New Jersey)
BRISTOL (Connecticut)
BRUNSWICK (New Jersey)
CALIFORNIA RETAIL BUILDINGS
SANTA MONICA (9)
SAN DIEGO (4)
150 POST STREET (San Francisco)
OTHER (5)
CLIFTON (New Jersey)
CONGRESSIONAL PLAZA (Maryland)
CONNECTICUT RETAIL BUILDINGS (2)
COURTHOUSE CENTER (Maryland)
CROSSROADS (Illinois)
DEDHAM PLAZA (Massachusetts)
EASTGATE (North Carolina)
ELLISBURG CIRCLE (New Jersey)
ESCONDIDO PROMENADE (California)
FALLS PLAZA (Virginia)
FALLS PLAZAEast (Virginia)
FEASTERVILLE (Pennsylvania)
FEDERAL PLAZA (Maryland)
FINLEY SQUARE (Illinois)
FLORIDA RETAIL BUILDINGS (2)
FLOURTOWN (Pennsylvania)
FRESH MEADOWS (New York)
FRIENDSHIP CTR (District of Columbia)
GAITHERSBURG SQUARE (Maryland)
GARDEN MARKET (Illinois)
GOVERNOR PLAZA (Maryland)
GRATIOT PLAZA (Michigan)
GREENLAWN (New York)
HAMILTON (New Jersey)
HAUPPAUGE (New York)
HUNTINGTON (New York)
IDYLWOOD PLAZA (Virginia)
F-30
KINGS COURT (California)
LANCASTER (Pennsylvania)
LANGHORNE SQUARE (Pennsylvania)
LAUREL (Maryland)
LAWRENCE PARK (Pennsylvania)
LEESBURG PLAZA (Virginia)
LOEHMANN'S PLAZA (Virginia)
MERCER MALL (New Jersey)
MID PIKE PLAZA (Maryland)
MOUNT VERNON PLAZA (Virginia)
NEW YORK RETAIL BUILDINGS (3)
NORTHEAST (Pennsylvania)
NORTH LAKE COMMONS (Illinois)
OLD KEENE MILL (Virginia)
OLD TOWN CENTER (California)
PAN AM SHOPPING CENTER (Virginia)
PENTAGON ROW (Virginia)
PERRING PLAZA (Maryland)
PIKE 7 (Virginia)
QUEEN ANNE PLAZA (Massachusetts)
QUINCE ORCHARD PLAZA (Maryland)
ROCKVILLE TOWN SQUARE (Maryland) (A)
ROLLINGWOOD APTS. (Maryland)
RUTGERS (New Jersey)
SAM'S PARK & SHOP (District of Columbia)
SANTANA ROW (California)
SAUGUS (Massachusetts)
SHAW'S PLAZA (Massachusetts)
SHIRLINGTON (Virginia)
SOUTH VALLEY SHOPPING CENTER (Virginia)
TEXAS RETAIL BUILDINGS (9)
TOWER (Virginia)
TROY (New Jersey)
TYSONS STATION (Virginia)
WESTGATE MALL (California)
WILDWOOD (Maryland)
WILLOW GROVE (Pennsylvania)
WILLOW LAWN (Virginia)
WYNNEWOOD (Pennsylvania)
TOTALS
F-31
SUMMARY OF REAL ESTATE AND ACCUMULATED
DEPRECIATIONCONTINUED
Three Years Ended December 31, 2004
Reconciliation of Total Cost
Balance, December 31, 2001
Additions during period
Acquisitions
Improvements
Deduction during perioddisposition of property and miscellaneous retirements
Balance, December 31, 2002
Balance, December 31, 2003
Balance, December 31, 2004
F-32
Reconciliation of Accumulated Depreciation and Amortization
Depreciation and amortization expense
Deductions during perioddisposition of property, miscellaneous retirements and acquisition of minority interest
F-33
SCHEDULE IV
MORTGAGE LOANS ON REAL ESTATE
Year Ended December 31, 2004
Column A
Column B
Column C
Column D
Column E
Column F
Description of Lien
Periodic PaymentTerms
PriorLiens
Face Amount
of Mortgages
F-34
MORTGAGE LOANS ON REAL ESTATECONTINUED
Reconciliation of Carrying Amount
Additions during period:
Issuance of loans
Deductions during period:
Collection and satisfaction of loans
Allowance for collectibility
F-35
Item 9. Changes In and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure
Not applicable.
Item 9A. Controls and Procedures
Quarterly Assessment. We carried out an assessment as of December 31, 2004 of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures and our internal control over financial reporting. This assessment was done under the supervision and with the participation of management, including our Chief Executive Officer and our Chief Financial Officer. Rules adopted by the SEC require that we present the conclusions of our principal executive officer and our principal financial officer about the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures and the conclusions of our management about the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of the end of the period covered by this annual report.
Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer Certifications. Included as Exhibits 31.1 and 31.2 to this Annual Report on Form 10-K are forms of Certification of our principal executive officer and our principal financial officer. The forms of Certification are required in accordance with Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. This section of this Annual Report on Form 10-K that you currently are reading is the information concerning the assessment referred to in the Section 302 certifications and this information should be read in conjunction with the Section 302 certifications for a more complete understanding of the topics presented.
Disclosure Controls and Procedures. We maintain disclosure controls and procedures that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed in our Exchange Act reports, such as this report on Form 10-K, is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SECs rules and forms, and that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our President and Chief Executive Officer and Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. These controls and procedures are based closely on the definition of disclosure controls and procedures in Rule 13a-15(e) promulgated under the Exchange Act. Rules adopted by the SEC require that we present the conclusions of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer about the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this quarterly report.
Internal Control over Financial Reporting. Establishing and maintaining internal control over financial reporting is a process designed by, or under the supervision of, our President and Chief Executive Officer and Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate, and effected by our employees, including management and our Board of Trustees, 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. This process includes policies and procedures that:
Limitations on the Effectiveness of Controls. Management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, do not expect that our disclosure controls and procedures or internal control over financial
45
reporting will prevent all errors and fraud. In designing and evaluating our control system, management recognized that any control system, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance of achieving the desired control objectives. Further, the design of a control system must reflect the fact that there are resource constraints, and management necessarily was required to apply its judgment in evaluating the cost-benefit relationship of possible controls and procedures. Because of the inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that all control issues and instances of fraud, if any, that may affect our operation have been detected. These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty, and that breakdowns can occur because of simple error or mistake. Additionally, controls can be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more people, or by managements override of the control. The design of any system of controls also is based in part upon certain assumptions about the likelihood of future events, and there can be no assurance that any design will succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future conditions. Over time, controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions that cannot be anticipated at the present time, or the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate. Because of the inherent limitations in a cost-effective control system, misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and not be detected.
Scope of the Evaluations.The evaluation by our Chief Executive Officer and our Chief Financial Officer of our disclosure controls and procedures and our internal control over financial reporting included a review of procedures and our internal audit, as well as discussions with our Disclosure Committee, independent public accountants and others in our organization, as appropriate. In conducting this evaluation, our management used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) in Internal ControlIntegrated Framework. In the course of the evaluation, we sought to identify data errors, control problems or acts of fraud and to confirm that appropriate corrective action, including process improvements, were being undertaken. The evaluation of our disclosure controls and procedures and our internal control over financial reporting is done on a quarterly basis, so that the conclusions concerning the effectiveness of such controls can be reported in our Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and Annual Reports on Form 10-K.
Our internal control over financial reporting is also assessed on an ongoing basis by personnel in our Accounting department and by our independent auditors in connection with their audit and review activities. The overall goals of these various evaluation activities are to monitor our disclosure controls and procedures and our internal control over financial reporting and to make modifications as necessary. Our intent in this regard is that the disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting will be maintained and updated (including with improvements and corrections) as conditions warrant. Among other matters, we sought in our evaluation to determine whether there were any significant deficiencies or material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting, or whether we had identified any acts of fraud involving personnel who have a significant role in our internal control over financial reporting. This information is important both for the evaluation generally and because the Section 302 certifications require that our Chief Executive Officer and our Chief Financial Officer disclose that information to the Audit Committee of our Board of Trustees and our independent auditors and also require us to report on related matters in this section of the Annual Report on Form 10-K. In the Public Company Accounting Oversight Boards Auditing Standard No. 2, a significant deficiency is a control deficiency, or a combination of control deficiencies, that adversely affects the ability to initiate, authorize, record, process or report external financial data reliably in accordance with GAAP such that there is more than a remote likelihood that a misstatement of the annual or interim financial statements that is more than inconsequential will not be prevented or detected. A control deficiency exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent or detect misstatements on a timely basis. A material weakness is defined in Auditing Standard No. 2 as a significant deficiency, or a combination of significant deficiencies, that results in more than a remote likelihood that a material misstatement of the annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected. We also sought to deal with other control matters in the evaluation, and in any case in which a problem was identified, we considered what revision, improvement and/or correction was necessary to be made in accordance with our on-going procedures.
46
Periodic Evaluation and Conclusion of Disclosure Controls and Procedures. Our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this report. Based on that evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that such controls and procedures were effective as of the end of the period covered by this report.
Periodic Evaluation and Conclusion of Internal Control over Financial Reporting. Our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our internal control over financial reporting as of the end of our most recent fiscal year. Based on that evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that such internal control over financial reporting was effective as of the end of our most recent fiscal year.
Statement of Our Management. Our management has issued a report on its assessment of the Trusts internal control over financial reporting, which appears on page F-2 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Statement of Our Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm. Grant Thornton LLP, our independent registered public accounting firm that audited the financial statements included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, has issued an attestation report on managements assessment of the Trusts internal control over financial reporting, which appears on page F-1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting. There was no change in our internal control over financial reporting during our fourth fiscal quarter of 2004 that materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
Item 9B. Other Information
PART III
Certain information required in Part III is omitted from this Report but is incorporated herein by reference from our Proxy Statement for the 2005 Annual Meeting of Shareholders (the Proxy Statement).
Item 10. Trustees and Executive Officers
a.) The table in the Proxy Statement identifying our Trustees and Board committees under the caption Election of Trustees and the section of the Proxy Statement entitled Executive Officers are incorporated herein by reference.
b.) The information included under the section of the Proxy Statement entitled Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance is incorporated herein by reference.
c.) We have adopted a Code of Ethics, which is applicable to our Chief Executive Officer and senior financial officers. The Code of Ethics is available in the Corporate Governance section of the Investor Information section of our website at www.federalrealty.com.
Item 11. Executive Compensation
The sections of the Proxy Statement entitled Compensation of Executive Officers, Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation, Report of the Compensation Committee on Executive Compensation and Performance Graph are incorporated herein by reference.
47
Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Shareholder Matters
The sections of the Proxy Statement entitled Share Ownership and Equity Compensation Plan Information are incorporated herein by reference.
Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions
The section of the Proxy Statement entitled Certain Relationship and Related Transactions is incorporated herein by reference.
Item 14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services
The sections of the Proxy Statement entitled Ratification of Independent Accountants and Relationship with Independent Public Accountants are incorporated herein by reference.
PART IV
Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules
(a)(1) Financial Statements
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting FirmGrant Thornton LLP
Consolidated Balance SheetsDecember 31, 2004 and 2003
Consolidated Statements of OperationsYears Ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002
Consolidated Statements of Common Shareholders EquityYears Ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002
Consolidated Statements of Cash FlowsYears Ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (including selected quarterly data)
(2) Financial Statement Schedules
Schedule III. Schedule of Real Estate and Accumulated Depreciation
Schedule IV. Mortgage Loans on Real Estate
(3) Exhibits
Description
48
49
50
(b)Exhibits
See Item 15(a)(3) above
(c) Not Applicable
* Management contract or compensatory plan to be filed under item 15(b) of Form 10-K.
51
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, the Registrant has duly caused this Report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized this 2nd day of March, 2005.
By:
/s/ DONALD C. WOOD
Donald C. Wood
Chief Executive Officer
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, this Report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the Registrant and in the capacity and on the dates indicated. Each person whose signature appears below hereby constitutes and appoints each of Donald C. Wood and Dawn M. Becker as his or her attorney-in-fact and agent, with full power of substitution and resubstitution for him or her in any and all capacities, to sign any or all amendments to this Report and to file same, with exhibits thereto and other documents in connection therewith, granting unto such attorney-in-fact and agent full power and authority to do and perform each and every act and thing requisite and necessary in connection with such matters and hereby ratifying and confirming all that such attorney-in-fact and agent or his or her substitutes may do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.
Signature
Title
Date
/S/ DONALD C. WOOD
Chief Executive Officer, Trustee (Principal Executive Officer)
/S/ LARRY E. FINGER
Larry E. Finger
Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer (principal financial and accounting officer)
/S/ MARK S. ORDAN
Mark S. Ordan
Non-Executive Chairman
/S/ DAVID W. FAEDER
David W. Faeder
Trustee
/S/ KRISTIN GAMBLE
Kristin Gamble
/S/ AMY B. LANE
Amy B. Lane
/S/ WALTER F. LOEB
Walter F. Loeb
/S/ JOSEPH S. VASSALLUZZO
Joseph S. Vassalluzzo
52
53
54
55