Companies:
10,652
total market cap:
$140.680 T
Sign In
๐บ๐ธ
EN
English
$ USD
โฌ
EUR
๐ช๐บ
โน
INR
๐ฎ๐ณ
ยฃ
GBP
๐ฌ๐ง
$
CAD
๐จ๐ฆ
$
AUD
๐ฆ๐บ
$
NZD
๐ณ๐ฟ
$
HKD
๐ญ๐ฐ
$
SGD
๐ธ๐ฌ
Global ranking
Ranking by countries
America
๐บ๐ธ United States
๐จ๐ฆ Canada
๐ฒ๐ฝ Mexico
๐ง๐ท Brazil
๐จ๐ฑ Chile
Europe
๐ช๐บ European Union
๐ฉ๐ช Germany
๐ฌ๐ง United Kingdom
๐ซ๐ท France
๐ช๐ธ Spain
๐ณ๐ฑ Netherlands
๐ธ๐ช Sweden
๐ฎ๐น Italy
๐จ๐ญ Switzerland
๐ต๐ฑ Poland
๐ซ๐ฎ Finland
Asia
๐จ๐ณ China
๐ฏ๐ต Japan
๐ฐ๐ท South Korea
๐ญ๐ฐ Hong Kong
๐ธ๐ฌ Singapore
๐ฎ๐ฉ Indonesia
๐ฎ๐ณ India
๐ฒ๐พ Malaysia
๐น๐ผ Taiwan
๐น๐ญ Thailand
๐ป๐ณ Vietnam
Others
๐ฆ๐บ Australia
๐ณ๐ฟ New Zealand
๐ฎ๐ฑ Israel
๐ธ๐ฆ Saudi Arabia
๐น๐ท Turkey
๐ท๐บ Russia
๐ฟ๐ฆ South Africa
>> All Countries
Ranking by categories
๐ All assets by Market Cap
๐ Automakers
โ๏ธ Airlines
๐ซ Airports
โ๏ธ Aircraft manufacturers
๐ฆ Banks
๐จ Hotels
๐ Pharmaceuticals
๐ E-Commerce
โ๏ธ Healthcare
๐ฆ Courier services
๐ฐ Media/Press
๐ท Alcoholic beverages
๐ฅค Beverages
๐ Clothing
โ๏ธ Mining
๐ Railways
๐ฆ Insurance
๐ Real estate
โ Ports
๐ผ Professional services
๐ด Food
๐ Restaurant chains
โ๐ป Software
๐ Semiconductors
๐ฌ Tobacco
๐ณ Financial services
๐ข Oil&Gas
๐ Electricity
๐งช Chemicals
๐ฐ Investment
๐ก Telecommunication
๐๏ธ Retail
๐ฅ๏ธ Internet
๐ Construction
๐ฎ Video Game
๐ป Tech
๐ฆพ AI
>> All Categories
ETFs
๐ All ETFs
๐๏ธ Bond ETFs
๏ผ Dividend ETFs
โฟ Bitcoin ETFs
โข Ethereum ETFs
๐ช Crypto Currency ETFs
๐ฅ Gold ETFs & ETCs
๐ฅ Silver ETFs & ETCs
๐ข๏ธ Oil ETFs & ETCs
๐ฝ Commodities ETFs & ETNs
๐ Emerging Markets ETFs
๐ Small-Cap ETFs
๐ Low volatility ETFs
๐ Inverse/Bear ETFs
โฌ๏ธ Leveraged ETFs
๐ Global/World ETFs
๐บ๐ธ USA ETFs
๐บ๐ธ S&P 500 ETFs
๐บ๐ธ Dow Jones ETFs
๐ช๐บ Europe ETFs
๐จ๐ณ China ETFs
๐ฏ๐ต Japan ETFs
๐ฎ๐ณ India ETFs
๐ฌ๐ง UK ETFs
๐ฉ๐ช Germany ETFs
๐ซ๐ท France ETFs
โ๏ธ Mining ETFs
โ๏ธ Gold Mining ETFs
โ๏ธ Silver Mining ETFs
๐งฌ Biotech ETFs
๐ฉโ๐ป Tech ETFs
๐ Real Estate ETFs
โ๏ธ Healthcare ETFs
โก Energy ETFs
๐ Renewable Energy ETFs
๐ก๏ธ Insurance ETFs
๐ฐ Water ETFs
๐ด Food & Beverage ETFs
๐ฑ Socially Responsible ETFs
๐ฃ๏ธ Infrastructure ETFs
๐ก Innovation ETFs
๐ Semiconductors ETFs
๐ Aerospace & Defense ETFs
๐ Cybersecurity ETFs
๐ฆพ Artificial Intelligence ETFs
Watchlist
Account
Regency Centers
REG
#1616
Rank
$13.35 B
Marketcap
๐บ๐ธ
United States
Country
$72.60
Share price
0.86%
Change (1 day)
3.01%
Change (1 year)
๐ Real estate
๐ฐ Investment
Categories
Regency Centers Corporation
is an American real estate investment (REIT) trust that operates of shopping centers.
Market cap
Revenue
Earnings
Price history
P/E ratio
P/S ratio
Annual Reports (10-K)
More
Price history
P/E ratio
P/S ratio
P/B ratio
Operating margin
EPS
Dividends
Dividend yield
Shares outstanding
Fails to deliver
Cost to borrow
Total assets
Total liabilities
Total debt
Cash on Hand
Net Assets
Regency Centers
Annual Reports (10-K)
Financial Year 2012
Regency Centers - 10-K annual report 2012
Text size:
Small
Medium
Large
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, DC 20549
FORM 10-K
x
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2012
or
o
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the transition period from
to
Commission File Number 1-12298 (Regency Centers Corporation)
Commission File Number 0-24763 (Regency Centers, L.P.)
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION
REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
FLORIDA (REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION)
59-3191743
DELAWARE (REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.)
59-3429602
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)
(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)
One Independent Drive, Suite 114
Jacksonville, Florida 32202
(904) 598-7000
(Address of principal executive offices) (zip code)
(Registrant's telephone number, including area code)
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Regency Centers Corporation
Title of each class
Name of each exchange on which registered
Common Stock, $.01 par value
New York Stock Exchange
6.625% Series 6 Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock, $.01 par value
New York Stock Exchange
6.000% Series 7 Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock, $.01 par value
New York Stock Exchange
Regency Centers, L.P.
Title of each class
Name of each exchange on which registered
None
N/A
________________________________
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
Regency Centers Corporation: None
Regency Centers, L.P.:
Class B Units of Partnership Interest
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.
Regency Centers Corporation YES
x
NO
o
Regency Centers, L.P. YES
x
NO
o
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act
Regency Centers Corporation YES
o
NO
x
Regency Centers, L.P. YES
o
NO
x
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.
Regency Centers Corporation YES
x
NO
o
Regency Centers, L.P. YES
x
NO
o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).
Regency Centers Corporation YES
x
NO
o
Regency Centers, L.P. YES
x
NO
o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant's knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.
Regency Centers Corporation
o
Regency Centers, L.P.
o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
Regency Centers Corporation:
Large accelerated filer
x
Accelerated filer
o
Non-accelerated filer
o
Smaller reporting company
o
Regency Centers, L.P.:
Large accelerated filer
o
Accelerated filer
x
Non-accelerated filer
o
Smaller reporting company
o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act).
Regency Centers Corporation YES
o
NO
x
Regency Centers, L.P. YES
o
NO
x
State the aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates computed by reference to the price at which the common equity was last sold, or the average bid and asked price of such common equity, as of the last business day of the registrants' most recently completed second fiscal quarter.
Regency Centers Corporation
$
4,187,374,700
Regency Centers, L.P.
N/A
The number of shares outstanding of the Regency Centers Corporation’s voting common stock was
90,395,745
as of
February 21, 2013
.
Documents Incorporated by Reference
Portions of Regency Centers Corporation's proxy statement in connection with its
2013
Annual Meeting of Stockholders are incorporated by reference in Part III.
EXPLANATORY NOTE
This report combines the annual reports on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2012
of Regency Centers Corporation and Regency Centers, L.P. Unless stated otherwise or the context otherwise requires, references to “Regency Centers Corporation” or the “Parent Company” mean Regency Centers Corporation and its controlled subsidiaries; and references to “Regency Centers, L.P.” or the “Operating Partnership” mean Regency Centers, L.P. and its controlled subsidiaries. The term “the Company” or “Regency” means the Parent Company and the Operating Partnership, collectively.
The Parent Company is a real estate investment trust (“REIT”) and the general partner of the Operating Partnership. The Operating Partnership's capital includes general and limited common Partnership Units (“Units”). As of
December 31, 2012
, the Parent Company owned approximately
99.8%
of the Units in the Operating Partnership and the remaining limited Units are owned by investors. The Parent Company owns all of the Series 6 and 7 Preferred Units of the Operating Partnership. As the sole general partner of the Operating Partnership, the Parent Company has exclusive control of the Operating Partnership's day-to-day management.
The Company believes combining the annual reports on Form 10-K of the Parent Company and the Operating Partnership into this single report provides the following benefits:
•
enhances investors' understanding of the Parent Company and the Operating Partnership by enabling investors to view the business as a whole in the same manner as management views and operates the business;
•
eliminates duplicative disclosure and provides a more streamlined and readable presentation; and
•
creates time and cost efficiencies through the preparation of one combined report instead of two separate reports.
Management operates the Parent Company and the Operating Partnership as one business. The management of the Parent Company consists of the same individuals as the management of the Operating Partnership. These individuals are officers of the Parent Company and employees of the Operating Partnership.
The Company believes it is important to understand the few differences between the Parent Company and the Operating Partnership in the context of how the Parent Company and the Operating Partnership operate as a consolidated company. The Parent Company is a REIT, whose only material asset is its ownership of partnership interests of the Operating Partnership. As a result, the Parent Company does not conduct business itself, other than acting as the sole general partner of the Operating Partnership, issuing public equity from time to time and guaranteeing certain debt of the Operating Partnership. The Parent Company does not hold any indebtedness, but guarantees all of the unsecured public debt and approximately
18%
of the secured debt of the Operating Partnership. The Operating Partnership holds all the assets of the Company and retains the ownership interests in the Company's joint ventures. Except for net proceeds from public equity issuances by the Parent Company, which are contributed to the Operating Partnership in exchange for partnership units, the Operating Partnership generates all remaining capital required by the Company's business. These sources include the Operating Partnership's operations, its direct or indirect incurrence of indebtedness, and the issuance of partnership units.
Stockholders' equity, partners' capital, and noncontrolling interests are the main areas of difference between the consolidated financial statements of the Parent Company and those of the Operating Partnership. The Operating Partnership's capital includes general and limited common Partnership Units, as well as Series 6 and 7 Preferred Units owned by the Parent Company. The limited partners' units in the Operating Partnership owned by third parties are accounted for in partners' capital in the Operating Partnership's financial statements and outside of stockholders' equity in noncontrolling interests in the Parent Company's financial statements. The Series 6 and 7 Preferred Units owned by the Parent Company are eliminated in consolidation in the accompanying consolidated financial statements of the Parent Company and are classified as preferred units of general partner in the accompanying consolidated financial statements of the Operating Partnership.
In order to highlight the differences between the Parent Company and the Operating Partnership, there are sections in this report that separately discuss the Parent Company and the Operating Partnership, including separate financial statements, controls and procedures sections, and separate Exhibit 31 and 32 certifications. In the sections that combine disclosure for the Parent Company and the Operating Partnership, this report refers to actions or holdings as being actions or holdings of the Company.
As general partner with control of the Operating Partnership, the Parent Company consolidates the Operating Partnership for financial reporting purposes, and the Parent Company does not have assets other than its investment in the Operating Partnership. Therefore, while stockholders' equity and partners' capital differ as discussed above, the assets and liabilities of the Parent Company and the Operating Partnership are the same on their respective financial statements.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Item No.
Form 10-K
Report Page
PART I
1.
Business
1
1A.
Risk Factors
4
1B.
Unresolved Staff Comments
11
2.
Properties
12
3.
Legal Proceedings
31
4.
Mine Safety Disclosures
31
PART II
5.
Market for the Registrant's Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters, and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
31
6.
Selected Financial Data
32
7.
Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
35
7A.
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
56
8.
Consolidated Financial Statements and Supplementary Data
58
9.
Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure
122
9A.
Controls and Procedures
122
9B.
Other Information
124
PART III
10.
Directors, Executive Officers, and Corporate Governance
124
11.
Executive Compensation
124
12.
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters
125
13.
Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence
125
14.
Principal Accountant Fees and Services
125
PART IV
15.
Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules
125
SIGNATURES
16.
Signatures
130
Forward-Looking Statements
In addition to historical information, the following information contains forward-looking statements as defined under federal securities laws. These forward-looking statements include statements about potential changes in our revenues, the size of our development program, earnings per share and unit, returns and portfolio value, and expectations about our liquidity. These statements are based on current expectations, estimates and projections about the real estate industry and markets in which the Parent Company and the Operating Partnership, collectively “Regency” or “the Company”, operate, and management's beliefs and assumptions. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve certain known and unknown risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by such statements. Such risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to, changes in national and local economic conditions; financial difficulties of tenants; competitive market conditions, including timing and pricing of acquisitions and sales of properties and out-parcels; changes in leasing activity and market rents; timing of development starts; meeting development schedules; our inability to exercise voting control over the co-investment partnerships through which we own many of our properties; consequences of any armed conflict or terrorist attack against the United States; and the ability to obtain governmental approvals. We do not undertake any obligation to release publicly any revision to such forward-looking statements to reflect events or uncertainties after the date hereof or to reflect the occurrence of uncertain events. For additional information, see “Risk Factors” elsewhere herein. The following discussion should be read in conjunction with the accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes thereto of Regency Centers Corporation and Regency Centers, L.P. appearing elsewhere herein.
PART I
Item 1. Business
Regency Centers Corporation began its operations as a real estate investment trust ("REIT") in 1993 and is the managing general partner in Regency Centers, L.P. We endeavor to be the preeminent, best-in-class national shopping center company distinguished by sustaining growth in shareholder value and compounding total shareholder return in excess of our peers. We work to achieve these goals through reliable growth in net operating income from a portfolio of dominant, infill shopping centers, balance sheet strength, value-added development capabilities and an engaged team of talented and dedicated people. All of our operating, investing, and financing activities are performed through the Operating Partnership, its wholly-owned subsidiaries, and through its investments in real estate partnerships with third parties (also referred to as "co-investment partnerships" or "joint ventures"). The Parent Company currently owns approximately
99.8%
of the outstanding common partnership units of the Operating Partnership.
At
December 31, 2012
, we directly owned
204
shopping centers (the “Consolidated Properties”) located in
24
states representing
22.5 million
square feet of gross leasable area (“GLA”). Through co-investment partnerships, we own partial ownership interests in
144
shopping centers (the “Unconsolidated Properties”) located in
24
states and the District of Columbia representing
17.8 million
square feet of GLA.
We earn revenues and generate cash flow by leasing space in our shopping centers to grocery stores, major retail anchors, restaurants, side-shop retailers, and service providers, as well as ground leasing or selling building pads ("out-parcels") to these same types of tenants. Historically, we have experienced growth in revenues by increasing occupancy and rental rates in our existing shopping centers and by acquiring and developing new shopping centers. At
December 31, 2012
, the consolidated shopping centers were
94.1%
leased, as compared to
92.2%
at
December 31, 2011
.
We monitor the operating performance and rent collections of all tenants in our shopping centers, especially those tenants operating retail formats that are experiencing significant changes in competition, business practice, and store closings in other locations. We also evaluate consumer preferences, shopping behaviors, and demographics to anticipate both challenges and opportunities in the changing retail industry that may affect our tenants.
We grow our shopping center portfolio through acquisitions of operating centers and new shopping center development. We will continue to use our development capabilities, market presence, and anchor relationships to invest in value-added new development and redevelopments of existing centers. Development is customer driven, meaning we generally have an executed lease from the anchor before we start construction. Developments serve the growth needs of our anchors and retailers, resulting in modern shopping centers with long-term anchor leases that produce attractive returns on our invested capital. This development process typically requires two to three years once construction has commenced, but can vary subject to the size and complexity of the project. We fund our acquisition and development activity from various capital sources including property sales, equity offerings, and new debt.
1
Co-investment partnerships provide us with an additional capital source for shopping center acquisitions, as well as the opportunity to earn fees for asset management, property management, and other investing and financing services. As asset manager, we are engaged by our partners to apply similar operating, investment and capital strategies to the portfolios owned by the co-investment partnerships as those applied to the portfolio that we wholly-own. Co-investment partnerships grow their shopping center investments through acquisitions from third parties or direct purchases from us. Although selling properties to co-investment partnerships reduces our direct ownership interest, it provides a source of capital that further strengthens our balance sheet while we continue to share, to the extent of our ownership interest, in the risks and rewards of shopping centers that meet our high quality standards and long-term investment strategy.
We recognize the importance of continually improving the environmental sustainability performance of our real estate assets. To date we have received LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) certifications by the U.S. Green Building Council at seven shopping centers and have four additional in-process developments targeting certification. We also continue to implement best practices in our operating portfolio to reduce our power and water consumption, in addition to other sustainability initiatives. We believe that the design, construction and operation of environmentally efficient shopping centers will contribute to our key strategic goals.
Competition
We are among the largest owners of shopping centers in the nation based on revenues, number of properties, gross leasable area, and market capitalization. There are numerous companies and private individuals engaged in the ownership, development, acquisition, and operation of shopping centers that compete with us in our targeted markets, including grocery store chains that also anchor some of our shopping centers. This results in competition for attracting anchor tenants, as well as the acquisition of existing shopping centers and new development sites. We believe that our competitive advantages are driven by our locations within our market areas, the design and high quality of our shopping centers, the strong demographics surrounding our shopping centers, our relationships with our anchor tenants and our side-shop and out-parcel retailers, our practice of maintaining and renovating our shopping centers, and our ability to source and develop new shopping centers.
Employees
Our headquarters are located at One Independent Drive, Suite 114, Jacksonville, Florida. We presently maintain 17 market offices nationwide where we conduct management, leasing, construction, and investment activities. At
December 31, 2012
, we had 368 employees and we believe that our relations with our employees are good.
Compliance with Governmental Regulations
Under various federal, state and local laws, ordinances and regulations, we may be liable for the cost to remove or remediate certain hazardous or toxic substances at our shopping centers. These laws often impose liability without regard to whether the owner knew of, or was responsible for, the presence of the hazardous or toxic substances. The cost of required remediation and the owner's liability for remediation could exceed the value of the property and/or the aggregate assets of the owner. The presence of such substances, or the failure to properly remediate such substances, may adversely affect our ability to sell or lease the property or borrow using the property as collateral. While we have a number of properties that could require or are currently undergoing varying levels of environmental remediation, environmental remediation is not currently expected to have a material financial impact on us due to reserves for remediation, insurance programs designed to mitigate the cost of remediation, and various state-regulated programs that shift the responsibility and cost to the state.
2
Executive Officers
The executive officers of the Company are appointed each year by the Board of Directors. Each of the executive officers has been employed by the Company in the position indicated in the list or positions indicated in the pertinent notes below. Each of the executive officers has been employed by the Company for more than five years.
Name
Age
Title
Executive Officer in Position Shown Since
Martin E. Stein, Jr.
60
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
1993
Brian M. Smith
57
President and Chief Operating Officer
2009
(1)
Lisa Palmer
44
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
2013
(2)
Dan M. Chandler, III
46
Managing Director - West
2009
(3)
John S. Delatour
54
Managing Director - Central
1999
James D. Thompson
59
Managing Director - East
1993
(1)
In February 2009, Brian M. Smith, Managing Director and Chief Investment Officer of the Company since 2005, was appointed to the position of President. Prior to serving as our Managing Director and Chief Investment Officer, from March 1999 to September 2005, Mr. Smith served as Managing Director of Investments for our Pacific, Mid-Atlantic, and Northeast divisions.
(2)
Lisa Palmer is our Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. Ms. Palmer served as Senior Manager of Investment Services in 1996 and assumed the role of Vice President of Capital Markets in 1999. She served as Senior Vice President of Capital Markets from 2003 to 2012 until assuming the role of Chief Financial Officer in January 2013.
(3)
Dan M. Chandler, III, has served as our Managing Director - West since August 2009. From August 2007 to April 2009, Mr. Chandler was a principal with Chandler Partners, a private commercial and residential real estate developer in Southern California. During 2009, Mr. Chandler was also affiliated with Urban|One, a real estate development and management firm in Los Angeles. Mr. Chandler was a Managing Director for us from 2006 to July 2007, Senior Vice President of Investments from 2002 to 2006, and Vice President of Investments from 1997 to 2002.
Company Website Access and SEC Filings
The Company's website may be accessed at
www.regencycenters.com
. All of our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) can be accessed free of charge through our website promptly after filing; however, in the event that the website is inaccessible, we will provide paper copies of our most recent annual report on Form 10-K, the most recent quarterly report on Form 10-Q, current reports filed or furnished on Form 8-K, and all related amendments, excluding exhibits, free of charge upon request. These filings are also accessible on the SEC's website at
www.sec.gov
.
General Information
The Company's registrar and stock transfer agent is Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (“Wells Fargo Shareowner Services”), Mendota Heights, MN. The Company offers a dividend reinvestment plan (“DRIP”) that enables its stockholders to reinvest dividends automatically, as well as to make voluntary cash payments toward the purchase of additional shares. For more information, contact Wells Fargo toll free at (800) 468-9716 or the Company's Shareholder Relations Department at (904) 598-7000.
The Company's Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm is KPMG LLP, Jacksonville, Florida. The Company's legal counsel is Foley & Lardner LLP, Jacksonville, Florida.
Annual Meeting
The Company's annual meeting will be held at The Ponte Vedra Inn & Club, 200 Ponte Vedra Blvd, Ponte Vedra Beach, Florida, at 11:00 a.m. on Tuesday, May 7,
2013
.
3
Item 1A. Risk Factors
Risk Factors Related to Our Industry and Real Estate Investments
Downturns in the retail industry likely will have a direct adverse impact on our revenues and cash flow.
Our properties consist primarily of grocery-anchored shopping centers. Our performance therefore is generally linked to economic conditions in the market for retail space. The market for retail space has been or could be adversely affected by any of the following:
•
weakness in the national, regional and local economies, which could adversely impact consumer spending and retail sales and in turn tenant demand for space and lead to increased store closings;
•
adverse financial conditions for grocery and retail anchors;
•
the ongoing consolidation in the retail sector;
•
the excess amount of retail space in a number of markets;
•
reduction in the demand by tenants to occupy our shopping centers as a result of reduced consumer demand for certain retail formats such as video rental stores;
•
a shift in retail shopping from brick and mortar stores to Internet retailers and catalogs;
•
the growth of super-centers and warehouse club retailers, such as those operated by Wal-Mart and Costco, and their adverse effect on traditional grocery chains;
•
the impact of increased energy costs on consumers and its consequential effect on the number of shopping visits to our centers; and
•
consequences of any armed conflict involving, or terrorist attack against, the United States.
To the extent that any of these conditions occur, they are likely to impact market rents for retail space, occupancy in the operating portfolios, our ability to sell, acquire or develop properties, and our cash available for distributions to stock and unit holders.
Our revenues and cash flow could be adversely affected by poor economic or market conditions where our properties are geographically concentrated, which may impede our ability to generate sufficient income to pay expenses and maintain our properties.
The economic conditions in markets in which our properties are concentrated greatly influence our financial performance. During the year ended
December 31, 2012
, our properties in California, Florida, and Texas accounted for 30.6%, 11.1%, and 11.0%, respectively, of our net income. Our revenues and cash available to pay expenses, maintain our properties, and for distributions to stock and unit holders could be adversely affected by this geographic concentration if market conditions, such as supply of or demand for retail space, deteriorate in California, Florida, or Texas relative to other geographic areas.
Loss of revenues from significant tenants could reduce distributions to stock and unit holders.
We derive significant revenues from anchor tenants such as Kroger, Publix, Safeway and Supervalu, which are our four most significant anchor tenants as they account for
4.3%
,
4.2%
,
3.3%
and
2.1%
respectively, of our total annualized base rent from Consolidated Properties plus our pro-rata share of annualized base rent from Unconsolidated Properties ("pro-rata basis"), which is recognized in equity in income (loss) of investment in real estate partnerships, for the year ended
December 31, 2012
. Distributions to stock and unit holders could be adversely affected by the loss of revenues in the event a significant tenant:
•
becomes bankrupt or insolvent;
•
experiences a downturn in its business;
•
materially defaults on its leases;
•
does not renew its leases as they expire; or
•
renews at lower rental rates.
Vacated anchor space, including space owned by the anchor, can reduce rental revenues generated by the shopping center because of the loss of the departed anchor tenant's customer drawing power. Some anchors have the right to vacate and prevent re-tenanting by paying rent for the balance of the lease term. If significant tenants vacate a property, then other tenants may be entitled to terminate their leases at the property.
4
Our net income depends on the success and continued occupancy of our tenants.
Our net income could be adversely affected in the event of bankruptcy or insolvency of any of our anchors or a significant number of our non-anchor tenants within a shopping center, or if we fail to lease significant portions of our new developments. The adverse impact on our net income may be greater than the loss of rent from the resulting unoccupied space because co-tenancy clauses in select centers may allow other tenants to modify or terminate their rent or lease obligations. Co-tenancy clauses have several variants: they may allow a tenant to postpone a store opening if certain other tenants fail to open their stores; they may allow a tenant to close its store prior to lease expiration if another tenant closes its store prior to lease expiration; or more commonly, they may allow a tenant to pay reduced levels of rent until a certain number of tenants open their stores within the same shopping center.
A large percentage of our revenues are derived from smaller shop tenants and our net income could be adversely impacted if our smaller shop tenants are not successful.
A large percentage of our revenues are derived from smaller shop tenants (those occupying less than 10,000 square feet). Smaller shop tenants may be more vulnerable to negative economic conditions as they have more limited resources than larger tenants. The types of smaller shop tenants vary from retail shops to service providers. If we are unable to attract the right type or mix of smaller shop tenants into our centers, our net income could be adversely impacted.
We may be unable to collect balances due from tenants in bankruptcy.
Although minimum rent is supported by long-term lease contracts, tenants who file bankruptcy have the legal right to reject any or all of their leases and close related stores. In the event that a tenant with a significant number of leases in our shopping centers files bankruptcy and rejects its leases, we could experience a significant reduction in our revenues and may not be able to collect all pre-petition amounts owed by that party.
Our real estate assets may be subject to impairment charges.
Our long-lived assets, primarily real estate held for investment, are carried at cost unless circumstances indicate that the carrying value of the assets may not be recoverable. We evaluate whether there are any indicators, including property operating performance and general market conditions, that the value of the real estate properties (including any related amortizable intangible assets or liabilities) may not be recoverable. Through the evaluation, we compare the current carrying value of the asset to the estimated undiscounted cash flows that are directly associated with the use and ultimate disposition of the asset. Our estimated cash flows are based on several key assumptions, including rental rates, costs of tenant improvements, leasing commissions, anticipated hold periods, and assumptions regarding the residual value upon disposition, including the exit capitalization rate. These key assumptions are subjective in nature and could differ materially from actual results. Changes in our disposition strategy or changes in the marketplace may alter the hold period of an asset or asset group, which may result in an impairment loss and such loss could be material to the Company's financial condition or operating performance. To the extent that the carrying value of the asset exceeds the estimated undiscounted cash flows, an impairment loss is recognized equal to the excess of carrying value over fair value. If such indicators, as described above, are not identified, management will not assess the recoverability of a property's carrying value.
The fair value of real estate assets is highly subjective and is determined through comparable sales information and other market data if available, or through use of an income approach such as the direct capitalization method or the traditional discounted cash flow approach. Such cash flow projections consider factors, including expected future operating income, trends and prospects, as well as the effects of demand, competition and other factors, and therefore are subject to a significant degree of management judgment. Changes in those factors could impact the determination of fair value. In estimating the fair value of undeveloped land, we generally use market data and comparable sales information.
These subjective assessments have a direct impact on our net income because recording an impairment charge results in an immediate negative adjustment to net income. There can be no assurance that we will not take additional charges in the future related to the impairment of our assets. Any future impairment could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations in the period in which the charge is taken.
5
Adverse global market and economic conditions may adversely affect us and could cause us to recognize additional impairment charges or otherwise harm our performance.
We are unable to predict the timing, severity, and length of adverse market and economic conditions. Adverse market and economic conditions may impede our ability to generate sufficient operating cash flow to pay expenses, maintain properties, pay distributions to our stock and unit holders, and refinance debt. During adverse periods, there may be significant uncertainty in the valuation of our properties and investments that could result in a substantial decrease in their value. No assurance can be given that we would be able to recover the current carrying amount of all of our properties and investments in the future. Our failure to do so would require us to recognize additional impairment charges for the period in which we reached that conclusion, which could materially and adversely affect us and the market price of our common stock.
Our acquisition activities may not produce the returns that we expect.
Our investment strategy includes investing in high-quality shopping centers that are leased to market-dominant grocers, category-leading anchors, specialty retailers, or restaurants located in areas with high barriers to entry and above average household incomes and population densities. The acquisition of properties entails risks that include, but are not limited to, the following, any of which could adversely affect our results of operations and our ability to meet our obligations:
•
we may not be able to identify suitable properties to acquire or may be unable to complete the acquisition of the properties we identify;
•
properties we acquire may fail to achieve the occupancy or rental rates we project, within the time frames we project, at the time we make the decision to invest, which may result in the properties' failure to achieve the returns we projected;
•
our pre-acquisition evaluation of the physical condition of each new investment may not detect certain defects or identify necessary repairs until after the property is acquired, which could significantly increase our total acquisition costs or decrease cash flow from the property;
•
our investigation of a property or building prior to our acquisition, and any representations we may receive from the seller of such building or property, may fail to reveal various liabilities, which could reduce the cash flow from the property or increase our acquisition costs;
•
our estimate of the costs to improve, reposition or redevelop a property may prove to be too low, or the time we estimate to complete the improvement, repositioning or redevelopment may be too short, either of which could result in the property failing to achieve the returns we have projected, either temporarily or for a longer time; and
•
we may not be able to integrate an acquisition into our existing operations successfully.
Unsuccessful development activities or a slowdown in development activities could have a direct impact on our revenues and our revenue growth.
We actively pursue development activities as opportunities arise. Development activities require various government and other approvals for entitlements and any delay in such approvals may significantly delay the development process. We may not recover our investment in development projects for which approvals are not received. We incur other risks associated with development activities, including:
•
the ability to lease developments to full occupancy on a timely basis;
•
the risk that occupancy rates and rents of a completed project will not be sufficient to make the project profitable;
•
the risk that development costs of a project may exceed original estimates, possibly making the project unprofitable;
•
delays in the development and construction process;
•
the risk that we may abandon development opportunities and lose our investment in these developments;
•
the risk that the current size of our development pipeline will strain the organization's capacity to complete the developments within the targeted timelines and at the expected returns on invested capital; and
•
the lack of cash flow during the construction period.
If our developments are unsuccessful or we experience a slowdown in development activities, our revenue growth and/or operating expenses may be adversely impacted.
6
We may experience difficulty or delay in renewing leases or re-leasing space.
We derive most of our revenue directly or indirectly from rent received from our tenants. We are subject to the risks that, upon expiration or termination of leases, leases for space in our properties may not be renewed, space may not be re-leased, or the terms of renewal or re-lease, including the cost of required renovations or concessions to tenants, may be less favorable than current lease terms. As a result, our results of operations and our net income could be adversely impacted.
We may be unable to sell properties when appropriate because real estate investments are illiquid.
Real estate investments generally cannot be sold quickly. Our inability to respond promptly to unfavorable changes in the performance of our investments could have an adverse effect on our ability to meet our obligations and make distributions to our stock and unit holders.
Geographic concentration of our properties makes our business vulnerable to natural disasters and severe weather conditions, which could have an adverse effect on our cash flow and operating results.
A significant portion of our property gross leasable area is located in areas that are susceptible to the harmful effects of earthquakes, tropical storms, hurricanes, tornadoes, wildfires, and similar natural disasters. As of December 31, 2012, approximately
23.4%
,
14.9%
, and
9.5%
of our property gross leasable area, on a pro-rata basis, was located in California, Florida, and Texas, respectively. Intense weather conditions during the last decade have caused our cost of property insurance to increase significantly. While much of the cost of this insurance is passed on to our tenants as reimbursable property costs, some tenants do not pay a pro rata share of these costs under their leases. These weather conditions also disrupt our business and the business of our tenants, which could affect the ability of some tenants to pay rent and may reduce the willingness of residents to remain in or move to the affected area. Therefore, as a result of the geographic concentration of our properties, we face demonstrable risks, including higher costs, such as uninsured property losses and higher insurance premiums, and disruptions to our business and the businesses of our tenants.
An uninsured loss or a loss that exceeds the insurance policies on our properties could subject us to loss of capital or revenue on those properties.
We carry comprehensive liability, fire, flood, extended coverage, rental loss, and environmental insurance for our properties with policy specifications and insured limits customarily carried for similar properties. We believe that the insurance carried on our properties is adequate and consistent with industry standards. There are, however, some types of losses, such as from hurricanes, terrorism, wars or earthquakes, which may be uninsurable, or the cost of insuring against such losses may not be economically justifiable. In addition, tenants generally are required to indemnify and hold us harmless from liabilities resulting from injury to persons or damage to personal or real property, on or off the premises, due to activities conducted by tenants or their agents on the properties (including without limitation any environmental contamination), and at the tenant's expense, to obtain and keep in full force during the term of the lease, liability and property damage insurance policies. However, our tenants may not properly maintain their insurance policies or have the ability to pay the deductibles associated with such policies. Should a loss occur that is uninsured or in an amount exceeding the combined aggregate limits for the policies noted above, or in the event of a loss that is subject to a substantial deductible under an insurance policy, we could lose all or part of our capital invested in, and anticipated revenue from, one or more of the properties, which could have a material adverse effect on our operating results and financial condition, as well as our ability to make distributions to stock and unit holders.
Loss of our key personnel could adversely affect the value of our Parent Company's stock price.
We depend on the efforts of our key executive personnel. Although we believe qualified replacements could be found for our key executives, the loss of their services could adversely affect our Parent Company's stock price.
We face competition from numerous sources, including other real estate investment trusts and small real estate owners.
The ownership of shopping centers is highly fragmented. We face competition from other real estate investment trusts as well as from numerous small owners in the acquisition, ownership, and leasing of shopping centers. We compete to develop shopping centers with other real estate investment trusts engaged in development activities as well as with local, regional, and national real estate developers. If we cannot successfully compete in our targeted markets, our cash flow, and therefore distributions to stock and unit holders, may be adversely affected.
7
Costs of environmental remediation could reduce our cash flow available for distribution to stock and unit holders.
Under various federal, state and local laws, an owner or manager of real property may be liable for the costs of removal or remediation of hazardous or toxic substances on the property. These laws often impose liability without regard to whether the owner knew of, or was responsible for, the presence of hazardous or toxic substances. The cost of any required remediation could exceed the value of the property and/or the aggregate assets of the owner or the responsible party. The presence of, or the failure to properly remediate, hazardous or toxic substances may adversely affect our ability to sell or lease a contaminated property or to borrow using the property as collateral. Any of these developments could reduce cash flow and our ability to make distributions to stock and unit holders.
Compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and fire, safety and other regulations may require us to make unintended expenditures that adversely affect our cash flows.
All of our properties are required to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”). The ADA has separate compliance requirements for “public accommodations” and “commercial facilities,” but generally requires that buildings be made accessible to people with disabilities. Compliance with the ADA requirements could require removal of access barriers, and noncompliance could result in imposition of fines by the U.S. government or an award of damages to private litigants, or both. While the tenants to whom we lease properties are obligated by law to comply with the ADA provisions, and typically under tenant leases are obligated to cover costs associated with compliance, if required changes involve greater expenditures than anticipated, or if the changes must be made on a more accelerated basis than anticipated, the ability of these tenants to cover costs could be adversely affected. In addition, we are required to operate the properties in compliance with fire and safety regulations, building codes and other land use regulations, as they may be adopted by governmental entities and become applicable to the properties. We may be required to make substantial capital expenditures to comply with these requirements, and these expenditures could have a material adverse effect on our ability to meet our financial obligations and make distributions to our stock and unit holders.
If we do not maintain the security of tenant-related information, we could incur substantial additional costs and become subject to litigation.
We have implemented an online payment system where we receive certain information about our tenants that depends upon secure transmissions of confidential information over public networks, including information permitting cashless payments. A compromise of our security systems that results in information being obtained by unauthorized persons could adversely affect our operations, results of operations, financial condition and liquidity, and could result in litigation against us or the imposition of penalties. In addition, a security breach could require that we expend significant additional resources related to our information security systems and could result in a disruption of our operations.
We rely extensively on computer systems to process transactions and manage our business. Disruptions in both our primary and secondary (back-up) systems could harm our ability to run our business.
Although we have independent, redundant and physically separate primary and secondary computer systems, it is critical that we maintain uninterrupted operation of our business-critical computer systems. Our computer systems, including our back-up systems, are subject to damage or interruption from power outages, computer and telecommunications failures, computer viruses, security breaches, catastrophic events such as fires, tornadoes and hurricanes, and usage errors by our employees. If our computer systems and our back-up systems are damaged or cease to function properly, we may have to make a significant investment to repair or replace them, and we may suffer interruptions in our operations in the interim. Any material interruption in both of our computer systems and back-up systems may have a material adverse effect on our business or results of operations.
Risk Factors Related to Our Co-investment Partnerships and Acquisition Structure
We do not have voting control over our joint venture investments, so we are unable to ensure that our objectives will be pursued.
We have invested as a partner in a number of joint venture investments for the acquisition or development of properties. These investments involve risks not present in a wholly-owned project. We do not have voting control over the ventures. The other partner might (i) have interests or goals that are inconsistent with our interests or goals or (ii) otherwise impede our objectives. The other partner also might become insolvent or bankrupt. These factors could limit the return that we receive from such investments or cause our cash flows to be lower than our estimates.
8
The termination of our co-investment partnerships could adversely affect our cash flow, operating results, and our ability to make distributions to stock and unit holders.
If co-investment partnerships owning a significant number of properties were dissolved for any reason, we would lose the asset and property management fees from these co-investment partnerships, which could adversely affect our operating results and our cash available for distribution to stock and unit holders.
Risk Factors Related to Funding Strategies and Capital Structure
Higher market capitalization rates for our properties could adversely impact our ability to sell properties and fund developments and acquisitions, and could dilute earnings.
As part of our funding strategy, we sell operating properties that no longer meet our investment standards. These sales proceeds are used to fund the construction of new developments. An increase in market capitalization rates could cause a reduction in the value of centers identified for sale, which would have an adverse impact on the amount of cash generated. In order to meet the cash requirements of our development program, we may be required to sell more properties than initially planned, which could have a negative impact on our earnings.
We depend on external sources of capital, which may not be available in the future on favorable terms or at all.
To qualify as a REIT, the Parent Company must, among other things, distribute to its stockholders each year at least 90% of its REIT taxable income (excluding any net capital gains). Because of these distribution requirements, we will likely not be able to fund all future capital needs, including capital for acquisitions or developments, with income from operations. We therefore will have to rely on third-party sources of capital, which may or may not be available on favorable terms or at all. Our access to third-party sources of capital depends on a number of things, including the market's perception of our growth potential and our current and potential future earnings. Our access to debt depends on our credit rating, the willingness of creditors to lend to us and conditions in the capital markets. In addition to finding creditors willing to lend to us, we are dependent upon our joint venture partners to contribute their share of any amount needed to repay or refinance existing debt when lenders reduce the amount of debt our joint ventures are eligible to refinance.
In addition, our existing debt arrangements also impose covenants that limit our flexibility in obtaining other financing, such as a prohibition on negative pledge agreements. Additional equity offerings may result in substantial dilution of stockholders' interests and additional debt financing may substantially increase our degree of leverage.
Without access to external sources of capital, we would be required to pay outstanding debt with our operating cash flows and proceeds from property sales. Our operating cash flows may not be sufficient to pay our outstanding debt as it comes due and real estate investments generally cannot be sold quickly at a return we believe is appropriate. If we are required to deleverage our business with operating cash flows and proceeds from property sales, we may be forced to reduce the amount of, or eliminate altogether, our distributions to stock and unit holders or refrain from making investments in our business.
Our debt financing may reduce distributions to stock and unit holders.
Our organizational documents do not limit the amount of debt that we may incur. In addition, we do not expect to generate sufficient funds from operations to make balloon principal payments on our debt when due. If we are unable to refinance our debt on acceptable terms, we might be forced (i) to dispose of properties, which might result in losses, or (ii) to obtain financing at unfavorable terms. Either could reduce the cash flow available for distributions to stock and unit holders. If we cannot make required mortgage payments, the mortgagee could foreclose on the property securing the mortgage, causing the loss of cash flow from that property.
9
Covenants in our debt agreements may restrict our operating activities and adversely affect our financial condition.
Our unsecured notes, unsecured term loan, and unsecured line of credit contain customary covenants, including compliance with financial ratios, such as ratio of total debt to gross asset value and fixed charge coverage ratio. Fixed charge coverage ratio is defined as earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization ("EBITDA") divided by the sum of interest expense and scheduled mortgage principal paid to our lenders plus dividends paid to our preferred stockholders. Our debt arrangements also restrict our ability to enter into a transaction that would result in a change of control. These covenants may limit our operational flexibility and our acquisition activities. Moreover, if we breach any of the covenants in our debt agreements, and did not cure the breach within the applicable cure period, our lenders could require us to repay the debt immediately, even in the absence of a payment default. Many of our debt arrangements, including our unsecured notes, unsecured term loan, and unsecured line of credit are cross-defaulted, which means that the lenders under those debt arrangements can put us in default and require immediate repayment of their debt if we breach and fail to cure a default under certain of our other material 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 stock.
Increases in interest rates would cause our borrowing costs to rise and negatively impact our results of operations.
While a significant amount of our outstanding debt has fixed interest rates, we do borrow funds at variable interest rates under our credit facilities. Increases in interest rates would increase our interest expense on any variable rate debt, in addition, increases in interest rates will affect the terms under which we refinance our existing debt as it matures.
This would reduce our future earnings and cash flows, which could adversely affect our ability to service our debt and meet our other obligations and also could reduce the amount we are able to distribute to our stock and unit holders.
Risk Factors Related to Interest Rates and the Market Price for Our Stock
Changes in economic and market conditions could adversely affect the Parent Company's stock price.
The market price of our common stock may fluctuate significantly in response to many factors, many of which are out of our control, including:
•
actual or anticipated variations in our operating results or dividends;
•
changes in our funds from operations or earnings estimates;
•
publication of research reports about us or the real estate industry in general and recommendations by financial analysts or actions taken by rating agencies with respect to our securities or those of other REIT's;
•
the ability of our tenants to pay rent and meet their other obligations to us under current lease terms and our ability to re-lease space as leases expire;
•
increases in market interest rates that drive purchasers of our stock to demand a higher dividend yield;
•
changes in market valuations of similar companies;
•
adverse market reaction to any additional debt we incur in the future;
•
any future issuances of equity securities;
•
additions or departures of key management personnel;
•
strategic actions by us or our competitors, such as acquisitions or restructurings;
•
actions by institutional stockholders;
•
speculation in the press or investment community; and
•
general market and economic conditions.
These factors may cause the market price of our common stock to decline, regardless of our financial condition, results of operations, business or prospects. It is impossible to ensure that the market price of our common stock will not fall in the future. A decrease in the market price of our common stock could reduce our ability to raise additional equity in the public markets. Selling common stock at a decreased market price would have a dilutive impact on existing stockholders.
10
Risk Factors Related to Federal Income Tax Laws
If the Parent Company fails to qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes, it would be subject to federal income tax at regular corporate rates.
We believe that we qualify for taxation as a REIT for federal income tax purposes, and we plan to operate so that we can continue to meet the requirements for taxation as a REIT. If we qualify as a REIT, we generally will not be subject to federal income tax on our income that we distribute currently to our stockholders. Many of the REIT requirements, however, are highly technical and complex. The determination that we are a REIT requires an analysis of various factual matters and circumstances, some of which may not be totally within our control and some of which involve questions of interpretation. For example, to qualify as a REIT, at least 95% of our gross income must come from specific passive sources, like rent, that are itemized in the REIT tax laws. There can be no assurance that the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) or a court would agree with the positions we have taken in interpreting the REIT requirements. We are also required to distribute to our stockholders at least 90% of our REIT taxable income, excluding capital gains. The fact that we hold many of our assets through co-investment partnerships and their subsidiaries further complicates the application of the REIT requirements. Even a technical or inadvertent mistake could jeopardize our REIT status. Furthermore, Congress and the IRS might make changes to the tax laws and regulations, and the courts might issue new rulings, that make it more difficult, or impossible, for us to remain qualified as a REIT.
Also, unless the IRS granted us relief under certain statutory provisions, we would remain disqualified as a REIT for four years following the year we first failed to qualify. If we failed to qualify as a REIT (currently and/or with respect to any tax years for which the statute of limitations has not expired), we would have to pay significant income taxes, reducing cash available to pay dividends, which would likely have a significant adverse effect on the value of our securities. In addition, we would no longer be required to pay any dividends to stockholders. Although we believe that we qualify as a REIT, we cannot assure you that we will continue to qualify or remain qualified as a REIT for tax purposes.
Even if we qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes, we are required to pay certain federal, state and local taxes on our income and property. For example, if we have net income from “prohibited transactions,” that income will be subject to a 100% tax. In general, prohibited transactions include sales or other dispositions of property held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of business. The determination as to whether a particular sale is a prohibited transaction depends on the facts and circumstances related to that sale. While we have undertaken a significant number of asset sales in recent years, we do not believe that those sales should be considered prohibited transactions, but there can be no assurance that the IRS would not contend otherwise.
Risk Factors Related to Our Ownership Limitations and the Florida Business Corporation Act
Restrictions on the ownership of the Parent Company's capital stock to preserve our REIT status could delay or prevent a change in control.
Ownership of more than 7% by value of our outstanding capital stock is prohibited, with certain exceptions, by our articles of incorporation, for the purpose of maintaining our qualification as a REIT. This 7% limitation may discourage a change in control and may also (i) deter tender offers for our capital stock, which offers may be attractive to our stockholders, or (ii) limit the opportunity for our stockholders to receive a premium for their capital stock that might otherwise exist if an investor attempted to assemble a block in excess of 7% of our outstanding capital stock or to affect a change in control.
The issuance of the Parent Company's capital stock could delay or prevent a change in control.
Our articles of incorporation authorize our Board of Directors to issue up to 30,000,000 shares of preferred stock and 10,000,000 shares of special common stock and to establish the preferences and rights of any shares issued. The issuance of preferred stock or special common stock could have the effect of delaying or preventing a change in control. The provisions of the Florida Business Corporation Act regarding control share acquisitions and affiliated transactions could also deter potential acquisitions by preventing the acquiring party from voting the common stock it acquires or consummating a merger or other extraordinary corporate transaction without the approval of our disinterested stockholders.
Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments
None.
11
Item 2. Properties
The following table is a list of the shopping centers summarized by state and in order of largest holdings presented for Consolidated Properties (excludes properties owned by unconsolidated co-investment partnerships):
December 31, 2012
December 31, 2011
Location
#
Properties
GLA (in thousands)
% of Total
GLA
%
Leased
#
Properties
GLA (in thousands)
% of Total
GLA
%
Leased
California
43
5,544
24.6
%
95.1
%
44
5,521
23.3
%
91.1
%
Florida
39
3,961
17.6
%
93.0
%
45
4,550
19.2
%
92.6
%
Texas
18
2,324
10.3
%
95.2
%
22
2,932
12.4
%
93.5
%
Ohio
10
1,402
6.2
%
97.1
%
12
1,592
6.7
%
96.3
%
Georgia
15
1,386
6.2
%
93.1
%
14
1,269
5.3
%
89.1
%
Colorado
14
1,163
5.2
%
94.3
%
14
1,162
4.9
%
91.6
%
Virginia
7
951
4.2
%
94.2
%
7
951
4.0
%
92.9
%
Illinois
4
748
3.3
%
97.3
%
5
863
3.6
%
95.0
%
North Carolina
9
743
3.3
%
91.8
%
9
837
3.5
%
92.6
%
Oregon
8
741
3.3
%
91.2
%
8
741
3.1
%
90.8
%
Washington
6
683
3.0
%
92.8
%
5
357
1.5
%
94.1
%
Missouri
4
408
1.8
%
99.0
%
4
408
1.7
%
98.7
%
Tennessee
5
392
1.7
%
95.9
%
6
479
2.0
%
94.1
%
Arizona
3
387
1.7
%
88.1
%
3
389
1.6
%
84.0
%
Massachusetts
2
357
1.6
%
94.6
%
2
360
1.5
%
94.6
%
Nevada
1
331
1.5
%
91.1
%
1
331
1.4
%
88.7
%
Pennsylvania
4
325
1.5
%
99.1
%
4
322
1.4
%
98.4
%
Delaware
2
243
1.1
%
94.2
%
2
243
1.0
%
89.6
%
Michigan
2
118
0.5
%
43.9
%
2
118
0.5
%
39.2
%
Maryland
1
88
0.4
%
100.0
%
1
88
0.4
%
97.2
%
Alabama
1
85
0.4
%
86.2
%
1
85
0.4
%
86.2
%
South Carolina
2
74
0.3
%
100.0
%
2
74
0.3
%
98.1
%
Indiana
3
55
0.2
%
89.8
%
3
55
0.2
%
82.3
%
Kentucky
1
23
0.1
%
100.0
%
1
23
0.1
%
93.9
%
Total
204
22,532
100.0
%
94.1
%
217
23,750
100.0
%
92.2
%
Certain Consolidated Properties are encumbered by mortgage loans of
$474.0 million
as of
December 31, 2012
.
The weighted average annual effective rent for the consolidated portfolio of properties, net of tenant concessions, is $16.95 per square foot as of
December 31, 2012
.
12
The following table is a list of the shopping centers summarized by state and in order of largest holdings presented for Unconsolidated Properties (includes properties owned by unconsolidated co-investment partnerships, excluding the properties of BRE Throne, LLC ("BRET") as the property holdings of BRET do not impact the rate of return on Regency's preferred stock investment):
December 31, 2012
December 31, 2011
Location
#
Properties
GLA (in thousands)
% of Total
GLA
%
Leased
#
Properties
GLA (in thousands)
% of Total
GLA
%
Leased
California
25
3,265
18.4
%
95.7
%
27
3,551
19.3
%
95.5
%
Virginia
22
2,789
15.7
%
96.3
%
21
2,780
15.1
%
94.8
%
Maryland
14
1,577
8.9
%
92.9
%
15
1,727
9.4
%
92.9
%
North Carolina
8
1,276
7.2
%
96.4
%
7
1,192
6.5
%
95.8
%
Texas
9
1,227
6.9
%
95.9
%
9
1,227
6.7
%
96.0
%
Illinois
8
1,067
6.0
%
97.1
%
10
1,328
7.2
%
97.5
%
Pennsylvania
7
982
5.5
%
96.1
%
7
982
5.3
%
95.9
%
Colorado
6
962
5.4
%
93.0
%
6
941
5.1
%
95.5
%
Florida
11
841
4.7
%
93.7
%
11
841
4.6
%
93.2
%
Minnesota
5
675
3.8
%
97.5
%
5
675
3.7
%
98.4
%
Washington
5
577
3.3
%
94.5
%
5
577
3.1
%
90.9
%
Ohio
2
532
3.0
%
90.2
%
2
532
2.9
%
93.3
%
South Carolina
4
286
1.6
%
96.3
%
4
286
1.6
%
96.3
%
Wisconsin
2
269
1.5
%
96.9
%
2
269
1.5
%
93.5
%
Georgia
3
244
1.4
%
95.3
%
3
243
1.3
%
92.0
%
Connecticut
1
180
1.0
%
99.8
%
1
180
1.0
%
99.8
%
New Jersey
2
157
0.9
%
94.0
%
2
157
0.9
%
96.6
%
Massachusetts
1
149
0.8
%
95.4
%
1
185
1.0
%
98.1
%
New York
1
141
0.8
%
100.0
%
—
—
—
%
—
%
Indiana
2
139
0.8
%
91.9
%
2
139
0.7
%
93.1
%
Alabama
1
119
0.7
%
71.6
%
1
119
0.6
%
64.6
%
Arizona
1
108
0.6
%
89.2
%
1
108
0.6
%
92.1
%
Oregon
1
93
0.5
%
94.8
%
1
93
0.5
%
92.5
%
Delaware
1
67
0.4
%
100.0
%
2
227
1.2
%
89.3
%
Dist. of Columbia
2
40
0.2
%
100.0
%
2
40
0.2
%
100.0
%
Total
144
17,762
100.0
%
95.2
%
147
18,399
100.0
%
94.8
%
Certain Unconsolidated Properties are encumbered by mortgage loans of
$1.8 billion
as of
December 31, 2012
.
The weighted average annual effective rent for the unconsolidated portfolio of properties, net of tenant concessions, is $17.03 per square foot as of
December 31, 2012
.
13
The following table summarizes the largest tenants occupying our shopping centers for Consolidated Properties plus Regency's pro-rata share of Unconsolidated Properties, excluding the properties of BRET, as of
December 31, 2012
, based upon a percentage of total annualized base rent exceeding or equal to 0.5% (GLA and dollars in thousands):
Tenant
GLA
Percent of Company Owned GLA
Rent
Percentage of Annualized Base Rent
Number of Leased Stores
Anchor Owned Stores
(1)
Kroger
1,987
7.0
%
$
19,182
4.3
%
40
7
Publix
1,948
6.9
%
19,041
4.2
%
53
1
Safeway
1,535
5.4
%
14,696
3.3
%
45
6
Supervalu
774
2.7
%
9,559
2.1
%
25
1
CVS
501
1.8
%
8,051
1.8
%
47
—
TJX Companies
573
2.0
%
7,081
1.6
%
27
—
Whole Foods
252
0.9
%
5,485
1.2
%
9
—
PETCO
264
0.9
%
5,450
1.2
%
32
—
Ahold
361
1.3
%
5,134
1.1
%
13
—
Ross Dress For Less
273
1.0
%
4,341
1.0
%
16
—
H.E.B.
295
1.0
%
4,326
1.0
%
5
—
Walgreens
150
0.5
%
3,906
0.9
%
13
—
JPMorgan Chase Bank
66
0.2
%
3,599
0.8
%
25
—
Sears Holdings
426
1.5
%
3,445
0.8
%
8
1
Trader Joe's
124
0.4
%
3,373
0.7
%
14
—
Starbucks
92
0.3
%
3,335
0.7
%
78
—
Wells Fargo Bank
72
0.3
%
3,329
0.7
%
34
—
Rite Aid
207
0.7
%
3,206
0.7
%
24
—
Bank of America
70
0.2
%
3,183
0.7
%
25
—
Sports Authority
141
0.5
%
3,063
0.7
%
4
—
Harris Teeter
248
0.9
%
2,929
0.7
%
8
—
Target
350
1.2
%
2,884
0.6
%
4
14
Subway
93
0.3
%
2,832
0.6
%
107
—
Toys "R" Us
176
0.6
%
2,750
0.6
%
7
—
Michael's
169
0.6
%
2,579
0.6
%
10
—
Wal-Mart
435
1.5
%
2,466
0.5
%
4
5
Hallmark
133
0.5
%
2,406
0.5
%
40
—
(1)
Stores owned by anchor tenant that are attached to our centers.
Regency's leases for tenant space under 5,000 square feet generally have terms ranging from three to five years. Leases greater than 10,000 square feet generally have lease terms in excess of five years, mostly comprised of anchor tenants. Many of the anchor leases contain provisions allowing the tenant the option of extending the term of the lease at expiration. The leases provide for the monthly payment in advance of fixed minimum rent, additional rents calculated as a percentage of the tenant's sales, the tenant's pro-rata share of real estate taxes, insurance, and common area maintenance (“CAM”) expenses, and reimbursement for utility costs if not directly metered.
14
The following table sets forth a schedule of lease expirations for the next ten years and thereafter, assuming no tenants renew their leases (GLA and dollars in thousands):
Lease Expiration Year
Number of Tenants with Expiring Leases
Expiring GLA
(2)
Percent of Total Company GLA
(2)
Minimum Rent Expiring Leases
(3)
Percent of Minimum Rent
(3)
(1)
173
218
0.8
%
$
4,697
1.0
%
2013
936
1,854
7.3
%
37,980
8.4
%
2014
1,057
2,610
10.2
%
52,016
11.6
%
2015
1,059
2,312
9.1
%
47,824
10.6
%
2016
936
2,758
10.8
%
48,383
10.8
%
2017
1,011
3,303
12.9
%
64,138
14.2
%
2018
316
1,780
7.0
%
28,336
6.3
%
2019
158
1,271
5.0
%
20,302
4.5
%
2020
144
1,493
5.8
%
22,711
5.0
%
2021
174
1,245
4.9
%
20,094
4.5
%
2022
222
1,666
6.5
%
25,845
5.8
%
Thereafter
274
5,028
19.7
%
78,048
17.3
%
Total
6,460
25,538
100.0
%
$
450,374
100.0
%
(1)
Leases currently under month-to-month rent or in process of renewal.
(2)
Represents GLA for Consolidated Properties plus Regency's pro-rata share of Unconsolidated Properties.
(3)
Minimum rent includes current minimum rent and future contractual rent steps for the Consolidated Properties plus Regency's pro-rata share from Unconsolidated Properties, but excludes additional rent such as percentage rent, common area maintenance, real estate taxes and insurance reimbursements.
15
See the following property table and also see Item 7, Management's Discussion and Analysis for further information about Regency's properties.
Property Name
(1)
Year
Acquired
Year
Con-
structed
(2)
Gross Leasable Area
(GLA)
Percent
Leased
(3)
Grocer & Major Tenant(s) >40,000 Sq Ft
(6)
Drug Stores & Other Junior Anchors > 10,000 Sq Ft
CALIFORNIA
Los Angeles / Southern CA
Amerige Heights Town Center
2000
2000
89,181
100.0
%
Albertsons, (Target)
—
Brea Marketplace
(5)
2005
1987
352,226
98.1
%
Sprout's Markets, Target
24 Hour Fitness, Big 5 Sporting Goods, Beverages & More!, Childtime Childcare, Golfsmith
El Camino Shopping Center
1999
1995
135,728
95.1
%
Von's Food & Drug
Sav-On Drugs
Granada Village
(5)
2005
1965
225,528
97.9
%
Sprout's Markets
Rite Aid, TJ Maxx, Stein Mart, PETCO, Homegoods
Hasley Canyon Village
(5)
2003
2003
65,801
100.0
%
Ralphs
—
Heritage Plaza
1999
1981
230,163
99.4
%
Ralphs
CVS, Daiso, Mitsuwa Marketplace, Total Woman
Laguna Niguel Plaza
(5)
2005
1985
41,943
96.4
%
(Albertsons)
CVS
Marina Shores
(5)
2008
2001
67,727
100.0
%
Whole Foods
PETCO
Morningside Plaza
1999
1996
91,212
97.4
%
Stater Bros.
—
Newland Center
1999
1985
149,140
96.0
%
Albertsons
—
Plaza Hermosa
1999
1984
94,777
100.0
%
Von's Food & Drug
Sav-On Drugs
Rona Plaza
1999
1989
51,760
100.0
%
Superior Super Warehouse
—
Seal Beach
(5)
2002
1966
96,858
97.8
%
Von's Food & Drug
CVS
South Bay Village
2012
2012
107,706
100.0
%
Orchard Supply Hardware
Homegoods
Twin Oaks Shopping Center
(5)
2005
1978
98,399
100.0
%
Ralphs
Rite Aid
Valencia Crossroads
2002
2003
172,856
98.8
%
Whole Foods, Kohl's
—
Vine at Castaic
2005
2005
27,314
70.4
%
—
—
Westridge Village
2001
2003
92,287
96.6
%
Albertsons
Beverages & More!
Woodman Van Nuys
1999
1992
107,614
99.1
%
El Super
—
Silverado Plaza
(5)
2005
1974
84,916
100.0
%
Nob Hill
Longs Drug
Gelson's Westlake Market Plaza
2002
2002
84,975
95.5
%
Gelson's Markets
—
Oakbrook Plaza
1999
1982
83,286
99.3
%
Albertsons
(Longs Drug)
Ventura Village
1999
1984
76,070
91.3
%
Von's Food & Drug
—
Westlake Village Plaza and Center
1999
1975
190,529
90.2
%
Von's Food & Drug and Sprouts
(CVS), Longs Drug, Total Woman
Falcon Ridge Town Center Phase I
(5)
2003
2004
232,754
88.0
%
Stater Bros., (Target)
Sports Authority, Ross Dress for Less, Michaels, Party City
Falcon Ridge Town Center Phase II
(5)
2005
2005
66,864
100.0
%
24 Hour Fitness
CVS
French Valley Village Center
2004
2004
98,752
95.3
%
Stater Bros.
CVS
Indio Towne Center
2006
2010
179,505
85.6
%
(Home Depot), (WinCo), Toys R Us
CVS, 24 Hour Fitness, PETCO, Party City
Jefferson Square
2007
2007
38,013
81.4
%
Fresh & Easy
CVS
4S Commons Town Center
2004
2004
240,060
92.2
%
Ralphs, Jimbo's...Naturally!
Bed Bath & Beyond, Cost Plus World Market, CVS, Griffin Ace Hardware
Balboa Mesa Shopping Center
2012
1974
189,321
96.5
%
Von's Food & Drug, Kohl's
CVS
Costa Verde Center
1999
1988
178,623
94.7
%
Bristol Farms
Bookstar, The Boxing Club
El Norte Pkwy Plaza
1999
1984
90,549
84.2
%
Von's Food & Drug
CVS
Friars Mission Center
1999
1989
146,897
100.0
%
Ralphs
Longs Drug
16
Property Name
(1)
Year
Acquired
Year
Con-
structed
(2)
Gross Leasable Area
(GLA)
Percent
Leased
(3)
Grocer & Major Tenant(s) >40,000 Sq Ft
(6)
Drug Stores & Other Junior Anchors > 10,000 Sq Ft
Navajo Shopping Center
(5)
2005
1964
102,139
95.5
%
Albertsons
Rite Aid, O'Reilly Auto Parts
Point Loma Plaza
(5)
2005
1987
212,415
94.0
%
Von's Food & Drug
Sport Chalet 5, 24 Hour Fitness, Jo-Ann Fabrics
Rancho San Diego Village
(5)
2005
1981
153,256
87.6
%
Von's Food & Drug
(Longs Drug), 24 Hour Fitness
Twin Peaks
1999
1988
198,139
99.4
%
Albertsons, Target
—
Uptown District
2012
1990
148,638
96.7
%
Ralphs, Trader Joe's
—
Vista Village IV
2006
2006
11,000
45.5
%
—
—
Vista Village Phase I
(5)
2002
2003
129,009
96.7
%
Krikorian Theaters, (Lowe's)
—
Vista Village Phase II
(5)
2002
2003
55,000
45.5
%
Frazier Farms
—
San Francisco / Northern CA
Auburn Village
(5)
2005
1990
133,944
85.4
%
Bel Air Market
Dollar Tree, Goodwill Industries, (CVS)
Bayhill Shopping Center
(5)
2005
1990
121,846
100.0
%
Mollie Stone's Market
CVS
Clayton Valley Shopping Center
2003
2004
260,205
92.9
%
Fresh & Easy, Orchard Supply Hardware
Longs Drugs, Dollar Tree, Ross Dress For Less
Diablo Plaza
1999
1982
63,265
94.3
%
(Safeway)
(CVS), Beverages & More
El Cerrito Plaza
2000
2000
256,035
98.9
%
(Lucky's), Trader Joe's
(Longs Drug), Bed Bath & Beyond, Barnes & Noble, Jo-Ann Fabrics, PETCO, Ross Dress For Less
Encina Grande
1999
1965
102,413
95.8
%
Safeway
Walgreens
Folsom Prairie City Crossing
1999
1999
90,237
92.4
%
Safeway
—
Gateway 101
2008
2008
92,110
100.0
%
(Home Depot), (Best Buy), Sports Authority, Nordstrom Rack
—
Oak Shade Town Center
2011
1998
103,762
92.3
%
Safeway
Office Max, Rite Aid
Pleasant Hill Shopping Center
(5)
2005
1970
227,681
100.0
%
Target, Toys "R" Us
Barnes & Noble, Ross Dress for Less
Powell Street Plaza
2001
1987
165,928
100.0
%
Trader Joe's
PETCO, Beverages & More!, Ross Dress For Less, DB Shoe Company, Marshalls
Raley's Supermarket
(5)
2007
1964
62,827
100.0
%
Raley's
—
San Leandro Plaza
1999
1982
50,432
100.0
%
(Safeway)
(Longs Drug)
Sequoia Station
1999
1996
103,148
94.2
%
(Safeway)
Longs Drug, Barnes & Noble, Old Navy, Pier 1
Strawflower Village
1999
1985
78,827
95.3
%
Safeway
(Longs Drug)
Tassajara Crossing
1999
1990
146,140
96.4
%
Safeway
Longs Drug, Tassajara Valley Hardware
Woodside Central
1999
1993
80,591
100.0
%
(Target)
Chuck E. Cheese, Marshalls
Ygnacio Plaza
(5)
2005
1968
109,701
100.0
%
Fresh & Easy
Sports Basement
Blossom Valley
(5)
1999
1990
93,316
98.4
%
Safeway
CVS
Loehmanns Plaza California
1999
1983
113,310
96.9
%
(Safeway)
Longs Drug, Loehmann's
Mariposa Shopping Center
(5)
2005
1957
126,658
100.0
%
Safeway
Longs Drug, Ross Dress for Less
Snell & Branham Plaza
(5)
2005
1988
92,352
100.0
%
Safeway
—
West Park Plaza
1999
1996
88,104
98.4
%
Safeway
Rite Aid
Golden Hills Promenade
2006
2006
241,846
95.8
%
Lowe's
Bed Bath & Beyond, TJ Maxx
Five Points Shopping Center
(5)
2005
1960
144,553
98.5
%
Albertsons
Longs Drug, Ross Dress for Less, Big 5 Sporting Goods, PETCO
East Washington Place
(4)
2011
2011
203,155
81.8
%
(Target), Dick's Sporting Goods, TJ Maxx
—
Corral Hollow
(5)
2000
2000
167,184
98.3
%
Safeway, Orchard Supply & Hardware
Longs Drug
17
Property Name
(1)
Year
Acquired
Year
Con-
structed
(2)
Gross Leasable Area
(GLA)
Percent
Leased
(3)
Grocer & Major Tenant(s) >40,000 Sq Ft
(6)
Drug Stores & Other Junior Anchors > 10,000 Sq Ft
Subtotal/Weighted Average (CA)
8,808,500
95.3
%
FLORIDA
Ft. Myers / Cape Coral
Corkscrew Village
2007
1997
82,011
98.3
%
Publix
—
Grande Oak
2000
2000
78,784
94.7
%
Publix
—
Jacksonville / North Florida
Anastasia Plaza
1993
1988
102,342
96.5
%
Publix
—
Canopy Oak Center
(5)
2006
2006
90,042
88.7
%
Publix
—
Carriage Gate
1994
1978
76,784
86.8
%
—
Leon County Tax Collector, TJ Maxx
Courtyard Shopping Center
1993
1987
137,256
100.0
%
(Publix), Target
—
Fleming Island
1998
2000
136,663
77.5
%
Publix, (Target)
PETCO
Hibernia Pavilion
2006
2006
51,298
97.4
%
Publix
—
Hibernia Plaza
2006
2006
8,400
16.7
%
—
(Walgreens)
Horton's Corner
2007
2007
14,820
100.0
%
—
Walgreens
John's Creek Center
(5)
2003
2004
75,101
80.5
%
Publix
—
Julington Village
(5)
1999
1999
81,820
98.3
%
Publix
(CVS)
Lynnhaven
(5)
2001
2001
63,871
100.0
%
Publix
—
Millhopper Shopping Center
1993
1974
80,421
100.0
%
Publix
CVS
Newberry Square
1994
1986
180,524
91.1
%
Publix, K-Mart
Jo-Ann Fabrics
Nocatee Town Center
2007
2007
69,679
100.0
%
Publix
—
Oakleaf Commons
2006
2006
73,717
82.9
%
Publix
(Walgreens)
Ocala Corners
2000
2000
86,772
98.6
%
Publix
—
Old St Augustine Plaza
1996
1990
232,459
93.5
%
Publix, Burlington Coat Factory, Hobby Lobby
—
Pine Tree Plaza
1997
1999
63,387
100.0
%
Publix
—
Plantation Plaza
(5)
2004
2004
77,747
88.0
%
Publix
—
Seminole Shoppes
2009
2009
73,241
98.1
%
Publix
—
Shoppes at Bartram Park
(5)
2005
2004
119,958
94.3
%
Publix, (Kohl's)
(Tutor Time)
Shops at John's Creek
2003
2004
15,490
83.3
%
—
—
Starke
2000
2000
12,739
100.0
%
—
CVS
Vineyard Shopping Center
(5)
2001
2002
62,821
84.7
%
Publix
—
Miami / Fort Lauderdale
Aventura Shopping Center
1994
1974
102,876
76.8
%
Publix
CVS
Berkshire Commons
1994
1992
110,062
97.8
%
Publix
Walgreens
Caligo Crossing
2007
2007
10,763
87.9
%
(Kohl's)
—
Five Corners Plaza
(5)
2005
2001
44,647
100.0
%
Publix
—
18
Property Name
(1)
Year
Acquired
Year
Con-
structed
(2)
Gross Leasable Area
(GLA)
Percent
Leased
(3)
Grocer & Major Tenant(s) >40,000 Sq Ft
(6)
Drug Stores & Other Junior Anchors > 10,000 Sq Ft
Garden Square
1997
1991
90,258
100.0
%
Publix
CVS
Naples Walk Shopping Center
2007
1999
125,390
88.2
%
Publix
—
Pebblebrook Plaza
(5)
2000
2000
76,767
100.0
%
Publix
(Walgreens)
Shoppes @ 104
1998
1990
108,192
96.7
%
Winn-Dixie
Navarro Discount Pharmacies
Welleby Plaza
1996
1982
109,949
91.7
%
Publix
Bealls
Tampa / Orlando
Bloomingdale Square
1998
1987
267,736
98.6
%
Publix, Wal-Mart, Bealls
Ace Hardware
East Towne Center
2002
2003
69,841
90.0
%
Publix
—
Kings Crossing Sun City
1999
1999
75,020
98.7
%
Publix
—
Marketplace Shopping Center
1995
1983
90,296
77.3
%
LA Fitness
—
Northgate Square
2007
1995
75,495
95.8
%
Publix
—
Regency Square
1993
1986
349,848
96.8
%
AMC Theater, Michaels, (Best Buy), (Macdill)
Dollar Tree, Marshalls, Shoe Carnival, Staples, TJ Maxx, PETCO, Ulta
Suncoast Crossing Phase I
2007
2007
108,434
94.8
%
Kohl's
—
Suncoast Crossing Phase II
2008
2008
9,451
44.5
%
(Target)
—
Town Square
1997
1999
44,380
95.7
%
—
PETCO, Pier 1 Imports
Village Center
1995
1993
181,110
86.8
%
Publix
Walgreens, Stein Mart
Westchase
2007
1998
78,998
95.2
%
Publix
—
Willa Springs
(5)
2000
2000
89,930
100.0
%
Publix
—
West Palm Beach / Treasure Cove
Boynton Lakes Plaza
1997
1993
111,625
88.5
%
Publix
Citi Trends, Pet Supermarket
Chasewood Plaza
1993
1986
157,403
95.1
%
Publix
Bealls, Books-A-Million
Island Crossing
(5)
2007
1996
58,456
97.6
%
Publix
—
Wellington Town Square
1996
1982
107,325
93.6
%
Publix
CVS
Subtotal/Weighted Average (FL)
4,802,399
93.1
%
VIRGINIA
Richmond
Gayton Crossing
(5)
2005
1983
156,917
92.7
%
Martin's, (Kroger)
—
Hanover Village Shopping Center
(5)
2005
1971
88,006
86.6
%
—
Tractor Supply Company, Floor Trader
Village Shopping Center
(5)
2005
1948
111,177
96.7
%
Martin's
CVS
Other Virginia
Ashburn Farm Market Center
2000
2000
91,905
100.0
%
Giant Food
—
Ashburn Farm Village Center
(5)
2005
1996
88,897
98.2
%
Shoppers Food Warehouse
—
Braemar Shopping Center
(5)
2004
2004
96,439
96.9
%
Safeway
—
19
Property Name
(1)
Year
Acquired
Year
Con-
structed
(2)
Gross Leasable Area
(GLA)
Percent
Leased
(3)
Grocer & Major Tenant(s) >40,000 Sq Ft
(6)
Drug Stores & Other Junior Anchors > 10,000 Sq Ft
Centre Ridge Marketplace
(5)
2005
1996
104,100
100.0
%
Shoppers Food Warehouse
Sears
Cheshire Station
2000
2000
97,156
97.5
%
Safeway
PETCO
Culpeper Colonnade
2006
2006
131,707
94.0
%
Martin's, (Target)
PetSmart, Staples
Fairfax Shopping Center
2007
1955
75,711
89.2
%
—
Direct Furniture
Festival at Manchester Lakes
(5)
2005
1990
165,130
100.0
%
Shoppers Food Warehouse
—
Fortuna Center Plaza
(5)
2004
2004
104,694
100.0
%
Shoppers Food Warehouse, (Target)
Rite Aid
Fox Mill Shopping Center
(5)
2005
1977
103,269
100.0
%
Giant Food
—
Greenbriar Town Center
(5)
2005
1972
339,939
96.0
%
Giant Food
CVS, HMY Roomstore, Total Beverage, Ross Dress for Less, Marshalls, PETCO
Hollymead Town Center
(5)
2003
2004
153,739
95.0
%
Harris Teeter, (Target)
Petsmart
Kamp Washington Shopping Center
(5)
2005
1960
71,924
100.0
%
—
Golfsmith
Kings Park Shopping Center
(5)
2005
1966
74,496
100.0
%
Giant Food
CVS
Lorton Station Marketplace
(5)
2006
2005
132,445
100.0
%
Shoppers Food Warehouse
Advanced Design Group
Lorton Town Center
(5)
2006
2005
51,807
88.4
%
—
ReMax
Market at Opitz Crossing
2003
2003
149,791
80.2
%
Safeway
Hibachi Grill & Supreme Buffet
Saratoga Shopping Center
(5)
2005
1977
113,013
100.0
%
Giant Food
—
Shops at County Center
2005
2005
96,695
92.6
%
Harris Teeter
—
Shops at Stonewall
2007
2011
307,845
100.0
%
Wegmans, Dick's Sporting Goods
Staples, Ross Dress For Less, Bed Bath & Beyond, Michaels
Signal Hill
(5)
2003
2004
95,172
100.0
%
Shoppers Food Warehouse
—
Town Center at Sterling Shopping Center
(5)
2005
1980
186,531
98.2
%
Giant Food
Direct Furniture, Party Depot
Tysons Corner CVS
(5)
2012
2012
12,900
100.0
%
—
CVS
Village Center at Dulles
(5)
2002
1991
297,572
92.1
%
Shoppers Food Warehouse, Gold's Gym
CVS, Advance Auto Parts, Chuck E. Cheese, Staples, Goodwill, Tuesday Morning
Willston Centre I
(5)
2005
1952
105,376
84.5
%
—
CVS, Baileys Health Care
Willston Centre II
(5)
2005
1986
135,862
98.6
%
Safeway, (Target)
—
Subtotal/Weighted Average (VA)
3,740,215
95.7
%
TEXAS
Austin
Hancock
1999
1998
410,438
97.9
%
H.E.B., Sears
Twin Liquors, PETCO, 24 Hour Fitness
Market at Round Rock
1999
1987
122,646
88.3
%
Sprout's Markets
Office Depot
North Hills
1999
1995
144,020
99.8
%
H.E.B.
—
Tech Ridge Center
2011
2001
187,350
92.7
%
H.E.B.
Office Depot, Petco
Dallas / Fort Worth
Bethany Park Place
(5)
1998
1998
98,906
98.0
%
Kroger
—
Hickory Creek Plaza
2006
2006
28,134
77.6
%
(Kroger)
—
Hillcrest Village
1999
1991
14,530
100.0
%
—
—
Keller Town Center
1999
1999
114,938
88.2
%
Tom Thumb
—
20
Property Name
(1)
Year
Acquired
Year
Con-
structed
(2)
Gross Leasable Area
(GLA)
Percent
Leased
(3)
Grocer & Major Tenant(s) >40,000 Sq Ft
(6)
Drug Stores & Other Junior Anchors > 10,000 Sq Ft
Lebanon/Legacy Center
2000
2002
56,435
89.2
%
(Wal-Mart)
—
Market at Preston Forest
1999
1990
96,353
100.0
%
Tom Thumb
—
Mockingbird Common
1999
1987
120,321
93.1
%
Tom Thumb
Ogle School of Hair Design
Prestonbrook
1998
1998
91,537
98.8
%
Kroger
—
Rockwall Town Center
2002
2004
46,095
91.3
%
(Kroger)
(Walgreens)
Shiloh Springs
(5)
1998
1998
110,040
85.3
%
Kroger
—
Signature Plaza
2003
2004
32,415
72.3
%
(Kroger)
—
Houston
Alden Bridge
(5)
2002
1998
138,953
99.0
%
Kroger
Walgreens
Cochran's Crossing
2002
1994
138,192
98.8
%
Kroger
CVS
Indian Springs Center
(5)
2002
2003
136,625
100.0
%
H.E.B.
—
Kleinwood Center
(5)
2002
2003
148,964
90.3
%
H.E.B.
(Walgreens)
Panther Creek
2002
1994
166,077
100.0
%
Randall's Food
CVS, Sears Paint & Hardware (Sublease Morelands), The Woodlands Childrens Museum
Southpark at Cinco Ranch
(4)
2012
2012
242,687
92.0
%
Kroger, Academy
—
Sterling Ridge
2002
2000
128,643
100.0
%
Kroger
CVS
Sweetwater Plaza
(5)
2001
2000
134,045
94.5
%
Kroger
Walgreens
Weslayan Plaza East
(5)
2005
1969
169,693
100.0
%
—
Berings, Ross Dress for Less, Michaels, Berings Warehouse, Chuck E. Cheese, The Next Level Fitness, Spec's Liquor, Bike Barn
Weslayan Plaza West
(5)
2005
1969
185,964
98.4
%
Randall's Food
Walgreens, PETCO, Jo Ann's, Office Max, Tuesday Morning
Westwood Village
2006
2006
183,547
96.7
%
(Target)
Gold's Gym, PetSmart, Office Max, Ross Dress For Less, TJ Maxx
Woodway Collection
(5)
2005
1974
103,796
93.8
%
Randall's Food
—
Subtotal/Weighted Average (TX)
3,551,344
95.4
%
COLORADO
Colorado Springs
Falcon Marketplace
2005
2005
22,491
84.9
%
(Wal-Mart Supercenter)
—
Marketplace at Briargate
2006
2006
29,075
91.8
%
(King Soopers)
—
Monument Jackson Creek
1998
1999
85,263
100.0
%
King Soopers
—
Woodmen Plaza
1998
1998
116,233
92.4
%
King Soopers
—
Denver
Applewood Shopping Center
(5)
2005
1956
381,041
94.1
%
King Soopers, Wal-Mart
Applejack Liquors, PetSmart, Wells Fargo Bank
Arapahoe Village
(5)
2005
1957
159,237
79.3
%
Safeway
Jo-Ann Fabrics, PETCO, Pier 1 Imports
Belleview Square
2004
1978
117,331
100.0
%
King Soopers
—
Boulevard Center
1999
1986
80,320
95.9
%
(Safeway)
One Hour Optical
Buckley Square
1999
1978
116,147
98.0
%
King Soopers
Ace Hardware
Cherrywood Square
(5)
2005
1978
96,667
98.4
%
King Soopers
—
Crossroads Commons
(5)
2001
1986
142,589
98.7
%
Whole Foods
Barnes & Noble, Bicycle Village
21
Property Name
(1)
Year
Acquired
Year
Con-
structed
(2)
Gross Leasable Area
(GLA)
Percent
Leased
(3)
Grocer & Major Tenant(s) >40,000 Sq Ft
(6)
Drug Stores & Other Junior Anchors > 10,000 Sq Ft
Hilltop Village
(5)
2002
2003
100,030
93.8
%
King Soopers
—
Kent Place
2011
2011
48,168
94.6
%
King Soopers
—
Littleton Square
1999
1997
94,222
80.7
%
King Soopers
—
Lloyd King Center
1998
1998
83,326
98.3
%
King Soopers
—
Ralston Square Shopping Center
(5)
2005
1977
82,750
96.7
%
King Soopers
—
Shops at Quail Creek
2008
2008
37,585
100.0
%
(King Soopers)
—
South Lowry Square
1999
1993
119,916
93.9
%
Safeway
—
Stroh Ranch
1998
1998
93,436
96.8
%
King Soopers
—
Centerplace of Greeley III
2007
2007
119,090
88.8
%
Sports Authority
Best Buy, TJ Maxx
Subtotal/Weighted Average (CO)
2,124,917
93.7
%
NORTH CAROLINA
Charlotte
Carmel Commons
1997
1979
132,651
94.1
%
Fresh Market
Chuck E. Cheese, Party City, Rite Aid, Planet Fitness
Cochran Commons
(5)
2007
2003
66,020
100.0
%
Harris Teeter
(Walgreens)
Phillips Place
(5)
2012
1996
133,059
99.3
%
Dean & Deluca
Phillips Place Theater, Dean & Deluca
Providence Commons
(5)
2010
1994
77,315
100.0
%
Harris Teeter
Rite Aid
Greensboro
Harris Crossing
2007
2007
65,150
92.9
%
Harris Teeter
—
Raleigh / Durham
Erwin Square
(4)
2012
2012
89,830
67.9
%
Harris Teeter
—
Southpoint Crossing
1998
1998
103,128
95.9
%
Kroger
—
Woodcroft Shopping Center
1996
1984
89,833
95.4
%
Food Lion
Triangle True Value Hardware
Cameron Village
(5)
2004
1949
552,541
97.5
%
Harris Teeter, Fresh Market
Eckerd, Talbots, Wake County Public Library, Great Outdoor Provision Co., York Properties, The Bargain Box, K&W Cafeteria, Johnson-Lambe Sporting Goods, Pier 1 Imports, Bevello, The Cheshire Cat Gallery
Colonnade Center
2009
2009
57,637
96.0
%
Whole Foods
—
Glenwood Village
1997
1983
42,864
96.8
%
Harris Teeter
—
Lake Pine Plaza
1998
1997
87,690
95.2
%
Kroger
—
Maynard Crossing
(5)
1998
1997
122,782
84.5
%
Kroger
—
Middle Creek Commons
2006
2006
73,634
95.1
%
Lowes Foods
—
Shoppes of Kildaire
(5)
2005
1986
145,101
96.5
%
Trader Joe's
Home Comfort Furniture, Fitness Connection, Staples
Sutton Square
(5)
2006
1985
101,025
97.1
%
Fresh Market
Rite Aid
Village Plaza
(5)
2012
1970
78,182
95.3
%
Whole Foods
PTA Thrift Shop
Subtotal/Weighted Average (NC)
2,018,442
94.7
%
22
Property Name
(1)
Year
Acquired
Year
Con-
structed
(2)
Gross Leasable Area
(GLA)
Percent
Leased
(3)
Grocer & Major Tenant(s) >40,000 Sq Ft
(6)
Drug Stores & Other Junior Anchors > 10,000 Sq Ft
OHIO
Cincinnati
Beckett Commons
1998
1995
121,318
95.7
%
Kroger
—
Cherry Grove
1998
1997
195,513
98.0
%
Kroger
Hancock Fabrics, Shoe Carnival, TJ Maxx
Hyde Park
1997
1995
396,861
97.5
%
Kroger, Biggs
Walgreens, Jo-Ann Fabrics, Ace Hardware, Michaels, Staples
Indian Springs Market Center
(5)
2005
2005
141,063
100.0
%
Kohl's, (Wal-Mart Supercenter)
Office Depot, HH Gregg Appliances
Red Bank Village
2006
2006
164,317
98.0
%
Wal-Mart
—
Regency Commons
2004
2004
30,770
94.5
%
—
—
Sycamore Crossing & Sycamore Plaza
(5)
2008
1966
390,957
86.6
%
Fresh Market, Macy's Furniture Gallery, Toys 'R Us, Dick's Sporting Goods
Barnes & Noble, Old Navy, Staples, Identity Salon & Day Spa
Westchester Plaza
1998
1988
88,181
93.8
%
Kroger
—
Columbus
East Pointe
1998
1993
86,503
96.8
%
Kroger
—
Kroger New Albany Center
1999
1999
93,286
94.1
%
Kroger
—
Maxtown Road (Northgate)
1998
1996
85,100
100.0
%
Kroger, (Home Depot)
—
Windmiller Plaza Phase I
1998
1997
140,437
98.5
%
Kroger
Sears Hardware
Subtotal/Weighted Average (OH)
1,934,306
95.2
%
ILLINOIS
Chicago
Civic Center Plaza
(5)
2005
1989
264,973
98.9
%
Super H Mart, Home Depot
O'Reilly Automotive, King Spa
Geneva Crossing
(5)
2004
1997
123,182
98.8
%
Dominick's
Goodwill
Glen Oak Plaza
2010
1967
62,616
100.0
%
Trader Joe's
Walgreens, ENH Medical Offices
Hinsdale
1998
1986
178,960
97.2
%
Dominick's
Goodwill, Cardinal Fitness
McHenry Commons Shopping Center
(5)
2005
1988
99,448
92.6
%
Hobby Lobby
Goodwill
Riverside Sq & River's Edge
(5)
2005
1986
169,435
96.5
%
Dominick's
Ace Hardware, Party City
Roscoe Square
(5)
2005
1981
140,426
94.9
%
Mariano's
Walgreens, Toys "R" Us
Shorewood Crossing
(5)
2004
2001
87,705
93.4
%
Dominick's
—
Shorewood Crossing II
(5)
2007
2005
86,276
100.0
%
—
Babies R Us, Staples, PETCO, Factory Card Outlet
Stonebrook Plaza Shopping Center
(5)
2005
1984
95,825
100.0
%
Dominick's
—
Westbrook Commons
2001
1984
123,855
92.4
%
Dominick's
Goodwill
Willow Festival
2010
2007
382,837
98.4
%
Whole Foods, Lowe's
CVS, DSW Warehouse, HomeGoods, Recreational Equipment, Best Buy
Subtotal/Weighted Average (IL)
1,815,538
97.2
%
23
Property Name
(1)
Year
Acquired
Year
Con-
structed
(2)
Gross Leasable Area
(GLA)
Percent
Leased
(3)
Grocer & Major Tenant(s) >40,000 Sq Ft
(6)
Drug Stores & Other Junior Anchors > 10,000 Sq Ft
MARYLAND
Baltimore
Elkridge Corners
(5)
2005
1990
73,529
97.6
%
Green Valley Markets
Rite Aid
Festival at Woodholme
(5)
2005
1986
81,016
95.3
%
Trader Joe's
—
Parkville Shopping Center
(5)
2005
1961
161,735
92.5
%
Giant Food
Parkville Lanes, Castlewood Realty (Sub: Herit)
Southside Marketplace
(5)
2005
1990
125,146
96.1
%
Shoppers Food Warehouse
Rite Aid
Valley Centre
(5)
2005
1987
219,549
100.0
%
—
TJ Maxx, Ross Dress for Less, HomeGoods, Staples, PetSmart
Village at Lee Airpark
2005
2005
87,557
100.0
%
Giant Food, (Sunrise)
—
Other Maryland
Bowie Plaza
(5)
2005
1966
102,904
97.9
%
—
CVS, Fitness 4 Less
Clinton Park
(5)
2003
2003
206,050
96.3
%
G-Mart, Sears, (Toys "R" Us)
Fitness For Less
Cloppers Mill Village
(5)
2005
1995
137,035
91.2
%
Shoppers Food Warehouse
CVS
Firstfield Shopping Center
(5)
2005
1978
22,328
75.4
%
—
—
Goshen Plaza
(5)
2005
1987
42,906
84.1
%
—
CVS
King Farm Village Center
(5)
2004
2001
118,326
96.3
%
Safeway
—
Takoma Park
(5)
2005
1960
104,079
100.0
%
Shoppers Food Warehouse
—
Watkins Park Plaza
(5)
2005
1985
113,443
56.5
%
—
CVS
Woodmoor Shopping Center
(5)
2005
1954
68,887
98.1
%
—
CVS
Subtotal/Weighted Average (MD)
1,664,490
93.3
%
GEORGIA
Atlanta
Ashford Place
1997
1993
53,449
98.1
%
—
Harbor Freight Tools
Briarcliff La Vista
1997
1962
39,204
100.0
%
—
Michaels
Briarcliff Village
1997
1990
189,551
94.2
%
Publix
Office Depot, Party City, Shoe Carnival, TJ Maxx
Buckhead Court
1997
1984
48,317
97.5
%
—
—
Cambridge Square
1996
1979
71,429
100.0
%
Kroger
—
Cornerstone Square
1997
1990
80,406
95.7
%
Aldi
CVS, Hancock Fabrics, Concentra
Delk Spectrum
1998
1991
100,539
69.2
%
Publix
Eckerd
Dunwoody Hall
(5)
1997
1986
89,551
100.0
%
Publix
Eckerd
Dunwoody Village
1997
1975
120,169
86.2
%
Fresh Market
Walgreens, Dunwoody Prep
Howell Mill Village
2004
1984
92,280
91.9
%
Publix
Eckerd
King Plaza
(5)
2007
1998
81,432
90.8
%
Publix
—
Loehmanns Plaza Georgia
1997
1986
137,139
98.5
%
—
Loehmann's, Office Max, Dance 101
Lost Mountain Crossing
(5)
2007
1994
72,568
94.7
%
Publix
—
Paces Ferry Plaza
1997
1987
61,698
93.5
%
—
Harry Norman Realtors
24
Property Name
(1)
Year
Acquired
Year
Con-
structed
(2)
Gross Leasable Area
(GLA)
Percent
Leased
(3)
Grocer & Major Tenant(s) >40,000 Sq Ft
(6)
Drug Stores & Other Junior Anchors > 10,000 Sq Ft
Powers Ferry Square
1997
1987
97,897
94.9
%
—
CVS, PETCO
Powers Ferry Village
1997
1994
78,896
100.0
%
Publix
Mardi Gras, Brush Creek Package
Russell Ridge
1994
1995
98,559
93.8
%
Kroger
—
Sandy Springs
2012
1959
116,094
94.4
%
—
Trader Joe's, Pier 1, Party City
Subtotal/Weighted Average (GA)
1,629,178
93.5
%
PENNSYLVANIA
Allentown / Bethlehem
Allen Street Shopping Center
(5)
2005
1958
46,228
100.0
%
Ahart Market
—
Lower Nazareth Commons
2007
2007
90,210
98.2
%
(Target), Sports Authority
PETCO
Stefko Boulevard Shopping Center
(5)
2005
1976
133,899
88.3
%
Valley Farm Market
—
Harrisburg
Silver Spring Square
(5)
2005
2005
314,450
99.0
%
Wegmans, (Target)
Ross Dress For Less, Bed Bath and Beyond, Best Buy, Office Max, Ulta, PETCO
Philadelphia
City Avenue Shopping Center
(5)
2005
1960
159,406
94.2
%
—
Ross Dress for Less, TJ Maxx, Sears
Gateway Shopping Center
2004
1960
214,213
99.3
%
Trader Joe's
Staples, TJ Maxx, Famous Footwear, Jo-Ann Fabrics
Kulpsville Village Center
2006
2006
14,820
100.0
%
—
Walgreens
Mercer Square Shopping Center
(5)
2005
1988
91,400
96.7
%
Wies Markets
—
Newtown Square Shopping Center
(5)
2005
1970
146,959
94.9
%
Acme Markets
Rite Aid
Warwick Square Shopping Center
(5)
2005
1999
89,680
100.0
%
Giant Food
—
Other Pennsylvania
Hershey
2000
2000
6,000
100.0
%
—
—
Subtotal/Weighted Average (PA)
1,307,265
96.8
%
WASHINGTON
Portland
Orchards Market Center I
(5)
2002
2004
100,663
100.0
%
Wholesale Sports
Jo-Ann Fabrics, PETCO, (Rite Aid)
Orchards Market Center II
2005
2005
77,478
92.1
%
LA Fitness
Office Depot
Seattle
Aurora Marketplace
(5)
2005
1991
106,921
97.5
%
Safeway
TJ Maxx
Cascade Plaza
(5)
1999
1999
211,072
91.7
%
Safeway
Fashion Bug, Jo-Ann Fabrics, Ross Dress For Less, Big Lots, Fitness Evolution
Eastgate Plaza
(5)
2005
1956
78,230
97.3
%
Albertsons
Rite Aid
25
Property Name
(1)
Year
Acquired
Year
Con-
structed
(2)
Gross Leasable Area
(GLA)
Percent
Leased
(3)
Grocer & Major Tenant(s) >40,000 Sq Ft
(6)
Drug Stores & Other Junior Anchors > 10,000 Sq Ft
Grand Ridge
(4)
2012
2012
326,022
88.6
%
Safeway, Regal Cinemas
Port Blakey
Inglewood Plaza
1999
1985
17,253
88.4
%
—
—
Overlake Fashion Plaza
(5)
2005
1987
80,555
88.5
%
(Sears)
Marshalls
Pine Lake Village
1999
1989
102,900
100.0
%
Quality Foods
Rite Aid
Sammamish-Highlands
1999
1992
101,289
98.1
%
(Safeway)
Bartell Drugs, Ace Hardware
Southcenter
1999
1990
58,282
97.0
%
(Target)
—
Subtotal/Weighted Average (WA)
1,260,665
93.6
%
OREGON
Portland
Greenway Town Center
(5)
2005
1979
93,101
94.8
%
Lamb's Thriftway
Rite Aid, Dollar Tree
Murrayhill Marketplace
1999
1988
148,967
81.2
%
Safeway
—
Sherwood Crossroads
1999
1999
87,966
92.0
%
Safeway
—
Sherwood Market Center
1999
1995
124,259
93.5
%
Albertsons
—
Sunnyside 205
1999
1988
53,547
74.8
%
—
—
Tanasbourne Market
2006
2006
71,000
100.0
%
Whole Foods
—
Walker Center
1999
1987
89,610
91.4
%
Bed Bath and Beyond
—
Other Oregon
Corvallis Market Center
2006
2006
84,548
100.0
%
Trader Joe's
TJ Maxx, Michael's
Northgate Marketplace
2011
2011
80,953
98.8
%
Trader Joe's
REI, PETCO, Ulta Salon
Subtotal/Weighted Average (OR)
833,951
91.6
%
MINNESOTA
Minneapolis
Apple Valley Square
(5)
2006
1998
184,841
100.0
%
Rainbow Foods, Jo-Ann Fabrics, (Burlington Coat Factory)
Savers, PETCO
Calhoun Commons
(5)
2011
1999
66,150
100.0
%
Whole Foods
—
Colonial Square
(5)
2005
1959
93,248
100.0
%
Lund's
—
Rockford Road Plaza
(5)
2005
1991
205,479
95.1
%
Rainbow Foods
PetSmart, HomeGoods, TJ Maxx
Rockridge Center
(5)
2011
2006
125,213
94.6
%
Cub Foods
—
Subtotal/Weighted Average (MN)
674,931
97.5
%
MASSACHUSETTS
26
Property Name
(1)
Year
Acquired
Year
Con-
structed
(2)
Gross Leasable Area
(GLA)
Percent
Leased
(3)
Grocer & Major Tenant(s) >40,000 Sq Ft
(6)
Drug Stores & Other Junior Anchors > 10,000 Sq Ft
Boston
Shops at Saugus
2006
2006
86,855
94.4
%
Trader Joe's
La-Z-Boy, PetSmart
Twin City Plaza
2006
2004
270,242
94.6
%
Shaw's, Marshall's
Rite Aid, K&G Fashion, Dollar Tree, Gold's Gym, Extra Space Storage
Speedway Plaza
(5)
2006
1988
148,767
95.4
%
Stop & Shop, Burlington Coat Factory
—
Subtotal/Weighted Average (MA)
505,864
94.8
%
ARIZONA
Phoenix
Anthem Marketplace
2003
2000
113,293
91.4
%
Safeway
—
Palm Valley Marketplace
(5)
2001
1999
107,633
89.2
%
Safeway
—
Pima Crossing
1999
1996
238,275
93.6
%
Golf & Tennis Pro Shop, Inc.
Life Time Fitness, E & J Designer Shoe Outlet, Paddock Pools Store, Pier 1 Imports, Stein Mart
Shops at Arizona
2003
2000
35,710
41.0
%
—
—
Subtotal/Weighted Average (AZ)
494,911
88.4
%
MISSOURI
St. Louis
Brentwood Plaza
2007
2002
60,452
96.5
%
Schnucks
—
Bridgeton
2007
2005
70,762
97.3
%
Schnucks, (Home Depot)
—
Dardenne Crossing
2007
1996
67,430
100.0
%
Schnucks
—
Kirkwood Commons
2007
2000
209,703
100.0
%
Wal-Mart, (Target), (Lowe's)
TJ Maxx, HomeGoods, Famous Footwear
Subtotal/Weighted Average (MO)
408,347
99.0
%
TENNESSEE
Nashville
Harpeth Village Fieldstone
1997
1998
70,091
97.7
%
Publix
—
Lebanon Center
2006
2006
63,800
94.0
%
Publix
—
Northlake Village
2000
1988
137,807
92.2
%
Kroger
PETCO
Peartree Village
1997
1997
109,506
100.0
%
Harris Teeter
PETCO, Office Max
Other Tennessee
Dickson Tn
1998
1998
10,908
100.0
%
—
Eckerd
Subtotal/Weighted Average (TN)
392,112
95.9
%
27
Property Name
(1)
Year
Acquired
Year
Con-
structed
(2)
Gross Leasable Area
(GLA)
Percent
Leased
(3)
Grocer & Major Tenant(s) >40,000 Sq Ft
(6)
Drug Stores & Other Junior Anchors > 10,000 Sq Ft
SOUTH CAROLINA
Charleston
Merchants Village
(5)
1997
1997
79,649
97.0
%
Publix
—
Orangeburg
2006
2006
14,820
100.0
%
—
Walgreens
Queensborough Shopping Center
(5)
1998
1993
82,333
93.9
%
Publix
—
Columbia
Murray Landing
(5)
2002
2003
64,359
100.0
%
Publix
—
Other South Carolina
Buckwalter Village
2006
2006
59,601
100.0
%
Publix
—
Surfside Beach Commons
(5)
2007
1999
59,881
94.7
%
Bi-Lo
—
Subtotal/Weighted Average (SC)
360,643
97.1
%
Nevada
Las Vegas
Deer Springs Town Center
2007
2007
330,907
91.1
%
(Target), Home Depot, Toys "R" Us
Michaels, PetSmart, Ross Dress For Less, Staples
Subtotal/Weighted Average (NV)
330,907
91.1
%
DELAWARE
Dover
White Oak - Dover, DE
2000
2000
10,908
100.0
%
—
Eckerd
Wilmington
Pike Creek
1998
1981
232,031
94.0
%
Acme Markets, K-Mart
Rite Aid
Shoppes of Graylyn
(5)
2005
1971
66,808
100.0
%
—
Rite Aid
Subtotal/Weighted Average (DE)
309,747
95.5
%
WISCONSIN
Whitnall Square Shopping Center
(5)
2005
1989
133,421
98.4
%
Pick 'N' Save
Harbor Freight Tools, Dollar Tree
Racine Centre Shopping Center
(5)
2005
1988
135,827
95.4
%
Piggly Wiggly
Golds Gym, Factory Card Outlet, Dollar Tree
28
Property Name
(1)
Year
Acquired
Year
Con-
structed
(2)
Gross Leasable Area
(GLA)
Percent
Leased
(3)
Grocer & Major Tenant(s) >40,000 Sq Ft
(6)
Drug Stores & Other Junior Anchors > 10,000 Sq Ft
Subtotal/Weighted Average (WI)
269,248
96.9
%
ALABAMA
Shoppes at Fairhope Village
2008
2008
84,740
86.2
%
Publix
—
Valleydale Village Shop Center
(5)
2002
2003
118,466
71.6
%
Publix
—
Subtotal/Weighted Average (AL)
203,206
77.7
%
INDIANA
Indianapolis
Greenwood Springs
2004
2004
28,028
85.1
%
(Gander Mountain), (Wal-Mart Supercenter)
—
Willow Lake Shopping Center
(5)
2005
1987
85,923
90.5
%
(Kroger)
Party City
Willow Lake West Shopping Center
(5)
2005
2001
52,961
94.3
%
Trader Joe's
—
Other Indiana
Airport Crossing
2006
2006
11,924
88.6
%
(Kohl's)
—
Augusta Center
2006
2006
14,533
100.0
%
(Menards)
—
Subtotal/Weighted Average (IN)
193,369
91.3
%
CONNECTICUT
Corbin's Corner
(5)
2005
1962
179,865
99.8
%
Trader Joe's
Toys "R" Us, Best Buy, Old Navy, Office Depot, Pier 1 Imports
Subtotal/Weighted Average (CT)
179,865
99.8
%
NEW JERSEY
Plaza Square
(5)
2005
1990
103,891
97.2
%
Shop Rite
—
Haddon Commons
(5)
2005
1985
52,640
87.7
%
Acme Markets
CVS
Subtotal/Weighted Average (NJ)
156,531
94.0
%
NEW YORK
Lake Grove Commons
(5)
2012
2008
141,382
100.0
%
Whole Foods, LA Fitness
PETCO
Subtotal/Weighted Average (NY)
141,382
100.0
%
29
Property Name
(1)
Year
Acquired
Year
Con-
structed
(2)
Gross Leasable Area
(GLA)
Percent
Leased
(3)
Grocer & Major Tenant(s) >40,000 Sq Ft
(6)
Drug Stores & Other Junior Anchors > 10,000 Sq Ft
MICHIGAN
State Street Crossing
2006
2006
21,049
86.7
%
(Wal-Mart)
—
Fenton Marketplace
1999
1999
97,224
34.7
%
—
Michaels
Subtotal/Weighted Average (MI)
118,273
43.9
%
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Shops at The Columbia
(5)
2006
2006
22,812
100.0
%
Trader Joe's
—
Spring Valley Shopping Center
(5)
2005
1930
16,835
100.0
%
—
CVS
Subtotal/Weighted Average (DC)
39,647
100.0
%
KENTUCKY
Walton Towne Center
2007
2007
23,186
100.0
%
(Kroger)
—
Subtotal/Weighted Average (KY)
23,186
100.0
%
Total/Weighted Average
40,293,379
94.6
%
(1)
This table includes both Regency's Consolidated and Unconsolidated Properties ("Combined Portfolio") and excludes the properties of BRET as the property holdings of BRET do not impact the rate of return on Regency's preferred stock investment
(2)
Or latest renovation.
(3)
Includes properties where the Company has not yet incurred at least 90% of the expected costs to complete and the anchor has not yet been open for at least two calendar years ("development properties" or "properties in development"). If development properties are excluded, the total percentage leased would be 94.8% for Company's Combined Portfolio of shopping centers.
(4)
Property in development.
(5)
Owned by a co-investment partnership with outside investors in which RCLP or an affiliate is the general partner or has a voting interest.
(6)
A retailer that supports the Company's shopping center and in which the Company has no ownership is indicated by parentheses.
30
Item 3. Legal Proceedings
We are a party to various legal proceedings that arise in the ordinary course of our business. We are not currently involved in any litigation nor to our knowledge, is any litigation threatened against us, the outcome of which would, in our judgment based on information currently available to us, have a material adverse effect on our financial position or results of operations.
Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures
None.
PART II
Item 5.
Market for the Registrant's Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters, and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
O
ur common stock (NYSE: REG) is traded on the New York Stock Exchange. The following table sets forth the high and low sales prices and the cash dividends declared on our common stock by quarter for
2012
and
2011
.
2012
2011
Cash
Cash
Quarter
High
Low
Dividends
High
Low
Dividends
Ended
Price
Price
Declared
Price
Price
Declared
March 31
$
44.78
40.90
0.4625
$
45.36
40.90
0.4625
June 30
47.99
41.65
0.4625
47.51
41.00
0.4625
September 30
51.38
45.81
0.4625
47.90
34.11
0.4625
December 31
50.40
36.30
0.4625
41.64
32.30
0.4625
The Company has determined that the dividends paid during
2012
and
2011
on our common stock qualify for the following tax treatment:
Total Distribution per Share
Ordinary Dividends
Total Capital Gain Distributions
Nontaxable Distributions
2012
$
1.8500
1.3135
0.0185
0.5180
2011
$
1.8500
0.6105
0.0185
1.2210
As of February 22, 2013, there were approximately 15,000 holders of common equity.
We intend to pay regular quarterly distributions to Regency Centers Corporations' common stockholders. Future distributions will be declared and paid at the discretion of our Board of Directors, and will depend upon cash generated by operating activities, our financial condition, capital requirements, annual dividend requirements under the REIT provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and such other factors as our Board of Directors deems relevant. In order to maintain Regency Centers Corporation's qualification as a REIT for federal income tax purposes, we are generally required to make annual distributions at least equal to 90% of our real estate investment trust taxable income for the taxable year. Under certain circumstances, which we do not expect to occur, we could be required to make distributions in excess of cash available for distributions in order to meet such requirements. The Company has a dividend reinvestment plan under which shareholders may elect to reinvest their dividends automatically in common stock. Under the plan, the Company may elect to purchase common stock in the open market on behalf of shareholders or may issue new common stock to such shareholders.
Under the loan agreement of our line of credit, in the event of any monetary default, we may not make distributions to stockholders except to the extent necessary to maintain our REIT status.
There were no unregistered sales of equity securities during the quarter ended
December 31, 2012
. The Company did not repurchase any of its equity securities during the quarter-ended December 31, 2012.
31
The performance graph furnished below shows Regency's cumulative total stockholder return to the S&P 500 Index and the FTSE NAREIT Equity REIT Index since December 31, 2007. The stock performance graph should not be deemed filed or incorporated by reference into any other filing made by us under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, except to the extent that we specifically incorporate the stock performance graph by reference in another filing.
Item 6.
Selected Financial Data
(in thousands, except per share and unit data, number of properties, and ratio of earnings to fixed charges)
The following table sets forth Selected Financial Data for the Company on a historical basis for the five years ended
December 31, 2012
. This historical Selected Financial Data has been derived from the audited consolidated financial statements as reclassified for discontinued operations. This information should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements of Regency Centers Corporation and Regency Centers, L.P. (including the related notes thereto) and Management's Discussion and Analysis of the Financial Condition and Results of Operations, each included elsewhere in this Form 10-K.
32
Parent Company
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
Operating Data:
Revenues
$
496,920
493,098
468,191
470,593
479,467
Operating expenses
321,258
318,128
306,100
294,802
258,789
Other expense
185,740
136,275
147,434
210,085
117,061
(Loss) Income before equity in income (loss) of investments in real estate partnerships
(10,078
)
38,695
14,657
(34,294
)
103,617
Equity in income (loss) of investments in real estate partnerships
23,807
9,643
(12,884
)
(26,373
)
5,292
Income (loss) from continuing operations before tax
13,729
48,338
1,773
(60,667
)
108,909
Income tax expense (benefit) of taxable REIT subsidiary
13,224
2,994
(1,333
)
1,883
(1,600
)
Income (loss) from continuing operations
505
45,344
3,106
(62,550
)
110,509
Income from discontinued operations
23,546
8,040
8,902
14,157
16,629
Income (loss) before gain on sale of real estate
24,051
53,384
12,008
(48,393
)
127,138
Gain on sale of real estate
2,158
2,404
993
19,357
20,346
Net income (loss)
26,209
55,788
13,001
(29,036
)
147,484
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests
(342
)
(4,418
)
(4,185
)
(3,961
)
(5,333
)
Net income (loss) attributable to the Company
25,867
51,370
8,816
(32,997
)
142,151
Preferred stock dividends
(32,531
)
(19,675
)
(19,675
)
(19,675
)
(19,675
)
Net (loss) income attributable to common stockholders
(6,664
)
31,695
(10,859
)
(52,672
)
122,476
Funds from operations
(1)
222,100
220,318
151,321
85,758
263,848
Core funds from operations
(1)
230,937
213,148
199,357
207,971
240,449
Income per Common Share - diluted:
(Loss) income from continuing operations
$
(0.34
)
0.26
(0.25
)
(0.89
)
1.52
Income from discontinued operations
0.26
0.09
0.11
0.19
0.24
Net (loss) income attributable to common stockholders
$
(0.08
)
0.35
(0.14
)
(0.70
)
1.76
Other Information:
Net cash provided by operating activities
$
257,215
217,633
138,459
195,804
211,314
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities
3,623
(77,723
)
(184,457
)
51,545
(105,006
)
Net cash used in financing activities
(249,891
)
(145,569
)
(32,797
)
(164,279
)
(105,144
)
Distributions paid to common stockholders
164,747
160,478
149,117
159,670
199,528
Common dividends declared per share
1.85
1.85
1.85
2.11
2.90
Common stock outstanding including exchangeable operating partnership units
90,572
90,099
81,717
81,670
70,091
Ratio of earnings to fixed charges
(3)
1.1
1.4
1.2
0.8
(2)
1.6
Balance Sheet Data:
Real estate investments before accumulated depreciation
$
4,352,839
4,488,794
4,417,746
4,259,990
4,425,895
Total assets
3,853,458
3,987,071
3,994,539
3,992,228
4,158,568
Total debt
1,941,891
1,982,440
2,094,469
1,886,380
2,135,571
Total liabilities
2,107,547
2,117,417
2,250,137
2,061,621
2,416,824
Stockholders' equity
1,730,765
1,808,355
1,685,177
1,862,380
1,676,323
Noncontrolling interests
15,146
61,299
59,225
68,227
65,421
(1)
FFO is a commonly used measure of REIT performance, which the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts ("NAREIT") defines as net income, computed in accordance with GAAP, excluding gains and losses from sales of depreciable property, net of tax, excluding operating real estate impairments, plus depreciation and amortization, and after adjustments for unconsolidated partnerships and joint ventures. Core FFO represents FFO, excluding, but not limited to, transaction income or expense, gains or losses from the early extinguishment of debt, development and outparcel gains or losses and other non-core items. See Supplemental Earnings Information within Item 7 for additional information and a reconciliation to the nearest GAAP measure.
(2)
The Company's ratio of earnings to fixed charges was deficient in 2009 by $26.2 million in earnings, due to significant non-cash charges for impairment of real estate investments of $97.5 million.
(3)
See Exhibit 12.1 for additional information regarding the computation of ratio of earnings to fixed charges.
33
Operating Partnership
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
Operating Data:
Revenues
$
496,920
493,098
468,191
470,593
479,467
Operating expenses
321,258
318,128
306,100
294,802
258,789
Other expense
185,740
136,275
147,434
210,085
117,061
(Loss) income before equity in income (loss) of investments in real estate partnerships
(10,078
)
38,695
14,657
(34,294
)
103,617
Equity in income (loss) of investments in real estate partnerships
23,807
9,643
(12,884
)
(26,373
)
5,292
Income (loss) from continuing operations before tax
13,729
48,338
1,773
(60,667
)
108,909
Income tax expense (benefit) of taxable REIT subsidiary
13,224
2,994
(1,333
)
1,883
(1,600
)
Income (loss) from continuing operations
505
45,344
3,106
(62,550
)
110,509
Income from discontinued operations
23,546
8,040
8,902
14,157
16,629
Income (loss) before gain on sale of real estate
24,051
53,384
12,008
(48,393
)
127,138
Gain on sale of real estate
2,158
2,404
993
19,357
20,346
Net income (loss)
26,209
55,788
13,001
(29,036
)
147,484
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests
(865
)
(590
)
(376
)
(452
)
(701
)
Net income (loss) attributable to the Partnership
25,344
55,198
12,625
(29,488
)
146,783
Preferred unit distributions
(31,902
)
(23,400
)
(23,400
)
(23,400
)
(23,400
)
Net (loss) income attributable to common unit holders
(6,558
)
31,798
(10,775
)
(52,888
)
123,383
Funds from operations
(1)
222,100
220,318
151,321
85,758
263,848
Core funds from operations
(1)
230,937
213,148
199,357
207,971
240,449
Income per common unit - diluted:
(Loss) income from continuing operations
$
(0.34
)
0.26
(0.25
)
(0.89
)
1.52
Income from discontinued operations
0.26
0.09
0.11
0.19
0.24
Net (loss) income attributable to common unit holders
$
(0.08
)
0.35
(0.14
)
(0.70
)
1.76
Other Information:
Net cash provided by operating activities
$
257,215
217,633
138,459
195,804
211,314
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities
3,623
(77,723
)
(184,457
)
51,545
(105,006
)
Net cash used in financing activities
(249,891
)
(145,569
)
(32,797
)
(164,279
)
(105,144
)
Distributions paid on common units
164,747
160,478
149,117
159,670
199,528
Ratio of earnings to fixed charges
(3)
1.1
1.4
1.2
0.8
(2)
1.6
Balance Sheet Data:
Real estate investments before accumulated depreciation
$
4,352,839
4,488,794
4,417,746
4,259,990
4,425,895
Total assets
3,853,458
3,987,071
3,994,539
3,992,228
4,158,568
Total debt
1,941,891
1,982,440
2,094,469
1,886,380
2,135,571
Total liabilities
2,107,547
2,117,417
2,250,137
2,061,621
2,416,824
Partners' capital
1,729,612
1,856,550
1,733,573
1,918,859
1,733,764
Noncontrolling interests
16,299
13,104
10,829
11,748
7,980
(1)
FFO is a commonly used measure of REIT performance, which the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts ("NAREIT") defines as net income, computed in accordance with GAAP, excluding gains and losses from sales of depreciable property, net of tax, excluding operating real estate impairments, plus depreciation and amortization, and after adjustments for unconsolidated partnerships and joint ventures. Core FFO represents FFO, excluding, but not limited to, transaction income or expense, gains or losses from the early extinguishment of debt, development and outparcel gains or losses and other non-core items. See Supplemental Earnings Information within Item 7 for additional information and a reconciliation to the nearest GAAP measure.
(2)
The Company's ratio of earnings to fixed charges was deficient in 2009 by $26.2 million in earnings, due to significant non-cash charges for impairment of real estate investments of $97.5 million.
(3)
See Exhibit 12.1 for additional information regarding the computation of ratio of earnings to fixed charges.
34
Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
Overview
Regency Centers Corporation began its operations as a REIT in 1993 and is the managing general partner in Regency Centers, L.P. We endeavor to be the preeminent, best-in-class national shopping center company distinguished by sustaining growth in shareholder value and compounding total shareholder return in excess of our peers. We work to achieve these goals through reliable growth in net operating income from a portfolio of dominant, infill shopping centers, balance sheet strength, value-added development capabilities and an engaged team of talented and dedicated people. All of our operating, investing, and financing activities are performed through the Operating Partnership, its wholly-owned subsidiaries, and through its investments in real estate partnerships with third parties (also referred to as "co-investment partnerships" or "joint ventures"). The Parent Company currently owns approximately
99.8%
of the outstanding common partnership units of the Operating Partnership.
At
December 31, 2012
, we directly owned
204
shopping centers (the “Consolidated Properties”) located in
24
states representing
22.5 million
square feet of gross leasable area (“GLA”). Through co-investment partnerships, we own partial ownership interests in
144
shopping centers (the “Unconsolidated Properties”) located in
24
states and the District of Columbia representing
17.8 million
square feet of GLA.
We earn revenues and generate cash flow by leasing space in our shopping centers to grocery stores, major retail anchors, restaurants, side-shop retailers, and service providers, as well as by ground leasing or selling building pads ("out-parcels") to these same types of tenants. We experience growth in revenues by increasing occupancy and rental rates in our existing shopping centers and by acquiring and developing new shopping centers. At
December 31, 2012
, the consolidated shopping centers were
94.1%
leased, as compared to
92.2%
at
December 31, 2011
.
We monitor the operating performance and rent collections of all tenants in our shopping centers, especially those tenants operating retail formats that are experiencing significant changes in competition, business practice, and store closings in other locations. We also evaluate consumer preferences, shopping behaviors, and demographics to anticipate both challenges and opportunities in the changing retail industry that may affect our tenants.
We grow our shopping center portfolio through acquisitions of operating centers and new shopping center development. We will continue to use our development capabilities, market presence, and anchor relationships to invest in value-added new developments and redevelopments of existing centers. Development is customer driven, meaning we generally have an executed lease from the anchor before we start construction. Developments serve the growth needs of our anchors and retailers, resulting in modern shopping centers with long-term anchor leases that produce attractive returns on our invested capital. This development process typically requires two to three years once construction has commenced, but can vary subject to the size and complexity of the project. We fund our acquisition and development activity from various capital sources including property sales, equity offerings, and new debt.
Co-investment partnerships provide us with an additional capital source for shopping center acquisitions, as well as the opportunity to earn fees for asset management, property management, and other investing and financing services. As asset manager, we are engaged by our partners to apply similar operating, investment and capital strategies to the portfolios owned by the co-investment partnerships as those applied to the portfolio that we wholly-own. Co-investment partnerships grow their shopping center investments through acquisitions from third parties or direct purchases from us. Although selling properties to co-investment partnerships reduces our direct ownership interest, it provides a source of capital that further strengthens our balance sheet while we continue to share, to the extent of our ownership interest, in the risks and rewards of shopping centers that meet our high quality standards and long-term investment strategy.
35
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
Knowledge about our accounting policies is necessary for a complete understanding of our financial statements. The preparation of our financial statements requires that we make certain estimates that impact the balance of assets and liabilities at a financial statement date and the reported amount of income and expenses during a financial reporting period. These accounting estimates are based upon, but not limited to, our judgments about historical results, current economic activity, and industry accounting standards. They are considered to be critical because of their significance to the financial statements and the possibility that future events may differ from those judgments, or that the use of different assumptions could result in materially different estimates. We review these estimates on a periodic basis to ensure reasonableness; however, the amounts we may ultimately realize could differ from such estimates.
Accounts Receivable
Minimum rent, percentage rent, and expense recoveries from tenants for common area maintenance costs, insurance and real estate taxes are the Company's principal source of revenue. As a result of generating this revenue, we will routinely have accounts receivable due from tenants. We are subject to tenant defaults and bankruptcies that may affect the collection of outstanding receivables. To address the collectability of these receivables, we analyze historical write-off experience, tenant credit-worthiness and current economic trends when evaluating the adequacy of our allowance for doubtful accounts. Although we estimate uncollectible receivables and provide for them through charges against income, actual experience may differ from those estimates.
Real Estate Investments
Acquisition of Real Estate Investments
Upon acquisition of real estate operating properties, the Company estimates the fair value of acquired tangible assets (consisting of land, building, building improvements and tenant improvements) and identified intangible assets and liabilities (consisting of above and below-market leases, in-place leases and tenant relationships), assumed debt, and any noncontrolling interest in the acquiree at the date of acquisition, based on evaluation of information and estimates available at that date. Based on these estimates, the Company allocates the estimated fair value to the applicable assets and liabilities. Fair value is determined based on an exit price approach, which contemplates the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. If, up to one year from the acquisition date, information regarding fair value of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed is received and estimates are refined, appropriate adjustments are made to the purchase price allocation on a retrospective basis. The Company expenses transaction costs associated with business combinations in the period incurred.
We strategically invest in entities that own, manage, acquire, develop and redevelop operating properties. We analyze our investments in real estate partnerships in order to determine whether the entity should be consolidated. If it is determined that these investments do not require consolidation because the entities are not variable interest entities (“VIEs”), we are not considered the primary beneficiary of the entities determined to be VIEs, we do not have voting control, and/or the limited partners (or non-managing members) have substantive participatory rights, then the selection of the accounting method used to account for our investments in real estate partnerships is generally determined by our voting interests and the degree of influence we have over the entity. Management uses its judgment when making these determinations. We use the equity method of accounting for investments in real estate partnerships when we own 20% or more of the voting interests and have significant influence but do not have a controlling financial interest, or if we own less than 20% of the voting interests but have determined that we have significant influence. Under the equity method, we record our investments in and advances to these entities in our consolidated balance sheets, and our proportionate share of earnings or losses earned by the joint venture is recognized in equity in income (loss) of investments in real estate partnerships in our consolidated statements of operations.
Development of Real Estate Assets and Cost Capitalization
We capitalize the acquisition of land, the construction of buildings and other specifically identifiable development costs incurred by recording them into properties in development in our accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets. Once a development property is substantially complete and held available for occupancy, costs are no longer capitalized. Other specifically identifiable development costs include pre-development costs essential to the development process, as well as, interest, real estate taxes, and direct employee costs incurred during the development period. Pre-development costs are incurred prior to land acquisition during the due diligence phase and include contract deposits, legal, engineering, and other professional fees related to evaluating the feasibility of developing a shopping center. At
December 31, 2012
and
2011
, the Company had capitalized pre-development costs of
$3.5 million
and
$2.1 million
, respectively, of which
$2.3 million
and
$1.0 million
, respectively, were refundable deposits. If we determine it is probable that a specific project undergoing due diligence will not be developed, we immediately expense all
36
related capitalized pre-development costs not considered recoverable. During the years ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
, we expensed pre-development costs of approximately
$1.5 million
,
$241,000
, and
$520,000
, respectively, recorded in other expenses in the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Operations. Interest costs are capitalized into each development project based on applying our weighted average borrowing rate to that portion of the actual development costs expended. We cease interest cost capitalization when the property is no longer being developed or is available for occupancy upon substantial completion of tenant improvements, but in no event would we capitalize interest on the project beyond 12 months after substantial completion of the building shell. During the years ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
, we capitalized interest of
$3.7 million
,
$1.5 million
, and $5.1 million, respectively, on our development projects. We have a staff of employees who directly support our development program. All direct internal costs attributable to these development activities are capitalized as part of each development project. During the years ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
, we capitalized
$10.3 million
,
$5.5 million
, and $2.7 million, respectively, of direct internal costs incurred to support our development program. The capitalization of costs is directly related to the actual level of development activity occurring.
Valuation of Real Estate Investments
We evaluate whether there are any indicators that have occurred, including property operating performance and general market conditions, that would result in us determining that the carrying value of our real estate properties (including any related amortizable intangible assets or liabilities) may not be recoverable. If such indicators occur, we compare the current carrying value of the asset to the estimated undiscounted cash flows that are directly associated with the use and ultimate disposition of the asset. Our estimated cash flows are based on several key assumptions, including rental rates, costs of tenant improvements, leasing commissions, anticipated hold period, and assumptions regarding the residual value upon disposition, including the exit capitalization rate. These key assumptions are subjective in nature and the resulting impairment, if any, could differ from the actual gain or loss recognized upon ultimate sale in an arms length transaction. If the carrying value of the asset exceeds the estimated undiscounted cash flows, an impairment loss is recognized equal to the excess of carrying value over fair value. Changes in our disposition strategy or changes in the marketplace may alter the hold period of an asset or asset group, which may result in an impairment loss and such loss could be material to the Company's financial condition or operating performance.
We evaluate our investments in real estate partnerships for impairment whenever there are indicators, including underlying property operating performance and general market conditions, that the value of our investments in real estate partnerships may be impaired. An investment in a real estate partnerships is considered impaired only if we determine that its fair value is less than the net carrying value of the investment in that real estate partnerships on an other-than-temporary basis. Cash flow projections for the investments consider property level factors such as expected future operating income, trends and prospects, as well as the effects of demand, competition and other factors. We consider various qualitative factors to determine if a decrease in the value of our investment is other-than-temporary. These factors include the age of the real estate partnerships, our intent and ability to retain our investment in the entity, the financial condition and long-term prospects of the entity and relationships with our partners and banks. If we believe that the decline in the fair value of the investment is temporary, no impairment charge is recorded. If our analysis indicates that there is an other-than-temporary impairment related to the investment in a particular real estate partnerships, the carrying value of the investment will be adjusted to an amount that reflects the estimated fair value of the investment.
The fair value of real estate investments is highly subjective and is determined through comparable sales information and other market data if available, or through use of an income approach such as the direct capitalization or the traditional discounted cash flow methods. Such cash flow projections consider factors such as expected future operating income, trends and prospects, as well as the effects of demand, competition and other factors, and therefore are subject to a significant degree of management judgment and changes in those factors could impact the determination of fair value. In estimating the fair value of undeveloped land, we generally use market data and comparable sales information.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
See Note 1 to Consolidated Financial Statements.
37
Shopping Center Portfolio
The following table summarizes general information related to the Consolidated Properties in our shopping center portfolio (GLA in thousands):
December 31,
2012
December 31,
2011
Number of Properties
204
217
Properties in Development
4
7
Gross Leasable Area
22,532
23,750
% Leased – Operating and Development
94.1
%
92.2
%
% Leased – Operating
94.4
%
93.2
%
The following table summarizes general information related to the Unconsolidated Properties owned in co-investment partnerships in our shopping center portfolio, excluding the properties held by BRET (GLA in thousands):
December 31,
2012
December 31,
2011
Number of Properties
144
147
Gross Leasable Area
17,762
18,399
% Leased – Operating
95.2
%
94.8
%
We seek to reduce our operating and leasing risks through geographic diversification, avoiding dependence on any single property, market, or tenant, and owning a portion of our shopping centers through co-investment partnerships.
The following table summarizes leasing activity for the year ended
December 31, 2012
, including Regency's pro-rata share of activity within the portfolio of our co-investment partnerships, except for the BRET portfolio:
Leasing Transactions
GLA (in thousands)
Base Rent / SF
Tenant Improvements / SF
Leasing Commissions / SF
New leases
695
2,143
$19.68
$4.33
$7.70
Renewals
1,105
2,967
$18.27
$0.32
$2.15
Total
1,800
5,110
$18.86
$2.00
$4.48
The following table summarizes our four most significant tenants, each of which is a grocery retailer, occupying our shopping centers at
December 31, 2012
:
Grocery Anchor
Number of
Stores
(1)
Percentage of
Company-
owned GLA
(2)
Percentage of
Annualized
Base Rent
(2)
Kroger
47
7.0%
4.3%
Publix
54
6.9%
4.2%
Safeway
51
5.4%
3.3%
Supervalu
(3)
26
2.7%
2.1%
(1)
Includes stores owned by grocery anchors that are attached to our centers.
(2)
Includes Regency's pro-rata share of Unconsolidated Properties and excludes those owned by anchors and the properties of BRET.
(3)
On January 10, 2013, SUPERVALU announced that it had entered into an agreement to sell its four largest grocery chains to an investor consortium. We will continue to closely monitor the pending sale and the impact, if any, on its shopping centers.
38
Although base rent is supported by long-term lease contracts, tenants who file bankruptcy may have the legal right to reject any or all of their leases and close related stores. In the event that a tenant with a significant number of leases in our shopping centers files bankruptcy and cancels its leases, we could experience a significant reduction in our revenues. We monitor industry trends and sales data to help us identify declines in retail categories or tenants who might be experiencing financial difficulties as a result of slowing sales, lack of credit, changes in retail formats or increased competition. As a result of our findings, we may reduce new leasing, suspend leasing, or curtail the allowance for the construction of leasehold improvements within a certain retail category or to a specific retailer.
We monitor the financial condition of our tenants. We communicate often with those tenants who have announced store closings or filed bankruptcy. We are not currently aware of the pending bankruptcy or announced store closings of any tenants in our shopping centers that would individually cause a material reduction in our revenues, and no tenant represents more than 5% of our total annualized base rent on a pro-rata basis.
39
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Our Parent Company has no capital commitments other than its guarantees of the commitments of our Operating Partnership. The Parent Company will from time to time access the capital markets for the purpose of issuing new equity and will simultaneously contribute all of the offering proceeds to the Operating Partnership in exchange for additional partnership units. All debt is issued by our Operating Partnership or by our co-investment partnerships. On
December 31, 2012
, our cash balance was
$22.3 million
. We have an $800.0 million Line of Credit commitment (the "Line"), which matures in September 2016, that had an outstanding balance of
$70.0 million
at
December 31, 2012
with remaining available borrowings of
$730.0 million
. As of
December 31, 2012
, we had the capacity to issue
$128.0 million
in common stock under various equity distribution agreements.
The following table summarizes net cash flows related to operating, investing, and financing activities of the Company for the
years
ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
(in thousands):
2012
2011
2010
Net cash provided by operating activities
$
257,215
217,633
138,459
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities
3,623
(77,723
)
(184,457
)
Net cash used in financing activities
(249,891
)
(145,569
)
(32,797
)
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
$
10,947
(5,659
)
(78,795
)
Net cash provided by operating activities:
Net cash provided by operating activities increased by
$39.6 million
for the year ended
December 31, 2012
as compared to the year ended
December 31, 2011
due primarily to increased operating income, driven by higher occupancy, a decrease in interest expense, and timing of cash receipts and payments.
Our dividend distribution policy is set by our Board of Directors who monitor our financial position. Our Board of Directors recently declared our quarterly dividend of $0.4625 per share, paid on February 27, 2013. Our dividend has remained unchanged since May 2009 and future dividends will be declared at the discretion of our Board of Directors and will be subject to capital requirements and availability. We plan to continue paying an aggregate amount of distributions to our stock and unit holders that, at a minimum, meet the requirements to continue qualifying as a REIT for Federal income tax purposes. We operate our business such that we expect net cash provided by operating activities will provide the necessary funds to pay our distributions to our share and unit holders, which were
$188.4 million
and
$183.9 million
for the years ended
December 31, 2012
and
2011
, respectively.
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities:
Net cash provided by investing activities increased by
$81.3 million
for the year ended
December 31, 2012
, as compared to the year ended
December 31, 2011
. Significant investing activity during the year ended
December 31, 2012
included:
•
Receiving proceeds of
$352.7 million
from the sale of real estate including $273.5 million from the sale of a 15-property portfolio to a partnership in which Regency retained a non-controlling interest;
•
Contributing $14.2 million to a co-investment partnership for our pro rata ownership interest in Lake Grove Commons, a shopping center acquired in January 2012;
•
Contributing $37.6 million to a co-investment partnership for our pro rata share to repay maturing debt;
•
Contributing $6.6 million to a co-investment partnership for our pro rata share of redevelopment costs;
•
Contributing $1.7 million to a new co-investment partnership for our pro rata share of the acquisition of land;
•
Contributing $6.2 million to a new co-investment partnership for our pro rata ownership interest in Phillips Place, a shopping center acquired in December 2012; and
40
•
Capital expenditures incurred for the acquisition, development, redevelopment, improvement and leasing of our real estate properties was $
320.6 million
and $
152.7 million
for the years ended
December 31, 2012
, and
2011
(in thousands), respectively as follows:
2012
2011
Change
Capital expenditures:
Acquisition of operating real estate
$
156,026
70,629
85,397
Acquisition of land for development / redevelopment
$
27,100
2,308
24,792
Development costs
71,702
24,813
46,889
Redevelopment costs
10,944
11,552
(608
)
Tenant allowances
8,664
9,501
(837
)
Capitalized interest
3,686
1,480
2,206
Capitalized direct compensation
10,312
5,538
4,774
Building improvements and other
32,180
26,877
5,303
Real estate development and capital improvements
$
164,588
82,069
82,519
Total
$
320,614
152,698
167,916
•
During the year ended
December 31, 2012
, we acquired five operating properties and five land parcels for
$156.0 million
and
$27.1 million
, respectively, compared to acquiring three operating properties and two land parcels for
$70.6 million
and
$2.3 million
, respectively, during the year ended
December 31, 2011
.
•
The increase in building improvements and other capital expenditures is due to normal ongoing improvements that may be capitalized for our existing centers.
•
During 2012, we started five new developments and one redevelopment as compared to starting four new developments and four redevelopments during 2011; however, two of the developments started in 2011 occurred during the fourth quarter of
2011
and contributed to the increased capitalization in
2012
.
At
December 31, 2012
, we had four development projects that were either under construction or in lease up, compared to seven such development projects at
December 31, 2011
. The following table details our development projects as of
December 31, 2012
(in thousands, except cost per square foot):
Property Name
Start Date
Estimated / Actual Anchor Opening
Estimated Net Development Costs After Partner Participation
(1)
Estimated Net Costs to Complete
(1)
Company Owned GLA
Cost per square foot of GLA
(1)
East Washington Place
Q4-11
Aug-13
$
60,562
$
36,191
203
$
298
Southpark at Cinco Ranch
Q1-12
Oct-12
31,532
7,730
243
130
Shops at Erwin Mill
Q2-12
Dec-13
14,384
5,448
90
160
Grand Ridge Plaza
Q2-12
Jun-13
81,074
50,151
326
249
Total
$
187,552
$
99,520
862
$
218
(2)
(1)
Amount represents costs, including leasing costs, net of tenant reimbursements.
(2)
Amount represents a weighted average
41
The following table details our developments completed during
2012
(in thousands, except cost per square foot):
Property Name
Completion Date
Net Development Costs
(1)
Company Owned GLA
Cost per square foot of GLA
(1)
Centerplace of Greeley III Ph II
Q2-12
$
2,110
25
$
84
Village at Lee Airpark
Q2-12
24,107
88
274
Nocatee Town Center
Q3-12
14,304
70
204
Suncoast Crossing Ph II
(2)
Q3-12
7,253
9
806
Harris Crossing
Q3-12
8,407
65
129
Market at Colonnade
Q3-12
15,270
58
263
South Bay Village
Q4-12
28,419
108
263
Kent Place
Q4-12
9,119
48
190
Northgate Marketplace
Q4-12
19,448
81
240
Total
$
128,437
552
$
233
(1)
Includes leasing costs, net of tenant reimbursements.
(2)
Suncoast Crossing Phase II net development costs include land improvements that will benefit a third phase, for which development has not yet commenced.
We plan to continue developing projects for long-term investment purposes and have a staff of employees who directly support our development program. Internal costs attributable to these development activities are capitalized as part of each development project. During the year ended
December 31, 2012
, we capitalized
$3.7 million
of interest expense and
$10.3 million
of internal costs for direct compensation for development and redevelopment activity. Changes in the level of future development activity could adversely impact results of operations by reducing the amount of internal costs for development projects that may be capitalized. A 10% reduction in development activity without a corresponding reduction in the compensation costs directly related to our development activities could result in an additional charge to net income of approximately $859,000.
Net cash provided or used in financing activities:
Net cash used in financing activities increased by
$104.3 million
for the year ended
December 31, 2012
, as compared to the year ended
December 31, 2011
. Significant financing activities during the year ended
December 31, 2012
include:
•
On January 15, 2012, the Operating Partnership repaid $192.4 million of maturing 6.75% ten-year unsecured notes;
•
On February 9, 2012, the Operating Partnership purchased all of its issued and outstanding 7.45% Series D Preferred Units, at a
3.75%
discount to par, for net redemption costs of $48.1 million;
•
On
February 16, 2012
, the Parent Company issued
10 million
shares of
6.625%
Series 6 Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Shares with a liquidation preference of
$25
per share, resulting in proceeds of
$241.4 million
, net of issuance costs;
•
On March 31, 2012, the Parent Company redeemed all issued and outstanding shares of 7.45% Series 3 and 7.25% Series 4 Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Shares for $200.0 million;
•
On
August 23, 2012
, the Parent Company issued
3 million
shares of
6.00%
Series 7 Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Shares with a liquidation preference of
$25
per share, resulting in proceeds of
$72.5 million
, net of issuance costs;
•
On September 13, 2012, the Parent Company redeemed all issued and outstanding shares of 6.70% Series 5 Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Shares for $75.0 million;
•
During the third quarter of 2012, the Parent Company issued
442,786
shares of common stock through its at-the-market ("ATM") common equity issuance program resulting in proceeds, net of commissions and issuance costs, of
$21.5 million
;
42
•
During 2012, we borrowed $250.0 million available under a Term Loan and repaid $150 million using the proceeds from the sale of real estate previously discussed. Our Term Loan has no remaining borrowing capacity and matures in December 2016.
We endeavor to maintain a high percentage of unencumbered assets. At
December 31, 2012
, 76.8% of our wholly-owned real estate assets were unencumbered. Such assets allow us to access the secured and unsecured debt markets and to maintain significant availability on the Line. Our coverage ratio, including our pro-rata share of our partnerships, was 2.5 times for the year ended
December 31, 2012
as compared to 2.3 times for the year ended
December 31, 2011
. We define our coverage ratio as earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (“EBITDA”) divided by the sum of the gross interest and scheduled mortgage principal paid to our lenders plus dividends paid to our preferred stockholders.
Through 2013, we estimate that we will require approximately $130.5 million to repay $16.7 million of maturing debt (excluding scheduled principal payments), $110.5 million to complete currently in-process developments and redevelopments, and $3.3 million to fund our pro-rata share of estimated capital contributions to our co-investment partnerships for repayment of debt. If we start new development or redevelop additional shopping centers, our cash requirements will increase. At
December 31, 2012
, our joint ventures had
$24.4 million
of scheduled secured mortgage loans and credit lines maturing through 2013. To meet our cash requirements, we will utilize cash generated from operations, borrowings from our Line, proceeds from the sale of real estate, and when the capital markets are favorable, proceeds from the sale of common equity and the issuance of debt.
43
Investments in Real Estate Partnerships
At
December 31, 2012
and
2011
, we had investments in real estate partnerships of
$442.9 million
and
$386.9 million
, respectively. The following table is a summary of unconsolidated combined assets and liabilities of these co-investment partnerships and our pro-rata share at
December 31, 2012
and
2011
(dollars in thousands):
2012
2011
Number of Co-investment Partnerships
19
16
Regency’s Ownership
20%-50%
20%-50%
Number of Properties
144
147
Combined Assets
(1)
$
3,434,954
3,501,775
Combined Liabilities
(1)
$
1,933,488
1,992,213
Combined Equity
(1)
$
1,501,466
1,509,562
Regency’s Share of
(1)(2)(3)
:
Assets
$
1,154,387
1,160,954
Liabilities
$
635,882
648,533
(1)
Excludes the assets and liabilities of BRET as the property holdings of BRET do not impact the rate of return on Regency's preferred stock investment.
(2)
Pro-rata financial information is not, and is not intended to be, a presentation in accordance with GAAP. However, management believes that providing such information is useful to investors in assessing the impact of its investments in real estate partnership activities on the operations of Regency, which includes such items on a single line presentation under the equity method in its consolidated financial statements.
(3)
The difference between Regency's share of the net assets of the co-investment partnerships and the Company's investments in real estate partnerships per the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets relates primarily to differences in inside/outside basis as further described in Note 4 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Investments in real estate partnerships are primarily comprised of co-investment partnerships in which we currently invest with six co-investment partners and a closed-end real estate fund (“Regency Retail Partners” or the “Fund”), as further summarized below. In addition to earning our pro-rata share of net income or loss in each of these co-investment partnerships, we receive recurring market-based fees for asset management, property management, and leasing as well as fees for investment and financing services, which were
$25.4 million
,
$29.0 million
and
$25.1 million
for the years ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
respectively. During the years ended
December 31, 2011
and
2010
we received transaction fees from our co-investment partnerships of
$5.0 million
and
$2.6 million
, respectively, with
no
such fees received during 2012.
Our equity method investments in real estate partnerships as of
December 31, 2012
and
2011
consist of the following (in thousands):
Regency's Ownership
2012
2011
GRI - Regency, LLC (GRIR)
40.00
%
$
272,044
262,018
Macquarie CountryWide-Regency III, LLC (MCWR III)
24.95
%
29
195
Columbia Regency Retail Partners, LLC (Columbia I)
20.00
%
17,200
20,335
Columbia Regency Partners II, LLC (Columbia II)
20.00
%
8,660
9,686
Cameron Village, LLC (Cameron)
30.00
%
16,708
17,110
RegCal, LLC (RegCal)
25.00
%
15,602
18,128
Regency Retail Partners, LP (the Fund)
20.00
%
15,248
16,430
US Regency Retail I, LLC (USAA)
20.01
%
2,173
3,093
BRE Throne Holdings, LLC (BRET)
47.80
%
48,757
—
Other investments in real estate partnerships
50.00
%
46,506
39,887
Total
(1)
$
442,927
386,882
(1)
The difference between Regency's share of the net assets of the co-investment partnerships and the Company's investments in real estate partnerships per the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets relates primarily to differences in inside/outside basis as further described in Note 4 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
44
Contractual Obligations
We have debt obligations related to our mortgage loans, unsecured notes, and our unsecured credit facilities as described further below and in Note 8 to the Consolidated Financial Statements. We have shopping centers that are subject to non-cancelable long-term ground leases where a third party owns and has leased the underlying land to us to construct and/or operate a shopping center. In addition, we have non-cancelable operating leases pertaining to office space from which we conduct our business. The table below excludes:
•
Reserves for
$9.3 million
related to our pro-rata share of environmental remediation as discussed herein under
Environmental Matters
as the timing of the remediation payments is not currently known;
•
Obligations related to construction or development contracts, since payments are only due upon satisfactory performance under the contracts;
•
Letters of credit of
$20.8 million
issued to cover performance obligations on certain development projects, which will be satisfied upon completion of the development projects; and
•
Obligations for retirement savings plans due to uncertainty around timing of participant withdrawals, which are solely within the control of the participant, and are further discussed in Note 13 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
The following table of Contractual Obligations summarizes our debt maturities including interest, excluding recorded debt premiums or discounts that are not obligations, and our obligations under non-cancelable operating leases, sub-leases, and ground leases as of
December 31, 2012
, including our pro-rata share of obligations within co-investment partnerships (in thousands):
Payments Due by Period
Beyond 5
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
Years
Total
Notes Payable:
Regency
(1)
$
125,525
276,553
488,153
255,663
554,975
632,762
2,333,631
Regency's share of JV
(1)
46,560
57,212
77,676
150,348
69,264
380,510
781,570
Operating Leases:
Regency
4,786
4,070
3,999
3,406
1,891
58
18,210
Subleases:
Regency
(229
)
(117
)
(94
)
(32
)
—
—
(472
)
Ground Leases:
Regency
3,175
3,183
2,808
2,807
2,758
101,555
116,286
Regency's share of JV
208
208
208
208
208
10,534
11,574
Total
$
180,025
341,109
572,750
412,400
629,096
1,125,419
3,260,799
(1)
Amounts include interest payments.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
We do not have off-balance sheet arrangements, financings, or other relationships with other unconsolidated entities (other than our co-investment partnerships) or other persons, also known as variable interest entities, not previously discussed. Our co-investment partnership properties have been financed with non-recourse loans. The Company has no guarantees related to these loans.
45
Results from Operations
Comparison of the
year
s ended
December 31, 2012
to
2011
:
Our revenues increased by
$3.8 million
or
0.8%
in
2012
, as compared to
2011
, as summarized in the following table (in thousands):
2012
2011
Change
Minimum rent
$
359,350
350,223
9,127
Percentage rent
3,327
2,996
331
Recoveries from tenants and other income
107,732
105,899
1,833
Management, transaction, and other fees
26,511
33,980
(7,469
)
Total revenues
$
496,920
493,098
3,822
Minimum rent increased
$9.1 million
for the year ended
December 31, 2012
compared to the year ended
December 31, 2011
despite a $13.2 million decrease attributable to the sale of a 15-property portfolio on July 25, 2012. This portfolio was sold for total consideration of $273.5 million, net of a $47.5 million retained investment in the acquiring real estate partnership. As of
December 31, 2012
, this asset group did not meet the definition of discontinued operations, in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 205-20, Presentation of Financial Statements - Discontinued Operations, based on our continuing involvement.
The increase in minimum rent is due to increased average occupancy levels at our consolidated properties from
92.2%
leased at
December 31, 2011
to
94.1%
leased at
December 31, 2012
, combined with an increase in average base rent per square foot (psf) from $16.59 psf for the year ended
December 31, 2011
to $16.86 psf for the year ended
December 31, 2012
. Minimum rent also increased $2.9 million due to the acquisition of five operating properties and four development properties since
December 31, 2011
.
Recoveries from tenants represent their share of the operating, maintenance, and real estate tax expenses that we incur to operate our shopping centers, as well as other income. Recoveries increased during the year ended
December 31, 2012
as compared to the year ended
December 31, 2011
primarily due to increased average occupancy, although recoveries were partially offset by declines in recovery revenue from the sale of real estate.
We earned fees, at market-based rates, for asset management, property management, leasing, acquisition, and financing services that we provided to our co-investment partnerships and third parties as follows (in thousands):
2012
2011
Change
Asset management fees
$
6,488
6,705
(217
)
Property management fees
14,224
14,910
(686
)
Leasing commissions and other fees
5,799
7,365
(1,566
)
Transaction fees
—
5,000
(5,000
)
$
26,511
33,980
(7,469
)
The decrease in fees in 2012 was primarily the result of the liquidation of the DESCO co-investment partnership during 2011, which included a $5.0 million disposition fee and a $1.0 million consulting fee we received as a result of the liquidation. Asset management fees, property management fees, and leasing commissions also declined as a result of the sale of properties held by our co-investment partnerships since
December 31, 2011
.
46
Our operating expenses increased by
$3.1 million
or
1.0%
in
2012
, as compared to
2011
. The following table summarizes our operating expenses (in thousands):
2012
2011
Change
Depreciation and amortization
$
126,808
128,963
(2,155
)
Operating and maintenance
69,900
71,707
(1,807
)
General and administrative
61,700
56,117
5,583
Real estate taxes
55,604
54,622
982
Other expenses
7,246
6,719
527
Total operating expenses
$
321,258
318,128
3,130
Depreciation and amortization expense and operating and maintenance expense decreased
$2.2 million
and
$1.8 million
, respectively, for the year ended
December 31, 2012
, as compared to the year ended
December 31, 2011
, due to mild winter weather and a net reduction in the number of shopping centers owned during 2012 . General and administrative expense increased
$5.6 million
primarily due to an increase in incentive compensation expense as a result of exceeding performance targets.
The following table presents the components of other expense (income) (in thousands):
2012
2011
Change
Interest expense, net
$
112,129
123,645
(11,516
)
Provision for impairment
74,816
12,424
62,392
Early extinguishment of debt
852
—
852
Net investment (income) loss from deferred compensation plan
(2,057
)
206
(2,263
)
$
185,740
136,275
49,465
As discussed above, we sold a 15-property portfolio during 2012, and as a result of this sale, we recognized a net impairment loss of $18.1 million during the year ended
December 31, 2012
. Additional impairment of $56.7 million was recognized related to two operating properties and three land parcels. The majority of this impairment,
$50.0 million
, related to one operating property, which we determined was more likely than not to be sold before the end of its previously estimated hold period, which led to the impairment. This property is located in a master planned community of North Los Vegas, a market that was significantly impacted by the housing market crash. This is the only property owned by us in this market, and we currently do not intend to hold the property for a term that we estimate would be necessary for us to recover our investment. The other operating property exhibited weak operating fundamentals, including low economic occupancy for an extended period of time, which led to a
$4.5 million
impairment.
During the year ended
December 31, 2011
, a $12.4 million provision for impairment was recognized related to two operating properties, that exhibited weak operating fundamentals, including low economic occupancy for an extended period of time, which lead to the impairment.
On
July 20, 2012
, we repaid
$150 million
of our Term Loan, and as a result of this early extinguishment of debt, we expensed approximately
$852,000
in loan costs.
The
$2.3 million
increase in net investment income from deferred compensation plan related to the change in the fair value of plan assets from
December 31, 2011
to
December 31, 2012
and is consistent with the change in plan liabilities.
47
The following table presents the change in net interest expense (in thousands):
2012
2011
Change
Interest on notes payable
$
103,610
116,343
(12,733
)
Interest on unsecured credit facilities
4,388
1,746
2,642
Capitalized interest
(3,686
)
(1,480
)
(2,206
)
Hedge interest
9,492
9,478
14
Interest income
(1,675
)
(2,442
)
767
$
112,129
123,645
(11,516
)
Interest on notes payable decreased and interest on unsecured credit facilities increased during the year ended
December 31, 2012
, as compared to the year ended
December 31, 2011
, as a result of the repayment of $192.4 million of 6.75% unsecured debt in January 2012 using proceeds from our Term Loan and $800 million Line of Credit at lower interest rates. Additional interest was capitalized during 2012 due to increased development activity.
Our equity in income (loss) of investments in real estate partnerships increased by
$14.2 million
in
2012
, as compared to
2011
as follows (in thousands):
Regency's Ownership
2012
2011
Change
GRI - Regency, LLC (GRIR)
40.00
%
$
9,311
7,266
2,045
Macquarie CountryWide-Regency III, LLC (MCWR III)
24.95
%
(22
)
(123
)
101
Macquarie CountryWide-Regency-DESCO, LLC (MCWR-DESCO)
(1)
—
—
(293
)
293
Columbia Regency Retail Partners, LLC (Columbia I)
20.00
%
8,480
2,775
5,705
Columbia Regency Partners II, LLC (Columbia II)
20.00
%
290
179
111
Cameron Village, LLC (Cameron)
30.00
%
596
322
274
RegCal, LLC (RegCal)
25.00
%
540
1,904
(1,364
)
Regency Retail Partners, LP (the Fund)
20.00
%
297
268
29
US Regency Retail I, LLC (USAA)
20.01
%
297
243
54
BRE Throne Holdings, LLC (BRET)
47.80
%
2,211
—
2,211
Other investments in real estate partnerships
50.00
%
1,807
(2,898
)
4,705
Total
$
23,807
9,643
14,164
(1)
At December 2010, our ownership interest in MCWR-DESCO was 16.35%. The liquidation of MCWR-DESCO was complete effective May 4, 2011. Our ownership interest in MCWR-DESCO was 0.00% at both December 2012 and 2011.
The increase in our equity in income (loss) in investments in real estate partnerships for the year ended
December 31, 2012
, as compared to the year ended
December 31, 2011
, is primarily due to the recognition of our pro-rata share of the $34.5 million gain on sale of an operating property in the Columbia I partnership during second quarter of 2012, the new ownership joint venture interest retained in BRET as part of the portfolio sale during the three months ended
December 31, 2012
, and a $4.6 million impairment recognized on one investment in a real estate partnership during the first quarter of 2011.
48
The following represents the remaining components to determine net income attributable to the common stockholders and unit holders for the year ended
December 31, 2012
, as compared to the year ended
December 31, 2011
(in thousands):
2012
2011
Change
Income from continuing operations before tax
$
13,729
48,338
(34,609
)
Income tax expense (benefit) of taxable REIT subsidiary
13,224
2,994
10,230
Income from discontinued operations
23,546
8,040
15,506
Gain on sale of real estate
2,158
2,404
(246
)
Income attributable to noncontrolling interests
(342
)
(4,418
)
4,076
Preferred stock dividends
(32,531
)
(19,675
)
(12,856
)
Net (loss) income attributable to common stockholders
$
(6,664
)
31,695
(38,359
)
Net income attributable to exchangeable operating partnership units
(106
)
(103
)
(3
)
Net (loss) income attributable to common unit holders
$
(6,558
)
31,798
(38,356
)
Income tax expense increased
$10.2 million
for the year ended
December 31, 2012
, as compared to the year ended
December 31, 2011
. During 2012, we identified four core operating properties within the Taxable REIT Subsidiary (“TRS”) and sold them to the REIT, which generated taxable gains enabling us to use a significant amount of the net operating losses created during the portfolio sale from July 2012. Based on the remaining properties within the TRS and future taxable income sources, the remaining deferred tax assets are not likely to be realized and a full valuation allowance was established on the balance.
Income from discontinued operations was
$23.5 million
for the year ended
December 31, 2012
and includes
$21.9 million
in gains, net of taxes, from the sale of five properties and the operations of the shopping centers sold. Income from discontinued operations was
$8.0 million
for the year ended
December 31, 2011
and includes
$5.9 million
in gains, net of taxes, from the sale of seven properties and the operations, including impairment, of the shopping centers sold.
Gain on sale of real estate decreased approximately
$246,000
for the year ended
December 31, 2012
, as compared to the year ended
December 31, 2011
. During the year ended
December 31, 2012
, we sold seven out-parcels for a gain of $2.2 million, whereas during the year ended
December 31, 2011
, we sold eight out-parcels for no gain, and we sold two operating properties, which did not meet the definition of discontinued operations due to our continuing involvement, for a gain of $2.4 million.
The income attributable to noncontrolling interests decreased during the year ended
December 31, 2012
related to the redemption of preferred units in February 2012, resulting in expense recognition of the original preferred unit issuance costs of approximately $842,000 offset by the redemption discount of $1.9 million.
Preferred stock dividends increased
$12.9 million
during the year ended
December 31, 2012
, from
$19.7 million
during the year ended
December 31, 2011
to
$32.5 million
during the year ended
December 31, 2012
. The increase is attributable to the $9.3 million of non-cash charges for the deemed distribution recognized upon redemption of the Series 3, 4 and 5 Preferred Stock during the year ended
December 31, 2012
, as well as the impact of additional dividends on the Series 6 Preferred Stock issued in February 2012 and Series 7 Preferred Stock issued in September 2012.
Related to our Parent Company's results, our net loss attributable to common stockholders for the year ended
December 31, 2012
was
$6.7 million
, a decrease of
$38.4 million
as compared to net income of
$31.7 million
for the year ended
December 31, 2011
. The lower net income was primarily related to an increase in impairment provisions of
$62.4 million
, offset by a decrease in interest expense of
$11.5 million
and an increase in equity in income of investments in real estate partnerships of
$14.2 million
. Our diluted net loss per share was
$0.08
for the year ended
December 31, 2012
as compared to diluted net income per share of
$0.35
for the year ended
December 31, 2011
.
Related to our Operating Partnership results, our net loss attributable to common unit holders for the year ended
December 31, 2012
was
$6.6 million
, a decrease of
$38.4 million
as compared to net income of
$31.8 million
for the year ended
December 31, 2011
for the same reasons stated above. Our diluted net loss per unit was
$0.08
for the year ended
December 31, 2012
as compared to diluted net income per unit of
$0.35
for the year ended
December 31, 2011
.
49
Comparison of the
year
s ended
December 31, 2011
to
2010
:
Our revenues increased by
$24.9 million
or
5.3%
in
2011
, as compared to
2010
, as summarized in the following table (in thousands):
2011
2010
Change
Minimum rent
$
350,223
332,159
18,064
Percentage rent
2,996
2,540
456
Recoveries from tenants and other income
105,899
104,092
1,807
Management, transaction, and other fees
33,980
29,400
4,580
Total revenues
$
493,098
468,191
24,907
Minimum rent increased
$18.1 million
for the year ended
December 31, 2011
compared to the year ended
December 31, 2010
due to an increase in average base rent per square foot (psf) from $16.55 psf for the year ended
December 31, 2010
to $16.59 psf for the year ended
December 31, 2011
, despite consistent average occupancy levels at our consolidated properties of
92.2%
at
December 31, 2011
and
2010
. Minimum rent also increased due to the acquisition of two operating properties in the latter part of the fourth quarter of 2010, the acquisition of three operating properties during 2011, and four properties received through a distribution-in-kind ("DIK") of one interest in MCWR-DESCO ("DESCO DIK") in May 2011.
Recoveries from tenants increased as a result of increases in our operating and maintenance expenses, and real estate taxes for the year ended
December 31, 2011
as compared to the year ended
December 31, 2010
as summarized further below. In addition, other income increased due to increased contingency income earned from prior year sales of $1.4 million.
We earned fees, at market-based rates, for asset management, property management, leasing, acquisition, disposition and financing services that we provided to our co-investment partnerships and third parties as follows (in thousands):
2011
2010
Change
Asset management fees
$
6,705
6,695
10
Property management fees
14,910
15,599
(689
)
Transaction fees
5,000
2,594
2,406
Leasing commissions and other fees
7,365
4,512
2,853
$
33,980
29,400
4,580
The increase in transaction and other fees was due to the $5.0 million disposition fee and a $1.0 million consulting fee we received as a result of the DESCO DIK liquidation during the the year ended December 31, 2011, as compared to the $2.6 million disposition fee we received related to GRI's acquisition of Macquarie CountryWide's ("MCW") investment during the year ended December 31, 2010.
Our operating expenses increased by
$12.0 million
or
3.9%
in
2011
, as compared to
2010
. The following table summarizes our operating expenses (in thousands):
2011
2010
Change
Depreciation and amortization
$
128,963
118,398
10,565
Operating and maintenance
71,707
67,514
4,193
General and administrative
56,117
61,505
(5,388
)
Real estate taxes
54,622
52,386
2,236
Other expenses
6,719
6,297
422
Total operating expenses
$
318,128
306,100
12,028
Depreciation and amortization expense, operating and maintenance expense, and real estate tax expense increased primarily due to the acquisition of two operating properties in the latter part of the fourth quarter of 2010, the acquisition of three operating properties during 2011, and the four properties received through the DESCO DIK in May 2011. General and administrative expense decreased
$5.4 million
primarily due to a decrease in salary expense, including incentive compensation and certain employee benefits.
50
The following table presents the components of other expense (income) (in thousands):
2011
2010
Change
Interest expense, net
$
123,645
125,287
(1,642
)
Provision for impairment
12,424
19,886
(7,462
)
Early extinguishment of debt
—
4,243
(4,243
)
Net investment (income) loss from deferred compensation plan
206
(1,982
)
2,188
$
136,275
147,434
(11,159
)
During the year ended
December 31, 2011
, a
$12.4 million
provision for impairment was recognized related to two operating properties that exhibited weak operating fundamentals, including low economic occupancy for an extended period of time, which lead to the impairment.
During the year ended
December 31, 2010
, a
$19.9 million
provision for impairment was recognized as a result of identifying properties that had been previously considered held for long term investment and determining that they no longer met our long term investment strategy. As a result of this re-evaluation, we changed our expected investment holding period and reduced our carrying value to estimated fair value.
On October 29, 2010, RCLP completed a tender offer for outstanding debt by purchasing $11.8 million of its $173.5 million 7.95% unsecured notes maturing in January 2011, and $57.6 million of its $250.0 million 6.75% unsecured notes maturing in January 2012 (collectively, the “Notes”). The Company recognized a $4.2 million expense for the early extinguishment of this debt.
The
$2.2 million
increase in net investment income from deferred compensation plan related to the change in the fair value of plan assets from
December 31, 2010
to
December 31, 2011
and is consistent with the change in plan liabilities.
The following table presents the change in interest expense (in thousands):
2011
2010
Change
Interest on notes payable
$
116,343
125,788
(9,445
)
Interest on unsecured credit facilities
1,746
1,430
316
Capitalized interest
(1,480
)
(5,099
)
3,619
Hedge interest
9,478
5,576
3,902
Interest income
(2,442
)
(2,408
)
(34
)
$
123,645
125,287
(1,642
)
Interest on notes payable decreased during the year ended
December 31, 2011
, as compared to the year ended
December 31, 2010
, as a result of the repayment of $161.7 million and $20.0 million of unsecured debt in January 2011 and December 2011, respectively. Capitalized interest decreased as a result of reduced development activity during the year ended
December 31, 2011
, as compared to
2010
. Hedge interest increased as a result of $36.7 million of hedges settled on September 30, 2010, with the realized loss being amortized over a ten year period beginning October 2010.
51
Our equity in income (loss) of investments in real estate partnerships increased by
$22.5 million
in
2011
, as compared to
2010
as follows (in thousands):
Ownership
2011
2010
Change
GRI - Regency, LLC (GRIR)
40.00
%
$
7,266
(6,672
)
13,938
Macquarie CountryWide-Regency III, LLC (MCWR III)
24.95
%
(123
)
(108
)
(15
)
Macquarie CountryWide-Regency-DESCO, LLC (MCWR-DESCO)
(1)
—
%
(293
)
(817
)
524
Columbia Regency Retail Partners, LLC (Columbia I)
20.00
%
2,775
(2,970
)
5,745
Columbia Regency Partners II, LLC (Columbia II)
20.00
%
179
(69
)
248
Cameron Village, LLC (Cameron)
30.00
%
322
(221
)
543
RegCal, LLC (RegCal)
25.00
%
1,904
194
1,710
Regency Retail Partners, LP (the Fund)
20.00
%
268
(3,565
)
3,833
US Regency Retail I, LLC (USAA)
20.01
%
243
(88
)
331
Other investments in real estate partnerships
50.00
%
(2,898
)
1,432
(4,330
)
Total
$
9,643
(12,884
)
22,527
(1) At December 31, 2010, our ownership interest in MCWR-DESCO was 16.35%. The liquidation of MCWR-DESCO was complete effective May 4, 2011.
The increase in our equity in income (loss) in investments in real estate partnerships for the year ended
December 31, 2011
, as compared to the year ended
December 31, 2010
, is related to our pro-rata share of the decrease in depreciation expense of $5.7 million, the decrease in interest expense of $5.9 million, the decrease in impairment provisions of $18.5 million, and the net gain on extinguishment of debt of $1.7 million, offset by a decrease in net operating income of $7.8 million and a gain on sale of properties of approximately $700,000 at the individual real estate partnerships.
The following represents the remaining components to determine net income attributable to the common stockholders and unit holders for the year ended
December 31, 2011
, as compared to the year ended
December 31, 2010
(in thousands):
2011
2010
Change
Income from continuing operations before tax
$
48,338
1,773
46,565
Income tax expense (benefit) of taxable REIT subsidiary
2,994
(1,333
)
4,327
Income from discontinued operations
8,040
8,902
(862
)
Gain on sale of real estate
2,404
993
1,411
Income attributable to noncontrolling interests
(4,418
)
(4,185
)
(233
)
Preferred stock dividends
(19,675
)
(19,675
)
—
Net income (loss) attributable to common stockholders
$
31,695
(10,859
)
42,554
Net income attributable to exchangeable operating partnership units
(103
)
(84
)
(19
)
Net income (loss) attributable to common unit holders
$
31,798
(10,775
)
42,573
Income tax expense increased
$4.3 million
for the year ended
December 31, 2011
, as compared to the year ended
December 31, 2010
, primarily due to the increase in deferred income taxes in 2011 and a tax benefit recognized in 2010.
Income from discontinued operations was
$8.0 million
for the year ended
December 31, 2011
and includes
$5.9 million
in gains, net of taxes, from the sale of seven properties and the operations of the shopping centers sold. Income from discontinued operations was
$8.9 million
for the year ended
December 31, 2010
and includes
$7.6 million
in gains, net of taxes, from the sale of three properties and the operations, including impairment, of the shopping centers sold.
Gain on sale of real estate increased approximately
$1.4 million
for the year ended
December 31, 2011
, as compared to the year ended
December 31, 2010
. During the year ended
December 31, 2011
, we sold eight out-parcels for no gain, and we sold two operating properties that did not meet the definition of discontinued operations due to our continuing involvement, for a gain of $2.4 million. During the year ended
December 31, 2010
we sold eleven out-parcels for a gain of approximately $661,000, and we sold three operating properties for a gain of approximately $332,000. These properties did not meet the definition of discontinued operations due to our continuing involvement.
52
The income attributable to noncontrolling interests remained relatively consistent for the year ended
December 31, 2011
, as compared to the year ended
December 31, 2010
, increasing approximately $233,000. Preferred stock dividends also remained consistent between
2011
and
2010
.
Related to our Parent Company's results, our net income attributable to common stockholders for the year ended
December 31, 2011
was
$31.7 million
, an increase of
$42.6 million
as compared to net loss of
$10.9 million
for the year ended
December 31, 2010
. The higher net income was primarily related to the increase in revenue, offset partially by the increase in operating expenses, from 2010 to 2011 as discussed above, a decrease in impairment provisions of
$7.5 million
, the
$4.2 million
net loss on extinguishment of debt incurred in 2010, and an increase in equity in income of investments in real estate partnerships of
$22.5 million
. Our diluted net income per share was
$0.35
for the year ended
December 31, 2011
as compared to diluted net loss per share of
$0.14
for the year ended
December 31, 2010
.
Related to our Operating Partnership results, our net income attributable to common unit holders for the year ended
December 31, 2011
was
$31.8 million
an increase of
$42.6 million
as compared to net loss of
$10.8 million
for the year ended
December 31, 2010
for the same reasons stated above. Our diluted net income per unit was
$0.35
for the year ended
December 31, 2011
as compared to diluted net loss per unit of
$0.14
for the year ended
December 31, 2010
.
Supplemental Earnings Information
We use certain non-GAAP performance measures, in addition to the required GAAP presentations, as we believe these measures are beneficial to us in improving the understanding of the Company's operational results among the investing public. We believe such measures make comparisons of other REITs' operating results to the Company's more meaningful. We continually evaluate the usefulness, relevance, and calculation of our reported non-GAAP performance measures to determine how best to provide relevant information to the public, and thus such reported measures could change.
The following are our definitions of Same Property Net Operating Income ("NOI"), Funds from Operations ("FFO"), and Core FFO, which we believe to be beneficial non-GAAP performance measures used in understanding our operational results:
Same Property NOI
includes only the net operating income of comparable operating properties that were owned and operated for the entirety of both periods being compared and this excludes all Properties in Development and Non-Same Properties. A Non-Same Property is a property acquired during either period being compared or a development completion that is less than 90% funded or features less than two years of anchor operations. In no event can a development completion be termed a non-same property for more than two years. As such, Same Property NOI assists in eliminating disparities in net income due to the development, acquisition or disposition of properties during the particular period presented, and thus provides a more consistent performance measure for the comparison of our properties.
NOI
is calculated as total property revenues (minimum rent, percentage rents, and recoveries from tenants and other income) less direct property operating expenses (operating and maintenance and real estate taxes) from the properties owned by the Company, and excludes corporate-level income (including management, transaction, and other fees), for the entirety of the periods presented.
FFO
is a commonly used measure of REIT performance, which the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts ("NAREIT") defines as net income, computed in accordance with GAAP, excluding gains and losses from sales of depreciable property, net of tax, excluding operating real estate impairments, plus depreciation and amortization, and after adjustments for unconsolidated partnerships and joint ventures. We compute FFO for all periods presented in accordance with NAREIT's definition. Many companies use different depreciable lives and methods, and real estate values historically fluctuate with market conditions. Since FFO excludes depreciation and amortization and gains and losses from depreciable property dispositions, and impairments, it can provide a performance measure that, when compared year over year, reflects the impact on operations from trends in occupancy rates, rental rates, operating costs, acquisition and development activities, and financing costs. This provides a perspective of our financial performance not immediately apparent from net income determined in accordance with GAAP. Thus, FFO is a supplemental non-GAAP financial measure of our operating performance, which does not represent cash generated from operating activities in accordance with GAAP and therefore, should not be considered an alternative for net income as a measure of liquidity.
Core FFO
is an additional performance measure we use as the computation of FFO includes certain non-cash and non-comparable items that affect our period-over-period performance. Core FFO excludes from FFO, but is not limited to, transaction income or expense, gains or losses from the early extinguishment of debt, development and outparcel gains and losses and other non-core items. We provide a reconciliation of FFO to Core FFO as shown below.
53
The Company's reconciliation of property revenues and property expenses to Same Property NOI for the years ended
December 31, 2012
and
2011
is as follows (in thousands):
2012
2011
Same Property
Other
(1)
Total
Same Property
Other
(1)
Total
Income (loss) from continuing operations
$
140,054
(139,549
)
505
160,784
(115,440
)
45,344
Less:
Management, transaction, and other fees
—
26,511
26,511
—
33,980
33,980
Other
(2)
5,511
1,685
7,196
5,169
1,125
6,294
Plus:
Depreciation and amortization
103,775
23,033
126,808
103,294
25,669
128,963
General and administrative
—
61,700
61,700
—
56,117
56,117
Other operating expense, excluding provision for doubtful accounts
9
4,230
4,239
328
3,376
3,704
Other expense (income)
82,499
103,241
185,740
41,659
94,616
136,275
Equity in income (loss) of investments in real estate excluded from NOI
(3)
63,053
3,489
66,542
69,079
10,060
79,139
Income tax expense of taxable REIT subsidiary
—
13,224
13,224
—
2,994
2,994
NOI from properties sold
—
2,781
2,781
—
10,203
10,203
NOI
$
383,879
43,953
427,832
369,975
52,490
422,465
(1)
Includes revenues and expenses attributable to non-same property, development, and corporate activities.
(2)
Includes straight-line rental income, net of reserves, above and below market rent amortization, banking charges, and other fees.
(3)
Excludes non-operating related expenses.
54
The Company's reconciliation of net income available to common shareholders to FFO and Core FFO for the years ended
December 31, 2012
and
2011
is as follows (in thousands, except share information):
2012
2011
Reconciliation of Net income to Funds from Operations
Net income (loss) attributable to common stockholders
$
(6,664
)
31,695
Adjustments to reconcile to Funds from Operations:
Depreciation and amortization - consolidated real estate
108,057
113,384
Depreciation and amortization - unconsolidated partnerships
43,162
43,750
Consolidated JV partners' share of depreciation
(755
)
(739
)
Provision for impairment
(1)
75,326
19,614
Amortization of leasing commissions and intangibles
16,055
16,427
Gain on sale of operating properties, net of tax
(1)
(13,187
)
(4,916
)
Loss from deferred compensation plan, net
—
1,000
Noncontrolling interest of exchangeable partnership units
106
103
Funds From Operations
$
222,100
220,318
Reconciliation of FFO to Core FFO
Funds from operations
$
222,100
220,318
Adjustments to reconcile to Core Funds from Operations:
Development and outparcel gain, net of dead deal costs and tax
(1)
(3,415
)
(1,328
)
Provision for impairment to land and outparcels
(1)
1,000
849
Provision for hedge ineffectiveness
(1)
20
54
Loss (gain) on early debt extinguishment
(1)
1,238
(1,745
)
Original preferred stock issuance costs expensed
10,119
—
Gain on redemption of preferred units
(1,875
)
—
One-time additional preferred dividend
1,750
—
Transaction fees and promotes
—
(5,000
)
Core Funds From Operations
$
230,937
213,148
(1)
Includes Regency's pro-rata share of unconsolidated co-investment partnerships.
55
Environmental Matters
We are subject to numerous environmental laws and regulations as they apply to our shopping centers pertaining to chemicals used by the dry cleaning industry, the existence of asbestos in older shopping centers, and underground petroleum storage tanks. We believe that the tenants who currently operate dry cleaning plants or gas stations do so in accordance with current laws and regulations. Generally, we use all legal means to cause tenants to remove dry cleaning plants from our shopping centers or convert them to more environmentally friendly systems. Where available, we have applied and been accepted into state-sponsored environmental programs. We have a blanket environmental insurance policy for third-party liabilities and remediation costs on shopping centers that currently have no known environmental contamination. We have also placed environmental insurance, where possible, on specific properties with known contamination, in order to mitigate our environmental risk. We monitor the shopping centers containing environmental issues and in certain cases voluntarily remediate the sites. We also have legal obligations to remediate certain sites and we are in the process of doing so. At
December 31, 2012
we had reserves of
$9.3 million
for our pro-rata share of environmental remediation, primarily from property acquisitions. We believe that the ultimate disposition of currently known environmental matters will not have a material effect on our financial position, liquidity, or results of operations; however, we can give no assurance that existing environmental studies on our shopping centers have revealed all potential environmental liabilities; that any previous owner, occupant or tenant did not create any material environmental condition not known to us; that the current environmental condition of the shopping centers will not be affected by tenants and occupants, by the condition of nearby properties, or by unrelated third parties; or that changes in applicable environmental laws and regulations or their interpretation will not result in additional environmental liability to us.
Inflation/Deflation
Inflation has been historically low and has had a minimal impact on the operating performance of our shopping centers; however, inflation may become a greater concern in the future. Substantially all of our long-term leases contain provisions designed to mitigate the adverse impact of inflation. Most of our leases require tenants to pay their pro-rata share of operating expenses, including common-area maintenance, real estate taxes, insurance and utilities, thereby reducing our exposure to increases in costs and operating expenses resulting from inflation. In addition, many of our leases are for terms of less than ten years, which permits us to seek increased rents upon re-rental at market rates. However, during deflationary periods or periods of economic weakness, minimum rents and percentage rents may decline as the supply of available retail space exceeds demand and consumer spending declines. Occupancy declines resulting from a weak economic period will also likely result in lower recovery rates of our operating expenses.
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
Market Risk
We are exposed to two significant components of interest rate risk:
•
We have a
$800.0 million
Line commitment and a $100.0 million Term Loan commitment, as further described in Note 8 to the Consolidated Financial Statements. Our Line commitment has a variable interest rate that is based upon a
annual rate of LIBOR plus 117.5 basis points
and our Term Loan has a
variable interest rate of LIBOR plus 145 basis points
. LIBOR rates charged on our Line commitment and our Term Loan (collectively our "unsecured credit facilities") change monthly. The spread on the unsecured credit facilities is dependent upon maintaining specific credit ratings. If our credit ratings are downgraded, the spread on the unsecured credit facilities would increase, resulting in higher interest costs.
•
We are also exposed to changes in interest rates when we refinance our existing long-term fixed rate debt. The objective of our interest rate risk management program is to limit the impact of interest rate changes on earnings and cash flows and to lower our overall borrowing costs. To achieve these objectives, we borrow primarily at fixed interest rates and may enter into derivative financial instruments such as interest rate swaps, caps, or treasury locks in order to mitigate our interest rate risk on a related financial instrument. We do not enter into derivative or interest rate transactions for speculative purposes. Our interest rate swaps are structured solely for the purpose of interest rate protection.
We have
$181.6 million
of fixed rate debt maturing in 2013 and 2014 that has a weighted average fixed interest rate of 5.22%, which includes
$150.0 million
of unsecured long-term debt that matures in
April 2014
. We also have $350.0 million of unsecured long-term debt that matures in 2015. In order to mitigate the risk of interest rates rising before we obtain new unsecured borrowings in 2014 and 2015, we entered into five forward-starting interest rate swaps during December 2012, for
56
the same ten year periods we expect for our future borrowings. These swaps total $300.0 million of notional value, with weighted average fixed ten year swap rates of 2.09% for those starting in 2014 and 2.48% for those starting in 2015, as discussed in note 9 to the Consolidated Financial Statements. We continuously monitor the capital markets and evaluate our ability to issue new debt to repay maturing debt or fund our commitments. Based upon the current capital markets, our current credit ratings, our current capacity under our Line and Term Loan, and the number of high quality, unencumbered properties that we own which could collateralize borrowings, we expect that we will be able to successfully issue new secured or unsecured debt to fund these debt obligations.
Our interest rate risk is monitored using a variety of techniques. The table below presents the principal cash flows (in thousands, excluding interest expense), weighted average interest rates of remaining debt, and the fair value of total debt (in thousands) as of
December 31, 2012
, by year of expected maturity to evaluate the expected cash flows and sensitivity to interest rate changes. Although the average interest rate for variable rate debt is included in the table, those rates represent rates that existed at
December 31, 2012
and are subject to change on a monthly basis.
The table below incorporates only those exposures that exist as of
December 31, 2012
and does not consider exposures or positions that could arise after that date. Since firm commitments are not presented, the table has limited predictive value. As a result, our ultimate realized gain or loss with respect to interest rate fluctuations will depend on the exposures that arise during the period, our hedging strategies at that time, and actual interest rates.
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
Thereafter
Total
Fair Value
Fixed rate debt
$
23,987
172,545
418,181
19,648
488,960
632,762
1,756,083
1,997,561
Average interest rate for all fixed rate debt
(1)
5.67
%
5.74
%
5.89
%
5.89
%
5.89
%
5.89
%
—
—
Variable rate LIBOR debt
$
204
11,837
—
170,000
—
—
182,041
182,390
Average interest rate for all variable rate debt
(1)
1.71
%
1.61
%
1.61
%
—
—
—
—
—
(1)
Average interest rates at the end of each year presented.
57
Item 8. Consolidated Financial Statements and Supplementary Data
Regency Centers Corporation and Regency Centers, L.P.
Index to Financial Statements
Reports of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
59
Regency Centers Corporation:
Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2012 and 2011
63
Consolidated Statements of Operations for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010
64
Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income (Loss) for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010
65
Consolidated Statements of Equity for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010
66
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010
68
Regency Centers, L.P.:
Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2012 and 2011
70
Consolidated Statements of Operations for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010
71
Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income (Loss) for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010
72
Consolidated Statements of Capital for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010
73
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010
75
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
77
Financial Statement Schedule
Schedule III - Consolidated Real Estate and Accumulated Depreciation - December 31, 201
2
115
All other schedules are omitted because of the absence of conditions under which they are required, materiality or because information required therein is shown in the consolidated financial statements or notes thereto.
58
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
The Board of Directors and Stockholders
Regency Centers Corporation:
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Regency Centers Corporation and subsidiaries (the Company) as of
December 31, 2012
and
2011
, and the related consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive income (loss), equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended
December 31, 2012
. In connection with our audits of the consolidated financial statements, we also have audited financial statement Schedule III. These consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedule are the responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedule 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 audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Regency Centers Corporation and subsidiaries as of
December 31, 2012
and
2011
, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended
December 31, 2012
, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. Also in our opinion, the related financial statement schedule, when considered in relation to the basic consolidated financial statements taken as a whole, presents fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), Regency Centers Corporation's internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2012
, based on criteria established in
Internal Control - Integrated Framework
issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO), and our report dated
March 1, 2013
expressed an unqualified opinion on the effectiveness of the Company's internal control over financial reporting.
/s/
KPMG LLP
March 1, 2013
Jacksonville, Florida
Certified Public Accountants
59
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
The Board of Directors and Stockholders
Regency Centers Corporation:
We have audited Regency Centers Corporation's (the Company's) internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2012
, based on criteria established in
Internal Control - Integrated Framework
issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Regency Centers Corporation's management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying Management's Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company's 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, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audit also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
A company's 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. A company's internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company's 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, Regency Centers Corporation maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2012
, based on criteria established in
Internal Control - Integrated Framework
issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheets of Regency Centers Corporation and subsidiaries as of
December 31, 2012
and
2011
, and the related consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive income (loss), equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended
December 31, 2012
, and our report dated
March 1, 2013
expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated financial statements.
/s/
KPMG LLP
March 1, 2013
Jacksonville, Florida
Certified Public Accountants
60
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
The Unit Holders of Regency Centers, L.P. and
the Board of Directors and Stockholders of
Regency Centers Corporation:
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Regency Centers, L.P. and subsidiaries (the Partnership) as of
December 31, 2012
and
2011
, and the related consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive income (loss), capital, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended
December 31, 2012
. In connection with our audits of the consolidated financial statements, we also have audited financial statement Schedule III. These consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedule are the responsibility of the Partnership's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedule 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 audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Regency Centers, L.P. and subsidiaries as of
December 31, 2012
and
2011
, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended
December 31, 2012
, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. Also in our opinion, the related financial statement schedule, when considered in relation to the basic consolidated financial statements taken as a whole, presents fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), Regency Centers, L.P.'s internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2012
, based on criteria established in
Internal Control - Integrated Framework
issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO), and our report dated
March 1, 2013
expressed an unqualified opinion on the effectiveness of the Partnership's internal control over financial reporting.
/s/
KPMG LLP
March 1, 2013
Jacksonville, Florida
Certified Public Accountants
61
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
The Unit Holders of Regency Centers, L.P. and
the Board of Directors and Stockholders of
Regency Centers Corporation:
We have audited Regency Centers, L.P.'s (the Partnership's) internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2012
, based on criteria established in
Internal Control - Integrated Framework
issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Regency Centers, L.P.'s management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying Management's Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Partnership's 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, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audit also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
A company's 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. A company's internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company's 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, Regency Centers, L.P. maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2012
, based on criteria established in
Internal Control - Integrated Framework
issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheets of Regency Centers, L.P. and subsidiaries as of
December 31, 2012
and
2011
, and the related consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive income (loss), capital, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended
December 31, 2012
, and our report dated
March 1, 2013
expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated financial statements.
/s/
KPMG LLP
March 1, 2013
Jacksonville, Florida
Certified Public Accountants
62
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION
Consolidated Balance Sheets
December 31, 2012
and
2011
(in thousands, except share data)
2012
2011
Assets
Real estate investments at cost (notes 2 and 3):
Land
$
1,215,659
1,273,606
Buildings and improvements
2,502,186
2,604,229
Properties in development
192,067
224,077
3,909,912
4,101,912
Less: accumulated depreciation
782,749
791,619
3,127,163
3,310,293
Investments in real estate partnerships (note 4)
442,927
386,882
Net real estate investments
3,570,090
3,697,175
Cash and cash equivalents
22,349
11,402
Restricted cash
6,472
6,050
Accounts receivable, net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $3,915 and $3,442 at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively
26,601
37,733
Straight-line rent receivable, net of reserve of $870 and $2,075 at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively
49,990
48,132
Notes receivable (note 5)
23,751
35,784
Deferred costs, less accumulated amortization of $69,224 and $71,265 at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively
69,506
70,204
Acquired lease intangible assets, less accumulated amortization of $19,148 and $15,588 at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively (note 6)
42,459
27,054
Trading securities held in trust, at fair value (note 13)
23,429
21,713
Other assets (note 9)
18,811
31,824
Total assets
$
3,853,458
3,987,071
Liabilities and Equity
Liabilities:
Notes payable (note 8)
$
1,771,891
1,942,440
Unsecured credit facilities (note 8)
170,000
40,000
Accounts payable and other liabilities (note 9 and 13)
127,185
101,899
Acquired lease intangible liabilities, less accumulated accretion of $6,636 and $4,750 at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively (note 6)
20,325
12,662
Tenants’ security and escrow deposits and prepaid rent
18,146
20,416
Total liabilities
2,107,547
2,117,417
Commitments and contingencies (notes 15 and 16)
Equity:
Stockholders’ equity (notes 11 and 12):
Preferred stock, $0.01 par value per share, 30,000,000 shares authorized; 13,000,000 and 11,000,000 Series 3-7 shares issued and outstanding at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively, with liquidation preferences of $25 per share
325,000
275,000
Common stock $0.01 par value per share,150,000,000 shares authorized; 90,394,486 and 89,921,858 shares issued at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively
904
899
Treasury stock at cost, 335,347 and 338,714 shares held at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively
(14,924
)
(15,197
)
Additional paid in capital
2,312,310
2,281,817
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
(57,715
)
(71,429
)
Distributions in excess of net income
(834,810
)
(662,735
)
Total stockholders’ equity
1,730,765
1,808,355
Noncontrolling interests (note 11):
Series D preferred units, aggregate redemption value of $50,000 at December 31, 2011
—
49,158
Exchangeable operating partnership units, aggregate redemption value of $8,348 and $6,665 at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively
(1,153
)
(963
)
Limited partners’ interests in consolidated partnerships
16,299
13,104
Total noncontrolling interests
15,146
61,299
Total equity
1,745,911
1,869,654
Total liabilities and equity
$
3,853,458
3,987,071
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
63
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION
Consolidated Statements of Operations
For the
years
ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
(in thousands, except per share data)
2012
2011
2010
Revenues:
Minimum rent
$
359,350
350,223
332,159
Percentage rent
3,327
2,996
2,540
Recoveries from tenants and other income
107,732
105,899
104,092
Management, transaction, and other fees
26,511
33,980
29,400
Total revenues
496,920
493,098
468,191
Operating expenses:
Depreciation and amortization
126,808
128,963
118,398
Operating and maintenance
69,900
71,707
67,514
General and administrative
61,700
56,117
61,505
Real estate taxes
55,604
54,622
52,386
Other expenses
7,246
6,719
6,297
Total operating expenses
321,258
318,128
306,100
Other expense (income):
Interest expense, net of interest income of $1,675, $2,442, and $2,408 in 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively (note 9)
112,129
123,645
125,287
Provision for impairment
74,816
12,424
19,886
Early extinguishment of debt
852
—
4,243
Net investment (income) loss from deferred compensation plan, including unrealized (gains) losses of $(888), $567, and $(1,342) in 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively (note 13)
(2,057
)
206
(1,982
)
Total other expense (income)
185,740
136,275
147,434
(Loss) income before equity in income (loss) of investments in real estate partnerships
(10,078
)
38,695
14,657
Equity in income (loss) of investments in real estate partnerships (note 4)
23,807
9,643
(12,884
)
Income from continuing operations before tax
13,729
48,338
1,773
Income tax expense (benefit) of taxable REIT subsidiary
13,224
2,994
(1,333
)
Income from continuing operations
505
45,344
3,106
Discontinued operations, net (note 3):
Operating income
1,691
2,098
1,325
Gain on sale of operating properties, net
21,855
5,942
7,577
Income from discontinued operations
23,546
8,040
8,902
Income before gain on sale of real estate
24,051
53,384
12,008
Gain on sale of real estate
2,158
2,404
993
Net income
26,209
55,788
13,001
Noncontrolling interests:
Preferred units
629
(3,725
)
(3,725
)
Exchangeable operating partnership units
(106
)
(103
)
(84
)
Limited partners’ interests in consolidated partnerships
(865
)
(590
)
(376
)
Income attributable to noncontrolling interests
(342
)
(4,418
)
(4,185
)
Net income attributable to the Company
25,867
51,370
8,816
Preferred stock dividends
(32,531
)
(19,675
)
(19,675
)
Net (loss) income attributable to common stockholders
$
(6,664
)
31,695
(10,859
)
(Loss) income per common share - basic (note 14):
Continuing operations
$
(0.34
)
0.26
(0.25
)
Discontinued operations
0.26
0.09
0.11
Net (loss) income attributable to common stockholders
$
(0.08
)
0.35
(0.14
)
(Loss) income per common share - diluted (note 14):
Continuing operations
$
(0.34
)
0.26
(0.25
)
Discontinued operations
0.26
0.09
0.11
Net (loss) income attributable to common stockholders
$
(0.08
)
0.35
(0.14
)
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
64
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION
Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income (Loss)
For the
years
ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
(in thousands)
2012
2011
2010
Net income
$
26,209
55,788
13,001
Other comprehensive income (loss):
Loss on settlement of derivative instruments:
Unrealized loss on derivative instruments
—
—
(61,625
)
Amortization of loss on settlement of derivative instruments recognized in net income
9,466
9,467
5,575
Effective portion of change in fair value of derivative instruments:
Effective portion of change in fair value of derivative instruments
4,220
11
28,363
Less: reclassification adjustment for change in fair value of derivative instruments included in net income
25
7
(3,294
)
Other comprehensive income (loss)
13,711
9,485
(30,981
)
Comprehensive income (loss)
39,920
65,273
(17,980
)
Less: comprehensive income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interests:
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests
342
4,418
4,185
Other comprehensive (loss) income attributable to noncontrolling interests
(3
)
29
(69
)
Comprehensive income attributable to noncontrolling interests
339
4,447
4,116
Comprehensive income (loss) attributable to the Company
$
39,581
60,826
(22,096
)
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
65
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION
Consolidated Statements of Equity
For the
years
ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
(in thousands, except per share data)
Noncontrolling Interests
Preferred
Stock
Common
Stock
Treasury
Stock
Additional
Paid In
Capital
Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Loss
Distributions
in Excess of
Net Income
Total
Stockholders’
Equity
Preferred Units
Exchangeable
Operating
Partnership
Units
Limited
Partners’
Interest in
Consolidated
Partnerships
Total
Noncontrolling
Interests
Total
Equity
Balance at December 31, 2009
$
275,000
815
(16,509
)
2,024,883
(49,973
)
(371,836
)
1,862,380
49,158
7,321
11,748
68,227
1,930,607
Net income
—
—
—
—
—
8,816
8,816
3,725
84
376
4,185
13,001
Other comprehensive loss
—
—
—
—
(30,912
)
—
(30,912
)
—
(69
)
—
(69
)
(30,981
)
Deferred compensation plan, net (note 13)
—
—
334
(607
)
—
—
(273
)
—
—
—
—
(273
)
Amortization of restricted stock issued
—
—
—
7,236
—
—
7,236
—
—
—
—
7,236
Common stock redeemed for taxes withheld for stock based compensation, net
—
—
—
(1,374
)
—
—
(1,374
)
—
—
—
—
(1,374
)
Common stock issued for dividend reinvestment plan
—
1
—
1,847
—
—
1,848
—
—
—
—
1,848
Common stock issued for partnership units exchanged
—
3
—
7,627
—
—
7,630
—
(7,630
)
—
(7,630
)
—
Contributions from partners
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
161
161
161
Distributions to partners
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
(1,456
)
(1,456
)
(1,456
)
Cash dividends declared:
Preferred stock/unit
—
—
—
—
—
(19,675
)
(19,675
)
(3,725
)
—
—
(3,725
)
(23,400
)
Common stock/unit ($1.85 per share)
—
—
—
—
—
(150,499
)
(150,499
)
—
(468
)
—
(468
)
(150,967
)
Balance at December 31, 2010
$
275,000
819
(16,175
)
2,039,612
(80,885
)
(533,194
)
1,685,177
49,158
(762
)
10,829
59,225
1,744,402
Net income
—
—
—
—
—
51,370
51,370
3,725
103
590
4,418
55,788
Other comprehensive income
—
—
—
—
9,456
—
9,456
—
20
9
29
9,485
Deferred compensation plan, net
—
—
978
16,865
—
—
17,843
—
—
—
—
17,843
Amortization of restricted stock issued
—
—
—
10,659
—
—
10,659
—
—
—
—
10,659
Common stock redeemed for taxes withheld for stock based compensation, net
—
—
—
(1,689
)
—
—
(1,689
)
—
—
—
—
(1,689
)
Common stock issued for dividend reinvestment plan
—
—
—
1,081
—
—
1,081
—
—
—
—
1,081
Common stock issued for stock offerings, net of issuance costs
—
80
—
215,289
—
—
215,369
—
—
—
—
215,369
Contributions from partners
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
2,787
2,787
2,787
Distributions to partners
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
(1,111
)
(1,111
)
(1,111
)
Cash dividends declared:
Preferred stock/unit
—
—
—
—
—
(19,675
)
(19,675
)
(3,725
)
—
—
(3,725
)
(23,400
)
66
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION
Consolidated Statements of Equity
For the
years
ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
(in thousands, except per share data)
Noncontrolling Interests
Preferred
Stock
Common
Stock
Treasury
Stock
Additional
Paid In
Capital
Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Loss
Distributions
in Excess of
Net Income
Total
Stockholders’
Equity
Preferred Units
Exchangeable
Operating
Partnership
Units
Limited
Partners’
Interest in
Consolidated
Partnerships
Total
Noncontrolling
Interests
Total
Equity
Common stock/unit ($1.85 per share)
—
—
—
—
—
(161,236
)
(161,236
)
—
(324
)
—
(324
)
(161,560
)
Balance at December 31, 2011
$
275,000
899
(15,197
)
2,281,817
(71,429
)
(662,735
)
1,808,355
49,158
(963
)
13,104
61,299
1,869,654
Net income
—
—
—
—
—
25,867
25,867
(629
)
106
865
342
26,209
Other comprehensive income (loss)
—
—
—
—
13,714
—
13,714
—
28
(31
)
(3
)
13,711
Deferred compensation plan, net
—
—
273
(261
)
—
—
12
—
—
—
—
12
Amortization of restricted stock issued
—
—
—
11,526
—
—
11,526
—
—
—
—
11,526
Common stock redeemed for taxes withheld for stock based compensation, net
—
—
—
(1,474
)
—
—
(1,474
)
—
—
—
—
(1,474
)
Common stock issued for dividend reinvestment plan
—
—
—
988
—
—
988
—
—
—
—
988
Common stock issued for stock offerings, net of issuance costs
—
5
—
21,537
—
—
21,542
—
—
—
—
21,542
Redemption of preferred units
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
(48,125
)
—
—
(48,125
)
(48,125
)
Issuance of preferred stock, net of issuance costs
325,000
—
—
(11,100
)
—
—
313,900
—
—
—
—
313,900
Redemption of preferred stock
(275,000
)
—
—
9,277
—
(9,277
)
(275,000
)
—
—
—
—
(275,000
)
Contributions from partners
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
3,362
3,362
3,362
Distributions to partners
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
(1,001
)
(1,001
)
(1,001
)
Cash dividends declared:
Preferred stock/unit
—
—
—
—
—
(23,254
)
(23,254
)
(404
)
—
—
(404
)
(23,658
)
Common stock/unit ($1.85 per share)
—
—
—
—
—
(165,411
)
(165,411
)
—
(324
)
—
(324
)
(165,735
)
Balance at December 31, 2012
$
325,000
904
(14,924
)
2,312,310
(57,715
)
(834,810
)
1,730,765
—
(1,153
)
16,299
15,146
1,745,911
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
67
RREGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
For the
years
ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
(in thousands)
2012
2011
2010
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net income
$
26,209
55,788
13,001
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization
127,839
133,756
123,933
Amortization of deferred loan cost and debt premium
12,759
12,327
8,533
Amortization and (accretion) of above and below market lease intangibles, net
(1,043
)
(931
)
(1,161
)
Stock-based compensation, net of capitalization
9,806
9,824
6,615
Equity in (income) loss of investments in real estate partnerships
(23,807
)
(9,643
)
12,884
Net gain on sale of properties
(24,013
)
(8,346
)
(8,648
)
Provision for impairment
74,816
15,883
26,615
Early extinguishment of debt
852
—
4,243
Deferred income tax expense (benefit) of taxable REIT subsidiary
13,727
2,422
(860
)
Distribution of earnings from operations of investments in real estate partnerships
44,809
43,361
41,054
Settlement of derivative instruments
—
—
(63,435
)
(Gain) loss on derivative instruments
(22
)
54
(1,419
)
Deferred compensation expense (income)
2,069
(2,136
)
5,068
Realized and unrealized (gain) loss on trading securities held in trust
(2,095
)
184
(2,009
)
Changes in assets and liabilities:
Restricted cash
(423
)
(651
)
(1,778
)
Accounts receivable
6,157
(3,108
)
2,657
Straight-line rent receivables, net
(6,059
)
(4,642
)
(6,202
)
Deferred leasing costs
(12,642
)
(15,013
)
(15,563
)
Other assets
(1,079
)
(3,393
)
(3,821
)
Accounts payable and other liabilities
10,994
(17,892
)
(1,281
)
Tenants’ security and escrow deposits and prepaid rent
(1,639
)
9,789
33
Net cash provided by operating activities
257,215
217,633
138,459
Cash flows from investing activities:
Acquisition of operating real estate
(156,026
)
(70,629
)
(24,569
)
Real estate development and capital improvements
(164,588
)
(82,069
)
(65,889
)
Proceeds from sale of real estate investments
352,707
86,233
47,333
(Issuance) collection of notes receivable
(552
)
(78
)
883
Investments in real estate partnerships
(66,663
)
(198,688
)
(231,847
)
Distributions received from investments in real estate partnerships
38,353
188,514
90,092
Dividends on trading securities held in trust
245
225
297
Acquisition of trading securities held in trust
(17,930
)
(19,377
)
(10,312
)
Proceeds from sale of trading securities held in trust
18,077
18,146
9,555
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities
3,623
(77,723
)
(184,457
)
Cash flows from financing activities:
Net proceeds from common stock issuance
21,542
215,369
—
Net proceeds from issuance of preferred stock
313,900
—
—
Proceeds from sale of treasury stock
338
2,128
1,431
Acquisition of treasury stock
(4
)
(14
)
—
Redemption of preferred stock and partnership units
(323,125
)
—
—
Distributions to limited partners in consolidated partnerships, net
1,375
(735
)
(1,427
)
Distributions to exchangeable operating partnership unit holders
(324
)
(324
)
(468
)
Distributions to preferred unit holders
(404
)
(3,725
)
(3,725
)
Dividends paid to common stockholders
(164,423
)
(160,154
)
(148,649
)
Dividends paid to preferred stockholders
(23,254
)
(19,675
)
(19,675
)
Repayment of fixed rate unsecured notes
(192,377
)
(181,691
)
(209,879
)
Proceeds from issuance of fixed rate unsecured notes, net
—
—
398,599
Proceeds from unsecured credit facilities
750,000
455,000
250,000
Repayment of unsecured credit facilities
(620,000
)
(425,000
)
(240,000
)
Proceeds from notes payable
—
1,940
6,068
Repayment of notes payable
(1,332
)
(16,919
)
(51,687
)
Scheduled principal payments
(7,259
)
(5,699
)
(5,024
)
Payment of loan costs
(4,544
)
(6,070
)
(4,361
)
Payment of premium on tender offer
—
—
(4,000
)
Net cash used in financing activities
(249,891
)
(145,569
)
(32,797
)
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
10,947
(5,659
)
(78,795
)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of the year
11,402
17,061
95,856
Cash and cash equivalents at end of the year
$
22,349
11,402
17,061
68
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
For the
years
ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
(in thousands)
2012
2011
2010
Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information:
Cash paid for interest (net of capitalized interest of $3,686, $1,480, and $5,099 in 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively)
$
115,879
128,649
127,591
Supplemental disclosure of non-cash transactions:
Common stock issued for partnership units exchanged
$
—
—
7,630
Real estate received through distribution in kind
$
—
47,512
—
Mortgage loans assumed through distribution in kind
$
—
28,760
—
Mortgage loans assumed for the acquisition of real estate
$
30,467
31,292
58,981
Real estate contributed for investments in real estate partnerships
$
47,500
—
—
Real estate received through foreclosure on notes receivable
$
12,585
—
990
Change in fair value of derivative instruments
$
(4,285
)
18
28,363
Common stock issued for dividend reinvestment plan
$
988
1,081
1,847
Stock-based compensation capitalized
$
1,979
1,104
852
Contributions from limited partners in consolidated partnerships, net
$
986
2,411
132
Common stock issued for dividend reinvestment in trust
$
440
631
640
Contribution of stock awards into trust
$
819
1,132
1,142
Distribution of stock held in trust
$
1,191
—
51
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
69
REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Consolidated Balance Sheets
December 31, 2012
and
2011
(in thousands, except unit data)
2012
2011
Assets
Real estate investments at cost (notes 2 and 3):
Land
$
1,215,659
1,273,606
Buildings and improvements
2,502,186
2,604,229
Properties in development
192,067
224,077
3,909,912
4,101,912
Less: accumulated depreciation
782,749
791,619
3,127,163
3,310,293
Investments in real estate partnerships (note 4)
442,927
386,882
Net real estate investments
3,570,090
3,697,175
Cash and cash equivalents
22,349
11,402
Restricted cash
6,472
6,050
Accounts receivable, net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $3,915 and $3,442 at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively
26,601
37,733
Straight-line rent receivable, net of reserve of $870 and $2,075 at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively
49,990
48,132
Notes receivable (note 5)
23,751
35,784
Deferred costs, less accumulated amortization of $69,224 and $71,265 at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively
69,506
70,204
Acquired lease intangible assets, less accumulated amortization of $19,148 and $15,588 at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively (note 6)
42,459
27,054
Trading securities held in trust, at fair value (note 13)
23,429
21,713
Other assets (note 9)
18,811
31,824
Total assets
$
3,853,458
3,987,071
Liabilities and Capital
Liabilities:
Notes payable (note 8)
$
1,771,891
1,942,440
Unsecured credit facilities (note 8)
170,000
40,000
Accounts payable and other liabilities (note 9 and 13)
127,185
101,899
Acquired lease intangible liabilities, less accumulated accretion of $6,636 and $4,750 at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively (note 6)
20,325
12,662
Tenants’ security and escrow deposits and prepaid rent
18,146
20,416
Total liabilities
2,107,547
2,117,417
Commitments and contingencies (notes 15 and 16)
Capital:
Partners’ capital (notes 11 and 12):
Series D preferred units, par value $100: 500,000 units issued and outstanding at December 31, 2011
—
49,158
Preferred units of general partner, $0.01 par value per unit, 13,000,000 and 11,000,000 units issued and outstanding at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively, liquidation preference of $25 per unit
325,000
275,000
General partner; 90,394,486 and 89,921,858 units outstanding at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively
1,463,480
1,604,784
Limited partners; 177,164 units outstanding at December 31, 2012 and 2011
(1,153
)
(963
)
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
(57,715
)
(71,429
)
Total partners’ capital
1,729,612
1,856,550
Noncontrolling interests (note 11):
Limited partners’ interests in consolidated partnerships
16,299
13,104
Total noncontrolling interests
16,299
13,104
Total capital
1,745,911
1,869,654
Total liabilities and capital
$
3,853,458
3,987,071
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
70
REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Consolidated Statements of Operations
For the
years
ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
(in thousands, except per unit data)
2012
2011
2010
Revenues:
Minimum rent
$
359,350
350,223
332,159
Percentage rent
3,327
2,996
2,540
Recoveries from tenants and other income
107,732
105,899
104,092
Management, transaction, and other fees
26,511
33,980
29,400
Total revenues
496,920
493,098
468,191
Operating expenses:
Depreciation and amortization
126,808
128,963
118,398
Operating and maintenance
69,900
71,707
67,514
General and administrative
61,700
56,117
61,505
Real estate taxes
55,604
54,622
52,386
Other expenses
7,246
6,719
6,297
Total operating expenses
321,258
318,128
306,100
Other expense (income):
Interest expense, net of interest income of $1,675, $2,442, and $2,408 in 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively (note 9)
112,129
123,645
125,287
Provision for impairment
74,816
12,424
19,886
Early extinguishment of debt
852
—
4,243
Net investment (income) loss from deferred compensation plan, including unrealized (gains) losses of $(888), $567, and $(1,342) in 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively (note 13)
(2,057
)
206
(1,982
)
Total other expense (income)
185,740
136,275
147,434
(Loss) income before equity in income (loss) of investments in real estate partnerships
(10,078
)
38,695
14,657
Equity in income (loss) of investments in real estate partnerships (note 4)
23,807
9,643
(12,884
)
Income from continuing operations before tax
13,729
48,338
1,773
Income tax expense (benefit) of taxable REIT subsidiary
13,224
2,994
(1,333
)
Income from continuing operations
505
45,344
3,106
Discontinued operations, net (note 3):
Operating income
1,691
2,098
1,325
Gain on sale of operating properties, net
21,855
5,942
7,577
Income from discontinued operations
23,546
8,040
8,902
Income before gain on sale of real estate
24,051
53,384
12,008
Gain on sale of real estate
2,158
2,404
993
Net income
26,209
55,788
13,001
Noncontrolling interests:
Limited partners’ interests in consolidated partnerships
(865
)
(590
)
(376
)
Income attributable to noncontrolling interests
(865
)
(590
)
(376
)
Net income attributable to the Partnership
25,344
55,198
12,625
Preferred unit distributions
(31,902
)
(23,400
)
(23,400
)
Net (loss) income attributable to common unit holders
$
(6,558
)
31,798
(10,775
)
(Loss) income per common unit - basic (note 14):
Continuing operations
$
(0.34
)
0.26
(0.25
)
Discontinued operations
0.26
0.09
0.11
Net (loss) income attributable to common unit holders
$
(0.08
)
0.35
(0.14
)
(Loss) income per common unit - diluted (note 14):
Continuing operations
$
(0.34
)
0.26
(0.25
)
Discontinued operations
0.26
0.09
0.11
Net (loss) income attributable to common unit holders
$
(0.08
)
0.35
(0.14
)
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
71
REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income (Loss)
For the
years
ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
(in thousands)
2012
2011
2010
Net income
$
26,209
55,788
13,001
Other comprehensive income (loss):
Loss on settlement of derivative instruments:
Unrealized loss on derivative instruments
—
—
(61,625
)
Amortization of loss on settlement of derivative instruments recognized in net income
9,466
9,467
5,575
Effective portion of change in fair value of derivative instruments:
Effective portion of change in fair value of derivative instruments
4,220
11
28,363
Less: reclassification adjustment for change in fair value of derivative instruments included in net income
25
7
(3,294
)
Other comprehensive income (loss)
13,711
9,485
(30,981
)
Comprehensive income (loss)
39,920
65,273
(17,980
)
Less: comprehensive income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interests:
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests
865
590
376
Other comprehensive (loss) income attributable to noncontrolling interests
(31
)
9
—
Comprehensive income attributable to noncontrolling interests
834
599
376
Comprehensive income (loss) attributable to the Partnership
$
39,086
64,674
(18,356
)
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
72
REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Consolidated Statements of Capital
For the
years
ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
(in thousands)
Preferred
Units
General Partner
Preferred and
Common Units
Limited
Partners
Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income (Loss)
Total
Partners’
Capital
Noncontrolling
Interests in
Limited Partners’
Interest in
Consolidated
Partnerships
Total
Capital
Balance at December 31, 2009
$
49,158
1,912,353
7,321
(49,973
)
1,918,859
11,748
1,930,607
Net income
3,725
8,816
84
—
12,625
376
13,001
Other comprehensive loss
—
—
(69
)
(30,912
)
(30,981
)
—
(30,981
)
Deferred compensation plan, net (note 13)
—
(273
)
—
—
(273
)
—
(273
)
Contributions from partners
—
—
—
—
—
161
161
Distributions to partners
—
(150,499
)
(468
)
—
(150,967
)
(1,456
)
(152,423
)
Preferred unit distributions
(3,725
)
(19,675
)
—
—
(23,400
)
—
(23,400
)
Restricted units issued as a result of amortization of restricted stock issued by Parent Company
—
7,236
—
—
7,236
—
7,236
Common units issued as a result of common stock issued by Parent Company, net of repurchases
—
474
—
—
474
—
474
Common units exchanged for common stock of Parent Company
—
7,630
(7,630
)
—
—
—
—
Balance at December 31, 2010
$
49,158
1,766,062
(762
)
(80,885
)
1,733,573
10,829
1,744,402
Net income
3,725
51,370
103
—
55,198
590
55,788
Other comprehensive income
—
—
20
9,456
9,476
9
9,485
Deferred compensation plan, net
—
17,843
—
—
17,843
—
17,843
Contributions from partners
—
—
—
—
—
2,787
2,787
Distributions to partners
—
(161,236
)
(324
)
—
(161,560
)
(1,111
)
(162,671
)
Preferred unit distributions
(3,725
)
(19,675
)
—
—
(23,400
)
—
(23,400
)
Restricted units issued as a result of amortization of restricted stock issued by Parent Company
—
10,659
—
—
10,659
—
10,659
Common units issued as a result of common stock issued by Parent Company, net of repurchases
—
214,761
—
—
214,761
—
214,761
Balance at December 31, 2011
$
49,158
1,879,784
(963
)
(71,429
)
1,856,550
13,104
1,869,654
Net income
(629
)
25,867
106
—
25,344
865
26,209
Other comprehensive income (loss)
—
—
28
13,714
13,742
(31
)
13,711
Deferred compensation plan, net
—
12
—
—
12
—
12
Contributions from partners
—
—
—
—
—
3,362
3,362
73
REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Consolidated Statements of Capital
For the
years
ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
(in thousands)
Preferred
Units
General Partner
Preferred and
Common Units
Limited
Partners
Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income (Loss)
Total
Partners’
Capital
Noncontrolling
Interests in
Limited Partners’
Interest in
Consolidated
Partnerships
Total
Capital
Distributions to partners
—
(165,411
)
(324
)
—
(165,735
)
(1,001
)
(166,736
)
Redemption of preferred units
(48,125
)
—
—
—
(48,125
)
—
(48,125
)
Preferred unit distributions
(404
)
(23,254
)
—
—
(23,658
)
—
(23,658
)
Restricted units issued as a result of amortization of restricted stock issued by Parent Company
—
11,526
—
—
11,526
—
11,526
Preferred units issued as a result of preferred stock issued by Parent Company, net of issuance costs
—
313,900
—
—
313,900
—
313,900
Preferred stock redemptions
—
(275,000
)
—
—
(275,000
)
—
(275,000
)
Common units issued as a result of common stock issued by Parent Company, net of repurchases
—
21,056
—
—
21,056
—
21,056
Balance at December 31, 2012
$
—
1,788,480
(1,153
)
(57,715
)
1,729,612
16,299
1,745,911
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
74
REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
For the
years
ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
(in thousands)
2012
2011
2010
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net income
$
26,209
55,788
13,001
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization
127,839
133,756
123,933
Amortization of deferred loan cost and debt premium
12,759
12,327
8,533
Amortization and (accretion) of above and below market lease intangibles, net
(1,043
)
(931
)
(1,161
)
Stock-based compensation, net of capitalization
9,806
9,824
6,615
Equity in (income) loss of investments in real estate partnerships
(23,807
)
(9,643
)
12,884
Net gain on sale of properties
(24,013
)
(8,346
)
(8,648
)
Provision for impairment
74,816
15,883
26,615
Early extinguishment of debt
852
—
4,243
Deferred income tax expense (benefit) of taxable REIT subsidiary
13,727
2,422
(860
)
Distribution of earnings from operations of investments in real estate partnerships
44,809
43,361
41,054
Settlement of derivative instruments
—
—
(63,435
)
(Gain) loss on derivative instruments
(22
)
54
(1,419
)
Deferred compensation expense (income)
2,069
(2,136
)
5,068
Realized and unrealized (gain) loss on trading securities held in trust
(2,095
)
184
(2,009
)
Changes in assets and liabilities:
Restricted cash
(423
)
(651
)
(1,778
)
Accounts receivable
6,157
(3,108
)
2,657
Straight-line rent receivables, net
(6,059
)
(4,642
)
(6,202
)
Deferred leasing costs
(12,642
)
(15,013
)
(15,563
)
Other assets
(1,079
)
(3,393
)
(3,821
)
Accounts payable and other liabilities
10,994
(17,892
)
(1,281
)
Tenants’ security and escrow deposits and prepaid rent
(1,639
)
9,789
33
Net cash provided by operating activities
257,215
217,633
138,459
Cash flows from investing activities:
Acquisition of operating real estate
(156,026
)
(70,629
)
(24,569
)
Real estate development and capital improvements
(164,588
)
(82,069
)
(65,889
)
Proceeds from sale of real estate investments
352,707
86,233
47,333
(Issuance) collection of notes receivable
(552
)
(78
)
883
Investments in real estate partnerships
(66,663
)
(198,688
)
(231,847
)
Distributions received from investments in real estate partnerships
38,353
188,514
90,092
Dividends on trading securities held in trust
245
225
297
Acquisition of trading securities held in trust
(17,930
)
(19,377
)
(10,312
)
Proceeds from sale of trading securities held in trust
18,077
18,146
9,555
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities
3,623
(77,723
)
(184,457
)
Cash flows from financing activities:
Net proceeds from common units issued as a result of common stock issued by Parent Company
21,542
215,369
—
Net proceeds from preferred units issued as a result of preferred stock issued by Parent Company
313,900
—
—
Proceeds from sale of treasury stock
338
2,128
1,431
Acquisition of treasury stock
(4
)
(14
)
—
Redemption of preferred partnership units
(323,125
)
—
—
Distributions to limited partners in consolidated partnerships, net
1,375
(735
)
(1,427
)
Distributions to partners
(164,747
)
(160,478
)
(149,117
)
Distributions to preferred unit holders
(23,658
)
(23,400
)
(23,400
)
Repayment of fixed rate unsecured notes
(192,377
)
(181,691
)
(209,879
)
Proceeds from issuance of fixed rate unsecured notes, net
—
—
398,599
Proceeds from unsecured credit facilities
750,000
455,000
250,000
Repayment of unsecured credit facilities
(620,000
)
(425,000
)
(240,000
)
Proceeds from notes payable
—
1,940
6,068
Repayment of notes payable
(1,332
)
(16,919
)
(51,687
)
Scheduled principal payments
(7,259
)
(5,699
)
(5,024
)
Payment of loan costs
(4,544
)
(6,070
)
(4,361
)
Payment of premium on tender offer
—
—
(4,000
)
Net cash used in financing activities
(249,891
)
(145,569
)
(32,797
)
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
10,947
(5,659
)
(78,795
)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of the year
11,402
17,061
95,856
Cash and cash equivalents at end of the year
$
22,349
11,402
17,061
75
REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
For the
years
ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
(in thousands)
2012
2011
2010
Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information:
Cash paid for interest (net of capitalized interest of $3,686, $1,480, and $5,099 in 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively)
$
115,879
128,649
127,591
Supplemental disclosure of non-cash transactions:
Common stock issued by Parent Company for partnership units exchanged
$
—
—
7,630
Real estate received through distribution in kind
$
—
47,512
—
Mortgage loans assumed through distribution in kind
$
—
28,760
—
Mortgage loans assumed for the acquisition of real estate
$
30,467
31,292
58,981
Real estate contributed for investments in real estate partnerships
$
47,500
—
—
Real estate received through foreclosure on notes receivable
$
12,585
—
990
Change in fair value of derivative instruments
$
(4,285
)
18
28,363
Common stock issued by Parent Company for dividend reinvestment plan
$
988
1,081
1,847
Stock-based compensation capitalized
$
1,979
1,104
852
Contributions from limited partners in consolidated partnerships, net
$
986
2,411
132
Common stock issued for dividend reinvestment in trust
$
440
631
640
Contribution of stock awards into trust
$
819
1,132
1,142
Distribution of stock held in trust
$
1,191
—
51
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
76
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
1.
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
(a) Organization and Principles of Consolidation
General
Regency Centers Corporation (the “Parent Company”) began its operations as a Real Estate Investment Trust (“REIT”) in
1993
and is the general partner of Regency Centers, L.P. (the “Operating Partnership”). At
December 31, 2012
, the Parent Company owned approximately
99.8%
of the outstanding common Partnership Units of the Operating Partnership. The Parent Company engages in the ownership, management, leasing, acquisition, and development of retail shopping centers through the Operating Partnership, and has no other assets or liabilities other than through its investment in the Operating Partnership. At
December 31, 2012
, the Parent Company, the Operating Partnership and their controlled subsidiaries on a consolidated basis (the "Company” or “Regency”) directly owned
204
retail shopping centers and held partial interests in an additional
144
retail shopping centers through investments in real estate partnerships (also referred to as joint ventures or co-investment partnerships).
Estimates, Risks, and Uncertainties
The preparation of the consolidated financial statements in conformity with U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (“GAAP”) requires the Company's management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities, at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. The most significant estimates in the Company's financial statements relate to the carrying values of its investments in real estate including its shopping centers, properties in development and its investments in real estate partnerships, and accounts receivable, net. Although the U.S. economy is recovering, economic conditions remain challenging, and therefore, it is possible that the estimates and assumptions that have been utilized in the preparation of the consolidated financial statements could change significantly, if economic conditions were to weaken.
Consolidation
The accompanying consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Parent Company, the Operating Partnership, its wholly-owned subsidiaries, and consolidated partnerships in which the Company has a controlling interest. Investments in real estate partnerships not controlled by the Company are accounted for under the equity method. All significant inter-company balances and transactions are eliminated in the consolidated financial statements.
Ownership of the Parent Company
The Parent Company has a single class of common stock outstanding and two series of preferred stock outstanding (“Series 6 and 7 Preferred Stock”). The dividends on the Series 6 and 7 Preferred Stock are cumulative and payable in arrears on the last day of each calendar quarter.
Ownership of the Operating Partnership
The Operating Partnership's capital includes general and limited common Partnership Units. At
December 31, 2012
, the Parent Company owned approximately
99.8%
or
90,394,486
of the total
90,571,650
Partnership Units outstanding. Net income and distributions of the Operating Partnership are allocable to the general and limited common Partnership Units in accordance with their ownership percentages.
Investments in Real Estate Partnerships
Investments in real estate partnerships not controlled by the Company are accounted for under the equity method. The accounting policies of the real estate partnerships are similar to the Company's accounting policies. Income or loss from these real estate partnerships, which includes all operating results (including impairment losses) and gains on sales of properties within the joint ventures, is allocated to the Company in accordance with the respective partnership agreements. Such allocations of net income or loss are recorded in equity in income (loss) of investments in real estate partnerships in the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Operations. The net difference in the
77
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
carrying amount of investments in real estate partnerships and the underlying equity in net assets is either accreted to income and recorded in equity in income (loss) of investments in real estate partnerships in the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Operations over the expected useful lives of the properties and other intangible assets, which range in lives from
10
to
40
years, or recognized at liquidation if the joint venture agreement includes a unilateral right to elect to dissolve the real estate partnership and, upon such an election, receive a distribution in-kind, as discussed further below.
Cash distributions of earnings from operations from investments in real estate partnerships are presented in cash flows provided by operating activities in the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows. Cash distributions from the sale of a property or loan proceeds received from the placement of debt on a property included in investments in real estate partnerships are presented in cash flows provided by investing activities in the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows.
The Company evaluates the structure and the substance of its investments in the real estate partnerships to determine if they are variable interest entities. The Company has concluded that these partnership investments are not variable interest entities. Further, the joint venture partners in the real estate partnerships have significant ownership rights, including approval over operating budgets and strategic plans, capital spending, sale or financing, and admission of new partners. Upon formation of the joint ventures, the Company, through the Operating Partnership, also became the managing member, responsible for the day-to-day operations of the real estate partnerships. In accordance with the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) Topic 810, the Company evaluated its investment in each real estate partnership and concluded that the other partners have kick-out rights and/or substantive participating rights and, therefore, the Company has concluded that the equity method of accounting is appropriate for these investments and they do not require consolidation. Under the equity method of accounting, investments in real estate partnerships are initially recorded at cost, subsequently increased for additional contributions and allocations of income, and reduced for distributions received and allocations of loss. These investments are included in the consolidated financial statements as investments in real estate partnerships.
Noncontrolling Interests
The Company consolidates all entities in which it has a controlling ownership interest. A controlling ownership interest is typically attributable to the entity with a majority voting interest. Noncontrolling interest is the portion of equity, in a subsidiary or consolidated entity, not attributable, directly or indirectly to the Company. Such noncontrolling interests are reported on the Consolidated Balance Sheets within equity or capital, but separately from stockholders' equity or partners' capital. On the Consolidated Statements of Operations, all of the revenues and expenses from less-than-wholly-owned consolidated subsidiaries are reported in net income (loss), including both the amounts attributable to the Company and noncontrolling interests. The amounts of consolidated net income (loss) attributable to the Company and to the noncontrolling interests are clearly identified on the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Operations.
Noncontrolling Interests of the Parent Company
The consolidated financial statements of the Parent Company include the following ownership interests held by owners other than the preferred and common stockholders of the Parent Company: (i) the limited Partnership Units in the Operating Partnership held by third parties (“Exchangeable operating partnership units”) and (ii) the minority-owned interest held by third parties in consolidated partnerships (“Limited partners' interests in consolidated partnerships”). The Parent Company has included all of these noncontrolling interests in permanent equity, separate from the Parent Company's stockholders' equity, in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets and Consolidated Statements of Equity and Comprehensive Income (Loss). The portion of net income (loss) or comprehensive income (loss) attributable to these noncontrolling interests is included in net income (loss) and comprehensive income (loss) in the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Operations and Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income (Loss) of the Parent Company.
In accordance with the FASB ASC Topic 480, securities that are redeemable for cash or other assets at the option of the holder, not solely within the control of the issuer, are classified as redeemable noncontrolling interests outside of permanent equity in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. The Parent Company has evaluated the conditions as specified under the FASB ASC Topic 480 as it relates to exchangeable operating partnership units outstanding and concluded that it has the right to satisfy the redemption requirements of the units by delivering unregistered common stock. Each
78
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
outstanding exchangeable operating partnership unit is exchangeable for one share of common stock of the Parent Company, and the unit holder cannot require redemption in cash or other assets. Limited partners' interests in consolidated partnerships are not redeemable by the holders. The Parent Company also evaluated its fiduciary duties to itself, its shareholders, and, as the managing general partner of the Operating Partnership, to the Operating Partnership, and concluded its fiduciary duties are not in conflict with each other or the underlying agreements. Therefore, the Parent Company classifies such units and interests as permanent equity in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets and Consolidated Statements of Equity and Comprehensive Income (Loss).
Noncontrolling Interests of the Operating Partnership
The Operating Partnership has determined that Limited partners' interests in consolidated partnerships are noncontrolling interests. The Operating Partnership has included these noncontrolling interests in permanent capital, separate from partners' capital, in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets and Consolidated Statements of Capital and Comprehensive Income (Loss). The portion of net income (loss) or comprehensive income (loss) attributable to these noncontrolling interests is included in net income (loss) and comprehensive income (loss) in the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Operations and Consolidated Statements Comprehensive Income (Loss) of the Operating Partnership.
(b) Revenues
The Company leases space to tenants under agreements with varying terms. Leases are accounted for as operating leases with minimum rent recognized on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease regardless of when payments are due. The Company estimates the collectibility of the accounts receivable related to base rents, straight-line rents, expense reimbursements, and other revenue taking into consideration the Company's historical write-off experience, tenant credit-worthiness, current economic trends, and remaining lease terms
.
During the years ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
, the Company recorded provisions for doubtful accounts of
$3.0 million
,
$3.2 million
, and
$4.0 million
, respectively, of which approximately
$151,000
and
$56,000
is included in discontinued operations for 2011 and 2010, respectively. There were
no
provisions for doubtful accounts included in discontinued operations in
2012
.
The following table represents the components of accounts receivable, net of allowance for doubtful accounts, as of
December 31, 2012
and
2011
in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets (in thousands):
2012
2011
Tenant receivables
$
4,043
4,654
CAM and tax reimbursements
17,891
26,355
Other receivables
8,582
10,166
Less: allowance for doubtful accounts
(3,915
)
(3,442
)
Total
$
26,601
37,733
Substantially all of the lease agreements with anchor tenants contain provisions that provide for additional rents based on tenants' sales volume ("percentage rent"). Percentage rents are recognized when the tenants achieve the specified targets as defined in their lease agreements. Substantially all lease agreements contain provisions for reimbursement of the tenants' share of real estate taxes, insurance and common area maintenance (“CAM”) costs. Recovery of real estate taxes, insurance, and CAM costs are recognized as the respective costs are incurred in accordance with the lease agreements.
As part of the leasing process, the Company may provide the lessee with an allowance for the construction of leasehold improvements. These leasehold improvements are capitalized and recorded as tenant improvements, and depreciated over the shorter of the useful life of the improvements or the remaining lease term. If the allowance represents a payment for a purpose other than funding leasehold improvements, or in the event the Company is not considered the owner of the improvements, the allowance is considered to be a lease incentive and is recognized over the lease term as a reduction of minimum rent. Factors considered during this evaluation include, among other things, who holds legal title to the improvements as well as other controlling rights provided by the lease agreement and
79
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
provisions for substantiation of such costs (e.g. unilateral control of the tenant space during the build-out process). Determination of the appropriate accounting for the payment of a tenant allowance is made on a lease-by-lease basis, considering the facts and circumstances of the individual tenant lease. When the Company is the owner of the leasehold improvements, recognition of lease revenue commences when the lessee is given possession of the leased space upon completion of tenant improvements. However, when the leasehold improvements are owned by the tenant, the lease inception date is the date the tenant obtains possession of the leased space for purposes of constructing its leasehold improvements.
Profits from sales of real estate are recognized under the full accrual method by the Company when: (i) a sale is consummated; (ii) the buyer's initial and continuing investment is adequate to demonstrate a commitment to pay for the property; (iii) the Company's receivable, if applicable, is not subject to future subordination; (iv) the Company has transferred to the buyer the usual risks and rewards of ownership; and (v) the Company does not have substantial continuing involvement with the property.
The Company sells shopping centers to joint ventures in exchange for cash equal to the fair value of the ownership interest of its partners. The Company accounts for those sales as “partial sales” and recognizes gains on those partial sales in the period the properties were sold to the extent of the percentage interest sold, and in the case of certain real estate partnerships, applies a more restrictive method of recognizing gains, as discussed further below. The gains and operations associated with properties sold to these real estate partnerships are not classified as discontinued operations because the Company continues to partially own and manage these shopping centers.
As of
December 31, 2012
,
six
of the Company's joint ventures (“DIK-JV”) give each partner the unilateral right to elect to dissolve the real estate partnership and, upon such an election, receive a distribution in-kind (“DIK”) of the assets of the real estate partnership equal to their respective capital account, which could include properties the Company previously sold to the real estate partnership. The liquidation provisions require that all of the properties owned by the real estate partnership be appraised to determine their respective fair values. As a general rule, if the Company initiates the liquidation process, its partner has the right to choose the first property that it will receive with the Company choosing the next property that it will receive in liquidation. If the Company's partner initiates the liquidation process, the order of the selection process is reversed. The process then continues with an alternating selection of properties by each partner until the balance of each partner's capital account, on a fair value basis, has been distributed. After the final selection, to the extent that the fair value of properties in the DIK-JV are not distributable in a manner that equals the balance of each partner's capital account, a cash payment would be made to the other partner by the partner receiving a property distribution in excess of its capital account. The partners may also elect to liquidate some or all of the properties through sales rather than through the DIK process.
Because the contingency associated with the possibility of receiving a particular property back upon liquidation is not satisfied at the property level, but at the aggregate level, no deferred gain is recognized on property sold by the DIK-JV to a third party or received by the Company upon actual dissolution. Instead, the property received upon dissolution is recorded at the carrying value of the Company's investment in the DIK-JV on the date of dissolution.
The Company is engaged under agreements with its joint venture partners to provide asset management, property management, leasing, investing, and financing services for such joint ventures' shopping centers. The fees are market-based, generally calculated as a percentage of either revenues earned or the estimated values of the properties managed or the proceeds received, and are recognized as services are rendered, when fees due are determinable, and collectibility is reasonably assured. The Company also receives transaction fees, as contractually agreed upon with a joint venture, which include fees such as acquisition fees, disposition fees, “promotes”, or “earnouts”.
(c) Real Estate Investments
Land, buildings, and improvements are recorded at cost. All specifically identifiable costs related to development activities are capitalized into properties in development on the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets. Properties in development are defined as properties that are in the construction or initial lease-up phase and have not reached their initial full occupancy. Once a development property is substantially complete and held available for occupancy, costs are no longer capitalized. The capitalized costs include pre-development costs essential to the development of the property, development costs, construction costs, interest costs, real estate taxes, and allocated direct employee costs incurred during the period of development. Interest costs are capitalized into each development
80
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
project based upon applying the Company's weighted average borrowing rate to that portion of the actual development costs expended. The Company discontinues interest cost capitalization when the property is no longer being developed or is available for occupancy upon substantial completion of tenant improvements, but in no event would the Company capitalize interest on the project beyond
12
months after substantial completion of the building shell.
The following table represents the components of properties in development as of
December 31, 2012
and
2011
in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets (in thousands):
2012
2011
Construction in process
$
133,153
50,903
Construction complete and in lease-up
—
76,301
Land held for future development
58,914
96,873
Total
$
192,067
224,077
Construction in process represents developments where the Company has not yet incurred at least
90%
of the expected costs to complete and the anchor tenant has not yet been open for at least
two
calendar years. Construction complete and in lease-up represents developments where the Company has incurred at least
90%
of the estimated costs to complete and the anchor tenant has not yet been open for at least
two
calendar years, but is still completing lease-up and final tenant build out. Land held for future development represents projects not in construction, but identified and available for future development if and when the market demand for a new shopping center exists.
The Company incurs costs prior to land acquisition including contract deposits, as well as legal, engineering, and other external professional fees related to evaluating the feasibility of developing a shopping center. These pre-development costs are included in properties in development in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets. At
December 31, 2012
and
2011
, the Company had capitalized pre-development costs of
$3.5 million
and
$2.1 million
, respectively, of which
$2.3 million
and
$1.0 million
, respectively, were refundable deposits. If the Company determines that the development of a particular shopping center is no longer probable, any related pre-development costs previously capitalized are immediately expensed in other expenses in the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Operations. During the years ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
, the Company expensed pre-development costs of approximately
$1.5 million
,
$241,000
, and
$520,000
, respectively, in other expenses in the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Operations.
Maintenance and repairs that do not improve or extend the useful lives of the respective assets are recorded in operating and maintenance expense.
Depreciation is computed using the straight-line method over estimated useful lives of approximately
40
years for buildings and improvements, the shorter of the useful life or the remaining lease term subject to a maximum of
10
years for tenant improvements, and
three
to
seven
years for furniture and equipment.
The Company and the real estate partnerships account for business combinations using the acquisition method by recognizing and measuring the identifiable assets acquired, the liabilities assumed, and any noncontrolling interest in the acquiree at their acquisition date fair values. The Company expenses transaction costs associated with business combinations in the period incurred.
The Company's methodology includes estimating an “as-if vacant” fair value of the physical property, which includes land, building, and improvements. In addition, the Company determines the estimated fair value of identifiable intangible assets, considering the following
three
categories: (i) value of in-place leases, (ii) above and below-market value of in-place leases, and (iii) customer relationship value.
The value of in-place leases is estimated based on the value associated with the costs avoided in originating leases compared to the acquired in-place leases as well as the value associated with lost rental and recovery revenue during the assumed lease-up period. The value of in-place leases is recorded to amortization expense over the remaining initial term of the respective leases.
Above-market and below-market in-place lease values for acquired properties are recorded based on the present value of the difference between (i) the contractual amounts to be paid pursuant to the in-place leases and (ii) management's
81
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
estimate of fair market lease rates for comparable in-place leases, measured over a period equal to the remaining non-cancelable term of the lease. The value of above-market leases is amortized as a reduction of minimum rent over the remaining terms of the respective leases and the value of below-market leases is accreted to minimum rent over the remaining terms of the respective leases, including below-market renewal options, if applicable. The Company does not assign value to customer relationship intangibles if it has pre-existing business relationships with the major retailers at the acquired property since they do not provide incremental value over the Company's existing relationships.
The Company classifies an operating property or a property in development as held-for-sale upon satisfaction of the following criteria: (i) management commits to a plan to sell a property (or group of properties), (ii) the property is available for immediate sale in its present condition subject only to terms that are usual and customary for sales of such properties, (iii) an active program to locate a buyer and other actions required to complete the plan to sell the property have been initiated, (iv) the sale of the property is probable and transfer of the asset is expected to be completed within one year, (v) the property is being actively marketed for sale at a price that is reasonable in relation to its current fair value, and (vi) actions required to complete the plan indicate that it is unlikely that significant changes to the plan will be made or that the plan will be withdrawn.
Given the nature of all real estate sales contracts, it is not unusual for such contracts to allow prospective buyers a period of time to evaluate the property prior to formal acceptance of the contract. In addition, certain other matters critical to the final sale, such as financing arrangements, often remain pending even upon contract acceptance. As a result, properties under contract may not close within the expected time period, or may not close at all. Therefore, any properties categorized as held-for-sale represent only those properties that management has determined are probable to close within the requirements set forth above. Operating properties held-for-sale are carried at the lower of cost or fair value less costs to sell. The recording of depreciation and amortization expense is suspended during the held-for-sale period. If circumstances arise that previously were considered unlikely and, as a result, the Company decides not to sell a property previously classified as held-for-sale, the property is reclassified as held and used and is measured individually at the lower of its (i) carrying amount before the property was classified as held-for-sale, adjusted for any depreciation and amortization expense that would have been recognized had the property been continuously classified as held and used or (ii) the fair value at the date of the subsequent decision not to sell. Any required adjustment to the carrying amount of the property reclassified as held and used is included in income from continuing operations in the period of the subsequent decision not to sell and the results of operations previously reported in discontinued operations are reclassified and included in income from continuing operations for all periods presented.
When the Company sells a property or classifies a property as held-for-sale and will not have significant continuing involvement in the operation of the property, the operations of the property are eliminated from ongoing operations and classified in discontinued operations. Its operations, including any mortgage interest and gain on sale, are reported in discontinued operations so that the operations are clearly distinguished. Prior periods are also reclassified to reflect the operations of the property as discontinued operations. When the Company sells an operating property to a joint venture or to a third party, and will continue to manage the property, the operations and gain on sale are included in income from continuing operations.
We evaluate whether there are any indicators, including property operating performance and general market conditions, that the value of the real estate properties (including any related amortizable intangible assets or liabilities) may not be recoverable. Through the evaluation, we compare the current carrying value of the asset to the estimated undiscounted cash flows that are directly associated with the use and ultimate disposition of the asset. Our estimated cash flows are based on several key assumptions, including rental rates, costs of tenant improvements, leasing commissions, anticipated hold period, and assumptions regarding the residual value upon disposition, including the exit capitalization rate. These key assumptions are subjective in nature and could differ materially from actual results. Changes in our disposition strategy or changes in the marketplace may alter the hold period of an asset or asset group which may result in an impairment loss and such loss could be material to the Company's financial condition or operating performance. To the extent that the carrying value of the asset exceeds the estimated undiscounted cash flows, an impairment loss is recognized equal to the excess of carrying value over fair value. If such indicators are not identified, management will not assess the recoverability of a property's carrying value. If a property previously classified as held and used is changed to held-for-sale, the Company estimates fair value, less expected costs to sell, which could cause the Company to determine that the property is impaired.
82
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
The fair value of real estate assets is highly subjective and is determined through comparable sales information and other market data if available, or through use of an income approach such as the direct capitalization method or the traditional discounted cash flow approach. Such cash flow projections consider factors such as expected future operating income, trends and prospects, as well as the effects of demand, competition and other factors, and therefore is subject to a significant degree of management judgment and changes in those factors could impact the determination of fair value. In estimating the fair value of undeveloped land, the Company generally uses market data and comparable sales information.
During the years ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
, the Company established a provision for impairment on Consolidated Properties of
$74.8 million
,
$15.9 million
, and
$23.9 million
, respectively, of which
$3.5 million
and
$6.7 million
was included in discontinued operations for
2011
and
2010
, respectively. There were
no
impairments included in discontinued operations in
2012
. Further, the Company evaluated its property portfolio and did not identify any properties that would meet the above mentioned criteria for held-for-sale as of
December 31, 2012
and
2011
.
A loss in value of investments in real estate partnerships under the equity method of accounting, other than a temporary decline, must be recognized in the period in which the loss occurs. If management identifies indicators that the value of the Company's investment in real estate partnerships may be impaired, it evaluates the investment by calculating the fair value of the investment by discounting estimated future cash flows over the expected term of the investment. As a result of this evaluation, the Company established
no
provision for impairment during the year ended
December 31, 2012
, and established a provision for impairment of
$4.6 million
on one investment in real estate partnership during the year ended
December 31, 2011
and
$2.7 million
on another investment in real estate partnership during the year ended
December 31, 2010
.
The net tax basis of the Company's real estate assets exceeds the book basis by approximately
$247.6 million
and
$95.1 million
at
December 31, 2012
and
2011
, respectively, primarily due to the property impairments recorded for book purposes and the cost basis of the assets acquired and their carryover basis recorded for tax purposes.
(d) Cash and Cash Equivalents
Any instruments which have an original maturity of 90 days or less when purchased are considered cash equivalents. At
December 31, 2012
and
2011
,
$6.5 million
and
$6.0 million
, respectively, of cash was restricted through escrow agreements and certain mortgage loans.
(e) Notes Receivable
The Company records notes receivable at cost on the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets and interest income is accrued as earned and netted against interest expense in the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Operations. If a note receivable is past due, meaning the debtor is past due per contractual obligations, the Company ceases to accrue interest. However, in the event the debtor subsequently becomes current, the Company will resume accruing interest and record the interest income accordingly. The Company evaluates the collectibility of both interest and principal for all notes receivable to determine whether impairment exists using the present value of expected cash flows discounted at the note receivable's effective interest rate or, alternatively, at the observable market price of the loan or the fair value of the collateral if the loan is collateral dependent. In the event the Company determines a note receivable or a portion thereof is considered uncollectible, the Company records a provision for impairment. The Company estimates the collectibility of notes receivable taking into consideration the Company's experience in the retail sector, available internal and external credit information, payment history, market and industry trends, and debtor credit-worthiness.
83
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
(f) Deferred Costs
Deferred costs include leasing costs and loan costs, net of accumulated amortization. Such costs are amortized over the periods through lease expiration or loan maturity, respectively. If the lease is terminated early, or if the loan is repaid prior to maturity, the remaining leasing costs or loan costs are written off. Deferred leasing costs consist of internal and external commissions associated with leasing the Company's shopping centers. Net deferred leasing costs were
$55.5 million
and
$56.5 million
at
December 31, 2012
and
2011
, respectively. Deferred loan costs consist of initial direct and incremental costs associated with financing activities. Net deferred loan costs were
$14.0 million
and
$13.7 million
at
December 31, 2012
and
2011
, respectively.
(g) Derivative Financial Instruments
The Company manages economic risks, including interest rate, liquidity, and credit risk primarily by managing the amount, sources, and duration of its debt funding and the use of derivative financial instruments. Specifically, the Company enters into derivative financial instruments to manage exposures that arise from business activities that result in the receipt or future payment of known and uncertain cash amounts, the amount of which are determined by interest rates. The Company's derivative financial instruments are used to manage differences in the amount, timing, and duration of the Company's known or expected cash payments principally related to the Company's borrowings.
All derivative instruments, whether designated in hedging relationships or not, are recorded on the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets at their fair value. The accounting for changes in the fair value of derivatives depends on the intended use of the derivative, whether the Company has elected to designate a derivative in a hedging relationship and apply hedge accounting, and whether the hedging relationship has satisfied the criteria necessary to apply hedge accounting. Derivatives designated and qualifying as a hedge of the exposure to changes in the fair value of an asset, liability, or firm commitment attributable to a particular risk, such as interest rate risk, are considered fair value hedges. Derivatives designated and qualifying as a hedge of the exposure to variability in expected future cash flows, or other types of forecasted transactions, are considered cash flow hedges. Hedge accounting generally provides for the matching of the timing of gain or loss recognition on the hedging instrument with the recognition of the changes in the fair value of the hedged asset or liability attributable to the hedged risk in a fair value hedge or the earnings effect of the hedged forecasted transactions in a cash flow hedge. The Company may enter into derivative contracts that are intended to economically hedge certain risks, even though hedge accounting does not apply or the Company elects not to apply hedge accounting.
The Company uses interest rate swaps to mitigate its interest rate risk on a related financial instrument or forecasted transaction, and the Company designates these interest rate swaps as cash flow hedges. Interest rate swaps designated as cash flow hedges involve the receipt of variable-rate amounts from a counterparty in exchange for the Company making fixed-rate payments over the life of the agreements without exchange of the underlying notional amount. The gains or losses resulting from changes in fair value of derivatives that qualify as cash flow hedges are recognized in other comprehensive income (“OCI”) while the ineffective portion of the derivative's change in fair value is recognized in the Statements of Operations as a gain or loss on derivative instruments. Upon the settlement of a hedge, gains and losses remaining in OCI are amortized over the underlying term of the hedged transaction.
The Company formally documents all relationships between hedging instruments and hedged items, as well as its risk management objectives and strategies for undertaking various hedge transactions. The Company assesses, both at inception of the hedge and on an ongoing basis, whether the derivatives that are used in hedging transactions are highly effective in offsetting changes in the cash flows and/or forecasted cash flows of the hedged items.
In assessing the valuation of the hedges, the Company uses standard market conventions and techniques such as discounted cash flow analysis, option pricing models, and termination costs at each balance sheet date. All methods of assessing fair value result in a general approximation of value, and such value may never actually be realized.
The settlement of interest rate swap terminations is presented in cash flows provided by operating activities in the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows.
84
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
(h) Income Taxes
The Parent Company believes it qualifies, and intends to continue to qualify, as a REIT under the Internal Revenue Code (the “Code”). As a REIT, the Parent Company will generally not be subject to federal income tax, provided that distributions to its stockholders are at least equal to REIT taxable income. Regency Realty Group, Inc. (“RRG”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Operating Partnership, is a Taxable REIT Subsidiary (“TRS”) as defined in Section 856(l) of the Code. RRG is subject to federal and state income taxes and files separate tax returns. As a pass through entity, the Operating Partnership's taxable income or loss is reported by its partners, of which the Parent Company, as general partner and approximately
99.8%
owner, is allocated its pro-rata share of tax attributes.
Income taxes are accounted for under the asset and liability method. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the estimated tax consequences attributable to differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are measured using the enacted tax rates in effect for the year in which these temporary differences are expected to be recovered or settled.
Earnings and profits, which determine the taxability of dividends to stockholders, differs from net income reported for financial reporting purposes primarily because of differences in depreciable lives and cost bases of the shopping centers, as well as other timing differences.
Tax positions are initially recognized in the financial statements when it is more likely than not the position will be sustained upon examination by the tax authorities. Such tax positions shall initially and subsequently be measured as the largest amount of tax benefit that has a greater than 50% likelihood of being realized upon ultimate settlement with the tax authority assuming full knowledge of the position and relevant facts. The Company believes that it has appropriate support for the income tax positions taken and to be taken on its tax returns and that its accruals for tax liabilities are adequate for all open tax years (
2009
and forward for federal and state) based on an assessment of many factors including past experience and interpretations of tax laws applied to the facts of each matter.
(i) Earnings per Share and Unit
Basic earnings per share of common stock and unit are computed based upon the weighted average number of common shares and units, respectively, outstanding during the period. Diluted earnings per share and unit reflect the conversion of obligations and the assumed exercises of securities including the effects of shares issuable under the Company's share-based payment arrangements, if dilutive. Dividends paid on the Company's share-based compensation awards are not participating securities as they are forfeitable.
(j) Stock-Based Compensation
The Company grants stock-based compensation to its employees and directors. The Company recognizes stock-based compensation based on the grant-date fair value of the award and the cost of the stock-based compensation is expensed over the vesting period.
When the Parent Company issues common shares as compensation, it receives a like number of common units from the Operating Partnership. The Company is committed to contributing to the Operating Partnership all proceeds from the exercise of stock options or other share-based awards granted under the Parent Company's Long-Term Omnibus Plan (the “Plan”). Accordingly, the Parent Company's ownership in the Operating Partnership will increase based on the amount of proceeds contributed to the Operating Partnership for the common units it receives. As a result of the issuance of common units to the Parent Company for stock-based compensation, the Operating Partnership accounts for stock-based compensation in the same manner as the Parent Company.
(k) Segment Reporting
The Company's business is investing in retail shopping centers through direct ownership or through joint ventures. The Company actively manages its portfolio of retail shopping centers and may from time to time make decisions to sell lower performing properties or developments not meeting its long-term investment objectives. The proceeds from sales are reinvested into higher quality retail shopping centers, through acquisitions or new developments, which management believes will generate sustainable revenue growth and attractive returns. It is management's intent that
85
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
all retail shopping centers will be owned or developed for investment purposes; however, the Company may decide to sell all or a portion of a development upon completion. The Company's revenues and net income are generated from the operation of its investment portfolio. The Company also earns fees for services provided to manage and lease retail shopping centers owned through joint ventures.
The Company's portfolio is located throughout the United States; however, management does not distinguish or group its operations on a geographical basis for purposes of allocating resources or capital. The Company reviews operating and financial data for each property on an individual basis; therefore, the Company defines an operating segment as its individual properties. The individual properties have been aggregated into one reportable segment based upon their similarities with regard to both the nature and economics of the centers, tenants and operational processes, as well as long-term average financial performance. In addition, no single tenant accounts for
5%
or more of revenue and none of the shopping centers are located outside the United States.
(l) Fair Value of Assets and Liabilities
Fair value is a market-based measurement, not an entity-specific measurement. Therefore, a fair value measurement is determined based on the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability. As a basis for considering market participant assumptions in fair value measurements, the Company uses a fair value hierarchy that distinguishes between market participant assumptions based on market data obtained from independent sources (observable inputs that are classified within Levels 1 and 2 of the hierarchy) and the Company's own assumptions about market participant assumptions (unobservable inputs classified within Level 3 of the hierarchy). The three levels of inputs used to measure fair value are as follows:
•
Level 1 - Quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the Company has the ability to access.
•
Level 2 - Inputs other than quoted prices included in Level 1 that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly.
•
Level 3 - Unobservable inputs for the asset or liability, which are typically based on the Company's own assumptions, as there is little, if any, related market activity.
The Company also remeasures nonfinancial assets and nonfinancial liabilities, initially measured at fair value in a business combination or other new basis event, at fair value in subsequent periods.
(m) Recent Accounting Pronouncements
Recently Adopted
On January 1, 2012, the Company adopted Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2011-04, "Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820): Amendments to Achieve Common Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure requirements in U.S. GAAP and IFRSs" ("ASU 2011-04"). ASU 2011-04 provides new guidance concerning fair value measurements and disclosure. The new guidance is the result of joint efforts by the FASB and the International Accounting Standards Board ("IASB") to develop a single, converged fair value framework on how to measure fair value and the necessary disclosures concerning fair value measurements. The guidance is applied prospectively. The adoption by the Company resulted in expanded disclosures over fair value measurements, included in note 6.
On January 1, 2012, the Company adopted FASB ASU No. 2011-05, "Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Presentation of Comprehensive Income" ("ASU 2011-05"). ASU 2011-05 revised guidance over the manner in which entities present comprehensive income in the financial statements. This guidance removes the previous presentation options and provides that entities must report comprehensive income in either a continuous statement of comprehensive income or two separate but consecutive statements. This guidance does not change the items that must be reported in other comprehensive income. The adoption by the Company resulted in a new Statement of Comprehensive Income (Loss), presented immediately following the Statements of Operations.
86
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
In February 2013, the FASB issued ASU No. 2013-02, "Reporting of Amounts Reclassified Out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income" ("ASU 2013-02"). ASU 2013-02 does not change the current requirements for reporting net income or other comprehensive income in financial statements. This ASU requires an entity to report the effect of significant reclassifications out of accumulated other comprehensive income on the respective line items in net income if the amount being reclassified is required under U.S. GAAP to be reclassified in its entirety to net income. For other amounts that are not required under U.S. GAAP to be reclassified in their entirety to net income, an entity is required to cross-reference to other disclosures required under U.S. GAAP that provide additional detail about those amounts. This guidance is effective prospectively for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2012 and early adoption is permitted. The Company has adopted this guidance as of December 31, 2012. The adoption by the Company did not have any impact on our financial results, rather resulted in adding parenthetical cross-references in our Consolidated Statements of Operations to related footnote disclosures.
Recently Issued But Not Yet Adopted
In December 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-11, "Disclosures about Offsetting Assets and Liabilities" ("ASU 2011-11"). ASU 2011-11 requires disclosures to allow investors to better compare financial statements prepared under U.S. GAAP with financial statements prepared under IFRS. The FASB expects to issue an ASU to clarify that the scope of the new disclosures is intended to be limited to derivative instruments, repurchase and reverse repurchase agreements, and securities lending arrangements. This guidance is effective for annual periods beginning January 1, 2013, and interim periods within those annual periods. Retrospective application is required. The Company does not expect this ASU to have a material effect on the Company's consolidated financial statements, rather will result in additional disclosures.
(n) Reclassifications and other
Certain prior period amounts have been reclassified to conform to current period presentation.
87
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
2.
Real Estate Investments
Acquisitions
The following table provides a summary of shopping centers acquired during the
year
ended
December 31, 2012
(in thousands):
Date Purchased
Property Name
City/State
Purchase Price
Debt Assumed, Net of Premiums
Intangible Assets
Intangible Liabilities
Contingent Liabilities
(1)
5/31/2012
Shops at Erwin Mill
(2)
Durham, NC
$
358
—
—
—
—
6/21/2012
Grand Ridge Plaza
(3)
Issaquah, WA
11,761
12,810
2,346
144
—
8/31/2012
Balboa Mesa Shopping Center
San Diego, CA
59,500
—
9,711
6,977
145
12/21/2012
Sandy Springs
Sandy Springs, GA
35,250
17,657
2,761
1,386
60
12/27/2012
Uptown District
San Diego, CA
81,115
—
5,833
1,154
4,058
$
187,984
30,467
20,651
9,661
4,263
(1)
These balances represent environmental liability contingencies, which were measured at fair value at the acquisition date.
(2)
Shops at Erwin Mill
was acquired on
May 31, 2012
for a total purchase price of
$5.8 million
and included both an operating component and a development component. The Company completed a purchase price allocation at the date of acquisition and determined that approximately
$358,000
related to the existing operating center, with the remaining balance allocated to properties in development at the time of acquisition.
(3)
Grand Ridge Plaza
was acquired on
June 21, 2012
for a total purchase price of
$20.0 million
and included both an operating component and a development component. The Company completed a purchase price allocation at the date of acquisition and determined that
$11.8 million
related to the existing operating center, with the remaining balance allocated to properties in development at the time of acquisition.
The following table provides a summary of shopping centers acquired during the
year
ended
December 31, 2011
(in thousands):
Date Purchased
Property Name
City/State
Purchase Price
Debt Assumed, Net of Premiums
Intangible Assets
Intangible Liabilities
Contingent Liabilities
6/2/2011
Ocala Corners
Tallahassee, FL
$
11,129
5,937
1,724
2,558
—
8/18/2011
Oak Shade Town Center
Davis, CA
34,871
12,456
2,320
1,658
—
9/26/2011
Tech Ridge Center
Austin, TX
55,400
12,899
4,519
936
—
$
101,400
31,292
8,563
5,152
—
In addition to the above shopping center acquisitions, on May 4, 2011, the Company entered into an agreement with the DESCO Group ("DESCO") to redeem its entire
16.35%
interest in Macquarie CountryWide-Regency-DESCO, LLC ("MCWR-DESCO"). The agreement allowed for a distribution-in-kind ("DIK") of the assets in the co-investment partnership. The assets were distributed as
100%
ownership interests to DESCO and to Regency after a selection process, as provided for by the agreement. Regency selected four assets, all in the St. Louis market. The properties which the Company received through the DIK were recorded at the carrying value of the Company's equity investment of
$18.8 million
. Additionally, as part of the agreement, Regency received a
$5.0 million
disposition fee at closing on May 4, 2011 to buyout its asset, property, and leasing management contracts, and received
$1.0 million
for transition services provided through 2011.
The acquisitions were accounted for as purchase business combinations, and the results are included in the consolidated financial statements from the date of acquisition. During the
year
s ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
, the Company expensed approximately
$1.2 million
,
$707,000
, and
$448,000
, respectively, of acquisition-related costs in
88
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
connection with the Company's property acquisitions, which are included in other operating expenses in the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Operations. The actual, or pro-forma, impact of the Company's acquired properties is not considered significant to the Company's operating results for the
year
s ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
.
3. Discontinued Operations
Dispositions
The following table provides a summary of shopping centers disposed of during the
year
s ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
(in thousands):
2012
2011
2010
Net proceeds
$
73,576
66,009
34,918
Gain on sale of properties
21,855
5,942
7,577
Number of properties sold
5
7
3
Percent interest sold
100%
100%
100%
The following table provides a summary of revenues and expenses from properties included in discontinued operations for the
year
s ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
(in thousands):
2012
2011
2010
Revenues
$
3,423
15,030
19,374
Operating expenses
1,750
9,368
11,553
Other (income) expense
—
3,458
6,729
Income tax expense (benefit)
(1)
(18
)
106
(233
)
Operating income from discontinued operations
$
1,691
2,098
1,325
(1) The operating income and gain on sales of properties included in discontinued operations are reported net of income taxes, if the property is sold by Regency Realty Group, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of the Operating Partnership, which is a Taxable REIT subsidiary as defined by in Section 856(1) of the Internal Revenue Code.
4.
Investments in Real Estate Partnerships
The Company invests in real estate partnerships, which primarily include six co-investment partners and a closed-end real estate fund (“Regency Retail Partners” or the “Fund”). In addition to earning its pro-rata share of net income or loss in each of these real estate partnerships, the Company received recurring market-based fees for asset management, property management, and leasing as well as fees for investment and financing services, of
$25.4 million
,
$29.0 million
, and
$25.1 million
for the years ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
, respectively. The Company also received non-recurring transaction fees of
$5.0 million
and
$2.6 million
for the years ended
December 31, 2011
and
2010
, respectively, with
no
such fees received during 2012.
89
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
Investments in real estate partnerships as of
December 31, 2012
consist of the following (in thousands):
Ownership
Total Investment
Total Assets of the Partnership
Net Income (Loss) of the Partnership
The Company's Share of Net Income (Loss) of the Partnership
GRI - Regency, LLC (GRIR)
(1)
40.00
%
$
272,044
1,939,659
23,357
9,311
Macquarie CountryWide-Regency III, LLC (MCWR III)
(1)
24.95
%
29
60,496
(75
)
(22
)
Columbia Regency Retail Partners, LLC (Columbia I)
(2)
20.00
%
17,200
210,490
42,399
8,480
Columbia Regency Partners II, LLC (Columbia II)
(2)
20.00
%
8,660
326,649
1,467
290
Cameron Village, LLC (Cameron)
30.00
%
16,708
102,930
2,021
596
RegCal, LLC (RegCal)
(2)
25.00
%
15,602
164,106
2,160
540
Regency Retail Partners, LP (the Fund)
20.00
%
15,248
323,406
407
297
US Regency Retail I, LLC (USAA)
(2)
20.01
%
2,173
123,053
1,484
297
BRE Throne Holdings, LLC (BRET)
(3)
47.80
%
48,757
—
2,211
2,211
Other investments in real estate partnerships
50.00
%
46,506
184,165
3,833
1,807
Total
$
442,927
3,434,954
79,264
23,807
(1)
Effective
January 1, 2010
, this partnership agreement was amended to include a unilateral right to elect to dissolve the partnership and receive a DIK upon liquidation; therefore, the Company has applied the Restricted Gain Method for additional properties sold to this partnership on or after
January 1, 2010
. During
2012
, the Company did not sell any properties to this real estate partnership.
(2)
This partnership agreement has a unilateral right for election to dissolve the partnership and receive a DIK upon liquidation; therefore, the Company has applied the Restricted Gain Method to determine the amount of gain recognized on property sales to this partnership. During
2012
, the Company did not sell any properties to this real estate partnership.
(3)
On July 25, 2012, the Company sold a 15-property portfolio and retained a
$47.5 million
,
10.5%
preferred stock investment in the entity that owns the portfolio. Following the 12-month anniversary of the closing date, Regency may call for the redemption of its investment in whole or in part, at par. Following the 18-month anniversary of the closing date, either Regency or the other member may initiate the redemption of Regency’s investment, in whole or in part. As the property holdings of BRET do not impact the rate of return on Regency's preferred stock investment, BRET's portfolio information is not included.
90
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
Investments in real estate partnerships as of
December 31, 2011
consist of the following (in thousands):
Ownership
Total Investment
Total Assets of the Partnership
Net Income (Loss) of the Partnership
The Company's Share of Net Income (Loss) of the Partnership
GRI - Regency, LLC (GRIR)
(1)
40.00
%
$
262,018
2,001,526
18,244
7,266
Macquarie CountryWide-Regency III, LLC (MCWR III)
(1)
24.95
%
195
61,867
(493
)
(123
)
Macquarie CountryWide-Regency-DESCO, LLC (MCWR-DESCO)
(3)
—
%
—
—
(1,752
)
(293
)
Columbia Regency Retail Partners, LLC (Columbia I)
(2)
20.00
%
20,335
259,225
14,554
2,775
Columbia Regency Partners II, LLC (Columbia II)
(2)
20.00
%
9,686
317,720
910
179
Cameron Village, LLC (Cameron)
30.00
%
17,110
104,314
1,101
322
RegCal, LLC (RegCal)
(2)
25.00
%
18,128
180,490
7,615
1,904
Regency Retail Partners, LP (the Fund)
20.00
%
16,430
333,013
265
268
US Regency Retail I, LLC (USAA)
(2)
20.01
%
3,093
127,763
1,215
243
Other investments in real estate partnerships
50.00
%
39,887
115,857
3,601
(2,898
)
Total
$
386,882
3,501,775
45,260
9,643
(1)
As noted above, effective
January 1, 2010
, this partnership agreement was amended to include a unilateral right to elect to dissolve the partnership and receive a DIK upon liquidation; therefore, the Company will apply the Restricted Gain Method for additional properties sold to this partnership on or after
January 1, 2010
. During
2011
, the Company did not sell any properties to this real estate partnership.
(2)
As noted above, this partnership agreement has a unilateral right for election to dissolve the partnership and receive a DIK upon liquidation; therefore, the Company has applied the Restricted Gain Method to determine the amount of gain recognized on property sales to this partnership. During
2011
, the Company did not sell any properties to this real estate partnership.
(3)
At December 2010, our ownership interest in MCWR-DESCO was
16.35%
. The liquidation of MCWR-DESCO was complete effective
May 4, 2011
. Our ownership interest in MCWR-DESCO was
0.00%
at
December 31, 2011
.
91
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
Summarized financial information for the investments in real estate partnerships on a combined basis, is as follows (in thousands):
December 31,
2012
December 31,
2011
Investments in real estate, net
$
3,213,984
3,263,704
Acquired lease intangible assets, net
74,986
85,232
Other assets
145,984
152,839
Total assets
$
3,434,954
3,501,775
Notes payable
$
1,816,648
1,874,780
Acquired lease intangible liabilities, net
46,264
49,938
Other liabilities
70,576
67,495
Capital - Regency
518,505
512,421
Capital - Third parties
982,961
997,141
Total liabilities and capital
$
3,434,954
3,501,775
The following table reconciles the Company's capital in unconsolidated partnerships to the Company's investments in real estate partnerships (in thousands):
December 31,
2012
December 31,
2011
Capital - Regency
$
518,505
512,421
add: Preferred equity investment in BRET
47,500
—
less: Impairment
(5,880
)
(5,880
)
less: Ownership percentage or Restricted Gain Method deferral
(38,995
)
(41,456
)
less: Net book equity in excess of purchase price
(78,203
)
(78,203
)
Investments in real estate partnerships
$
442,927
386,882
Acquisitions
The following table provides a summary of shopping centers acquired through our unconsolidated co-investment partnerships during the
year
ended
December 31, 2012
(in thousands):
Date Purchased
Property Name
City/State
Co-investment Partner
Ownership %
Purchase Price
Debt Assumed, Net of Premiums
Intangible Assets
Intangible Liabilities
1/17/2012
Lake Grove Commons
Lake Grove, NY
GRIR
40%
$
72,500
31,813
5,397
4,342
11/28/2012
Applewood Village Shops
Wheat Ridge, CO
GRIR
40%
3,700
—
363
34
12/19/2012
Village Plaza
Chapel Hill, NC
Columbia II
20%
19,200
—
2,242
686
12/28/2012
Phillips Place
Charlotte, NC
Other
50%
55,400
44,500
—
—
$
150,800
76,313
8,002
5,062
92
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
The following table provides a summary of shopping centers acquired through our unconsolidated co-investment partnerships during the
year
ended
December 31, 2011
(in thousands):
Date Purchased
Property Name
City/State
Co-investment Partner
Ownership %
Purchase Price
Debt Assumed, Net of Premiums
Intangible Assets
Intangible Liabilities
7/1/2011
Calhoun Commons
Minneapolis, MN
RegCal
25%
$
21,020
6,052
2,130
303
8/8/2011
Rockridge Center
Plymouth, MN
Columbia II
20%
20,500
16,459
2,116
2,059
$
41,520
22,511
4,246
2,362
Dispositions
On July 25, 2012, the Company sold a 15-property portfolio for total consideration of
$321.0 million
. As a result of entering into this agreement, the Company recognized a net impairment loss of
$18.1 million
during the year ended December 31, 2012. The Company retained a
$47.5 million
,
10.5%
preferred stock investment in the entity that owns the portfolio. As of December 31, 2012, this asset group did not meet the definition of discontinued operations, in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 205-20. Following the 12-month anniversary of the closing date, Regency may call for the redemption of its investment in whole or in part, at par. Following the 18-month anniversary of the closing date, either Regency or the other member may initiate the redemption of Regency’s investment, in whole or in part. Regency does not provide leasing or management services for the Portfolio after closing.
Notes Payable
The Company’s proportionate share of notes payable of the investments in real estate partnerships was
$597.4 million
and
$610.4 million
at
December 31, 2012
and
2011
, respectively. The Company does not guarantee these loans.
As of
December 31, 2012
, scheduled principal repayments on notes payable of the investments in real estate partnerships were as follows (in thousands):
Scheduled Principal Payments by Year:
Scheduled
Principal
Payments
Mortgage Loan
Maturities
Unsecured
Maturities
Total
Regency’s
Pro-Rata
Share
2013
$
19,176
24,373
—
43,549
15,949
2014
21,289
53,015
21,660
95,964
27,254
2015
21,895
130,796
—
152,691
49,619
2016
19,139
374,257
—
393,396
127,888
2017
18,437
200,635
—
219,072
51,610
Beyond 5 Years
77,039
833,680
—
910,719
325,272
Unamortized debt premiums (discounts), net
—
1,257
—
1,257
(169
)
Total
$
176,975
1,618,013
21,660
1,816,648
597,423
93
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
The revenues and expenses for the investments in real estate partnerships on a combined basis are summarized as follows (in thousands):
For the years ended December 31,
2012
2011
2010
Total revenues
$
387,908
399,091
437,029
Operating expenses:
Depreciation and amortization
128,946
134,236
155,146
Operating and maintenance
55,394
62,442
67,541
General and administrative
7,549
7,905
7,383
Real estate taxes
46,395
49,103
55,926
Other expenses
3,521
3,477
3,666
Total operating expenses
241,805
257,163
289,662
Other expense (income):
Interest expense, net
104,694
112,099
129,581
Gain on sale of real estate
(40,437
)
(7,464
)
(8,976
)
Loss (gain) on extinguishment of debt
967
(8,743
)
—
Loss on hedge ineffectiveness
51
—
—
Provision for impairment
3,775
—
78,908
Preferred return on equity investment
(2,211
)
—
—
Other expense (income)
—
776
(383
)
Total other expense
66,839
96,668
199,130
Net income (loss)
$
79,264
45,260
(51,763
)
Regency's share of net income (loss)
$
23,807
9,643
(12,884
)
5.
Notes Receivable
The Company had notes receivable outstanding of
$23.8 million
and
$35.8 million
at
December 31, 2012
and
2011
, respectively. The loans have fixed interest rates ranging from
6.0%
to
9.0%
with maturity dates through
January 2019
and are secured by real estate held as collateral.
6.
Acquired Lease Intangibles
The Company had the following acquired lease intangibles, net of accumulated amortization and accretion, at
December 31, 2012
and
2011
, respectively (in thousands):
2012
2011
In-place leases, net
$
31,314
21,900
Above-market leases, net
9,440
3,427
Above-market ground leases, net
1,705
1,727
Acquired lease intangible assets, net
$
42,459
27,054
Acquired lease intangible liabilities, net
$
20,325
12,662
94
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
The following table provides a summary of amortization and net accretion amounts from acquired lease intangibles for the
year
s ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
:
2012
2011
2010
Remaining Weighted Average Amortization/Accretion Period
(in thousands)
(in thousands)
(in thousands)
(in years)
In-place lease amortization
$
4,307
$
3,436
$
2,317
6.70
Above-market lease amortization
(1)
739
319
108
9.70
Above-market ground lease amortization
(1)
23
17
1
84.50
Acquired lease intangible asset amortization
$
5,069
$
3,772
$
2,426
Acquired lease intangible liability accretion
(2)
$
1,950
$
1,375
$
1,303
9.91
(1)
Amounts are recorded as a reduction to minimum rent.
(2)
Amounts are recorded as an increase to minimum rent.
The estimated aggregate amortization and net accretion amounts from acquired lease intangibles for the next five years are as follows (in thousands):
Year Ending December 31,
Amortization Expense
Net Accretion
2013
$
6,607
2,035
2014
5,076
1,588
2015
3,999
947
2016
3,238
675
2017
2,441
672
7. Income Taxes
The following summarizes the tax status of dividends paid on our common shares during the respective years:
2012
2011
2010
Dividend per share
$
1.85
1.85
1.85
Ordinary income
71
%
33
%
40
%
Capital gain
1
%
1
%
2
%
Return of capital
28
%
66
%
58
%
RRG is subject to federal and state income taxes and files separate tax returns. Income tax expense consists of the following for the years ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
(in thousands):
2012
2011
2010
Income tax expense (benefit):
Current
$
97
283
(639
)
Deferred
13,727
2,422
(860
)
Total income tax expense (benefit)
$
13,824
2,705
(1,499
)
95
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
Income tax expense (benefit) is included in either income tax expense (benefit) of taxable REIT subsidiaries, if the related income is from continuing operations, or is included in operating income from discontinued operations, if from discontinued operations, on the Consolidated Statements of Operations as follows for the years ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
(in thousands):
2012
2011
2010
Income tax expense (benefit) from:
Continuing operations
$
13,224
2,994
(1,333
)
Discontinued operations
600
(289
)
(166
)
Total income tax expense (benefit)
$
13,824
2,705
(1,499
)
Income tax expense (benefit) differed from the amounts computed by applying the U.S. Federal income tax rate of
34%
to pretax income from continuing operations of RRG for the years ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
, respectively as follows (in thousands):
2012
2011
2010
Computed expected tax (benefit) expense
$
(2,099
)
1,089
(3,368
)
(Decrease) increase in income tax resulting from state taxes
(122
)
126
(392
)
Valuation allowance
15,635
1,438
286
All other items
410
52
1,975
Total income tax expense (benefit)
13,824
2,705
(1,499
)
Amounts attributable to discontinued operations
600
(289
)
(166
)
Amounts attributable to continuing operations
$
13,224
2,994
(1,333
)
For 2012, all other items principally represent permanent differences related to deferred compensation and meals and entertainment. For 2011, all other items principally represent permanent differences related to impairments and the effect of the change in state tax rate. For 2010, all other items principally represent straight line rents. Included in the income tax expense (benefit) disclosed above, the Company has approximately
$600,000
of state income tax expense at the Operating Partnership for the Texas Gross Margin Tax recorded in income tax expense (benefit) of taxable REIT subsidiaries in the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Operations for each of the years ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
.
96
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
The following table represents the Company's net deferred tax assets as of
December 31, 2012
and
2011
recorded in other assets in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets (in thousands):
2012
2011
Deferred tax assets
Investments in real estate partnerships
$
8,116
8,124
Provision for impairment
5,667
4,047
Deferred interest expense
4,507
4,507
Capitalized costs under Section 263A
2,637
3,828
Net operating loss carryforward
1,033
280
Employee benefits
838
683
Other
435
791
Deferred tax assets
23,233
22,260
Valuation allowance
(22,114
)
(6,479
)
Deferred tax assets, net
1,119
15,781
Deferred tax liabilities
Straight line rent
519
1,916
Depreciation
600
138
Deferred tax liabilities
1,119
2,054
Net deferred tax assets
$
—
13,727
During
2012
and
2011
, the net change in the total valuation allowance was
$15.6 million
and
$1.4 million
, respectfully. The Company has federal and state net operating loss carryforwards totaling
$2.9 million
, which expire between
2027
and
2032
.
The evaluation of the recoverability of the deferred tax assets and the need for a valuation allowance requires the Company to weigh all positive and negative evidence to reach a conclusion that it is more likely than not that all or some portion of the deferred tax assets will not be realized. The Company's framework for assessing the recoverability of deferred tax assets includes weighing recent taxable income (loss), projected future taxable income (loss) of the character necessary to realize the deferred tax assets, the carryforward periods for the net operating loss, including the effect of reversing taxable temporary differences, and prudent feasible tax planning strategies that would be implemented, if necessary, to protect against the loss of deferred tax assets. At
December 31, 2012
, the cumulative history of taxable losses and projected future taxable income within the TRS caused the Company to determine that it is more likely than not that the net deferred tax assets will not be realized. As a result, a valuation allowance has been established for the entire amount of the deferred tax asset.
The Company accounts for uncertainties in income tax law in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 740, under which tax positions shall initially be recognized in the financial statements when it is more likely than not the position will be sustained upon examination by the tax authorities. Such tax positions shall initially and subsequently be measured as the largest amount of tax benefit that has a greater than 50% likelihood of being realized upon ultimate settlement with the tax authority assuming full knowledge of the position and relevant facts. The Company believes that it has appropriate support for the income tax positions taken and to be taken on its tax returns and that its accruals for tax liabilities are adequate for all open tax years based on an assessment of many factors including past experience and interpretations of tax laws applied to the facts of each matter. Federal and state tax returns are open from
2009
and forward for the Company.
97
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
8. Notes Payable and Unsecured Credit Facilities
The Parent Company does not have any indebtedness, but guarantees all of the unsecured debt and
17.6%
of the secured debt of the Operating Partnership.
Notes Payable
Notes payable consist of mortgage loans secured by properties and unsecured public debt. Mortgage loans may be prepaid, but could be subject to yield maintenance premiums. Mortgage loans are generally due in monthly installments of principal and interest or interest only and mature over various terms through
2028
, whereas, interest on unsecured public debt is payable semi-annually and matures over various terms through
2021
. Fixed interest rates on mortgage loans range from
5.22%
to
8.40%
with a weighted average rate of
6.30%
. Fixed interest rates on unsecured public debt range from
4.80%
to
6.00%
with a weighted average rate of
5.46%
. As of
December 31, 2012
, the Company had two variable rate mortgage loans, one in the amount of
$9.0 million
with a
variable interest rate of LIBOR plus 160 basis points
maturing on
September 1, 2014
and one in the amount of
$3.0 million
with a
variable interest rate equal to LIBOR plus 380 basis points
maturing on
October 1, 2014
.
On
January 15, 2012
, the Company repaid the maturing balance of
$192.4 million
of
6.75%
ten-year unsecured notes. The Company assumed debt, net of premiums, of
$12.8 million
and
$17.7 million
in connection with the acquisition of Grand Ridge Plaza on June 21, 2012 and Sandy Springs on December 21, 2012, respectively.
The Company is required to comply with certain financial covenants for its unsecured public debt as defined in the indenture agreements such as the following ratios: Consolidated Debt to Consolidated Assets, Consolidated Secured Debt to Consolidated Assets, Consolidated Income for Debt Service to Consolidated Debt Service, and Unencumbered Consolidated Assets to Unsecured Consolidated Debt. As of
December 31, 2012
, management of the Company believes it is in compliance with all financial covenants for its unsecured public debt.
Unsecured Credit Facilities
The Company has an
$800.0 million
unsecured line of credit (the "Line") commitment under an agreement (the "Credit Agreement") with Wells Fargo Bank and a syndicate of other banks, which was amended on September 13, 2012 to increase the borrowing capacity by
$200.0 million
to a total of
$800.0 million
. The maturity date was extended by one year, and the Line will expire in
September 2016, subject to a one-year extension
at the Company's option. The amended Line bears interest at an
annual rate of LIBOR plus 117.5 basis points
and a facility fee of
22.5 basis points
, subject to adjustment based on the higher of the Company's corporate credit ratings from Moody's and S&P. In addition, the Company has the ability to increase the Line through an accordion feature to
$1.0 billion
. Borrowing capacity is reduced by the balance of outstanding borrowings and commitments under outstanding letters of credit. The balance on the Line was
$70.0 million
and
$40.0 million
at
December 31, 2012
and
2011
, respectively. The proceeds from the Line are used to finance the acquisition and development of real estate and for general working-capital purposes.
The Company is required to comply with certain financial covenants as defined in the Credit Agreement such as Minimum Tangible Net Worth, Ratio of Indebtedness to Total Asset Value ("TAV"), Ratio of Unsecured Indebtedness to Unencumbered Asset Value, Ratio of Adjusted Earnings Before Interest Taxes Depreciation and Amortization (“EBITDA”) to Fixed Charges, Ratio of Secured Indebtedness to TAV, Ratio of Unencumbered Net Operating Income to Unsecured Interest Expense, and other covenants customary with this type of unsecured financing. As of
December 31, 2012
, management of the Company believes it is in compliance with all financial covenants for the Line.
On
November 17, 2011
, the Company entered into an unsecured term loan (the "Term Loan") commitment under an agreement (the "Term Loan Agreement") with Wells Fargo Bank and a syndicate of other banks, which matures on
December 15, 2016
. During
2012
, the Company borrowed the
$250.0 million
available under the Term Loan and repaid
$150.0 million
, which resulted in the Company writing-off approximately
$852,000
in loan costs and reducing the remaining commitment to
$100.0 million
. There was
$100.0 million
and
no
balance outstanding on the Term Loan as of
December 31, 2012
and
December 31, 2011
, respectively. The Term Loan has a
variable interest rate of LIBOR plus 145 basis points
subject to Regency maintaining its corporate credit and senior unsecured ratings at BBB. In addition, the Company has the ability to increase the Term Loan up to an amount not to exceed an additional
$150.0 million
subject to the provisions of the Term Loan Agreement.
98
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
The Term Loan includes financial covenants relating to minimum tangible net worth, ratio of indebtedness to total asset value, ratio of unsecured indebtedness to unencumbered asset value, ratio of adjusted EBITDA to fixed charges, ratio of secured indebtedness to total asset value, and ratio of unencumbered NOI to unsecured interest expense. The Term Loan also includes customary events of default for agreements of this type (with customary grace periods, as applicable). As of
December 31, 2012
, management of the Company believes it is in compliance with all financial covenants for its Term Loan.
The Company’s outstanding debt at
December 31, 2012
and
2011
consists of the following (in thousands):
2012
2011
Notes payable:
Fixed rate mortgage loans
$
461,914
439,880
Variable rate mortgage loans
12,041
12,665
Fixed rate unsecured loans
1,297,936
1,489,895
Total notes payable
1,771,891
1,942,440
Unsecured credit facilities
170,000
40,000
Total
$
1,941,891
1,982,440
As of
December 31, 2012
, scheduled principal payments and maturities on notes payable were as follows (in thousands):
Scheduled Principal Payments and Maturities by Year:
Scheduled
Principal
Payments
Mortgage Loan
Maturities
Unsecured
Maturities
(1)
Total
2013
$
7,872
16,319
—
24,191
2014
7,383
26,999
150,000
184,382
2015
5,746
62,435
350,000
418,181
2016
5,487
14,161
170,000
189,648
2017
4,584
84,375
400,000
488,959
Beyond 5 Years
20,021
212,743
400,000
632,764
Unamortized debt premiums (discounts), net
—
5,830
(2,064
)
3,766
Total
$
51,093
422,862
1,467,936
1,941,891
(1)
Includes unsecured public debt and unsecured credit facilities balances outstanding at December 31, 2012.
The Company continuously monitors the capital markets and evaluates its ability to issue new debt to repay maturing debt or fund its commitments. Based upon the current capital markets, the Company's current credit ratings, and the number of high quality, unencumbered properties that it owns which could collateralize borrowings, the Company expects that it will successfully issue new secured or unsecured debt to fund its obligations.
99
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
9. Derivative Financial Instruments
The following table summarizes the terms and fair values of the Company's derivative financial instruments, as well as their classification on the Consolidated Balance Sheets, at
December 31, 2012
and
2011
(in thousands):
Fair Value
Effective Date
Maturity Date
Notional Amount
Bank Pays Variable Rate of
Regency Pays Fixed Rate of
2012
2011
Assets:
April 15, 2014
April 15, 2024
$
75,000
3 Month LIBOR
2.087
%
1,022
—
April 15, 2014
April 15, 2024
$
50,000
3 Month LIBOR
2.088
%
672
—
August 1, 2015
August 1, 2025
$
75,000
3 Month LIBOR
2.479
%
1,131
—
August 1, 2015
August 1, 2025
$
50,000
3 Month LIBOR
2.479
%
729
—
August 1, 2015
August 1, 2025
$
50,000
3 Month LIBOR
2.479
%
753
—
Other Assets
4,307
—
Liabilities:
October 1, 2011
September 1, 2014
$
9,000
1 Month LIBOR
0.76
%
76
37
Accounts payable and other liabilities
76
37
These derivative financial instruments are comprised of interest rate swaps, which are designated and qualify as cash flow hedges. The Company does not use derivatives for trading or speculative purposes and currently does not have any derivatives that are not designated as hedges.
The effective portion of changes in the fair value of derivatives designated and qualifying as cash flow hedges is recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) and subsequently reclassified into earnings in the period that the hedged forecasted transaction affects earnings. The ineffective portion of the change in fair value of the derivatives is recognized directly in earnings as a gain or loss on derivative instruments.
The following table represents the effect of the derivative financial instruments on the accompanying consolidated financial statements for the years ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
(in thousands):
Derivatives in FASB
ASC Topic 815 Cash
Flow Hedging
Relationships:
Amount of Gain (Loss)
Recognized in OCI on
Derivative (Effective
Portion)
Location of Gain
(Loss) Reclassified
from Accumulated
OCI into Income
(Effective Portion)
Amount of Gain (Loss)
Reclassified from
Accumulated OCI into
Income (Effective
Portion)
Location of Gain or
(Loss) Recognized in
Income on Derivative
(Ineffective Portion and
Amount Excluded from
Effectiveness Testing)
Amount of Gain or
(Loss) Recognized in
Income on Derivative
(Ineffective Portion and
Amount Excluded from
Effectiveness Testing)
December 31,
December 31,
December 31,
2012
2011
2010
2012
2011
2010
2012
2011
2010
Interest rate swaps
$
4,245
18
(36,556
)
Interest
expense
$
(9,491
)
(9,467
)
(5,575
)
Other expenses
$
—
(54
)
1,419
The unamortized balance of the settled interest rate swaps at
December 31, 2012
and
2011
was
$62.6 million
and
$72.0 million
, respectively. As of
December 31, 2012
, the Company expects
$9.5 million
of deferred losses (gains) on derivative instruments accumulated in other comprehensive income to be reclassified into earnings during the next 12 months.
On October 7, 2010, the Company paid
$36.7 million
to settle the remaining
$140.7 million
of interest rate swaps then outstanding. On October 7, 2010, the Company closed on
$250.0 million
of
4.80%
ten-year senior unsecured notes. The Company began amortizing the
$36.7 million
loss realized from the swap settlement in October 2010 over a ten year period; therefore, the effective interest rate on these notes was
6.26%
.
100
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
On June 1, 2010, the Company paid
$26.8 million
to settle and partially settle
$150.0 million
of its interest rate swaps then outstanding of
$290.7 million
. On June 2, 2010 the Company also closed on
$150.0 million
of ten-year senior unsecured notes with an interest rate of
6.00%
. The Company began amortizing the
$26.8 million
loss realized from the swap settlement in June 2010 over a ten year period; therefore, the effective interest rate on these notes was
7.67%
.
Realized gains and losses associated with the settled interest rate swaps have been included in accumulated other comprehensive loss in the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Equity of the Parent Company and the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Capital of the Operating Partnership and are amortized as the corresponding hedged interest payments are made in future periods.
10. Fair Value Measurements
(a) Disclosure of Fair Value of Financial Instruments
All financial instruments of the Company are reflected in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets at amounts which, in management's estimation, reasonably approximates their fair values, except those listed below. The following provides information about the methods and assumptions used to estimate the fair value of the Company's financial instruments, including their estimated fair values.
Notes Receivable
The fair value of the Company's notes receivable is estimated by calculating the present value of future contractual cash flows discounted at an interest rate available for notes of the same terms and maturities adjusted for customer specific credit risk. The interest rates range from
7.0%
to
8.1%
and
7.1%
to
8.1%
at
December 31, 2012
and
2011
, respectively, based on the Company's estimates. The fair value of notes receivable was determined primarily using Level 3 inputs of the fair value hierarchy. Based on the estimates made by the Company, the fair value of notes receivable was
$23.7 million
and
$35.3 million
at
December 31, 2012
and
2011
, respectively.
Notes Payable
The fair value of the Company's notes payable is estimated by discounting future cash flows of each instrument at rates that reflect the current market rates available to the Company for debt of the same terms and maturities. These rates range from
2.4%
to
3.3%
and
2.4%
to
4.3%
at
December 31, 2012
and
2011
, respectively, based on the Company's estimates. Fixed rate loans assumed in connection with real estate acquisitions are recorded in the accompanying consolidated financial statements at fair value at the time the property is acquired including those loans assumed in distribution-in-kind liquidations. The fair value of the notes payable was determined using Level 2 inputs of the fair value hierarchy. Based on the estimates used by the Company, the fair value of notes payable was
$2.0 billion
and
$2.1 billion
at
December 31, 2012
and
2011
, respectively.
Unsecured Credit Facilities
The fair value of the Company's unsecured credit facilities is estimated based on the interest rates currently offered to the Company by the Company's third partylenders, which is estimated to be
1.6%
and
1.5%
at
December 31, 2012
and
2011
, respectively. The fair value of the unsecured credit facilities was determined using Level 2 inputs of the fair value hierarchy. Based on the estimates used by the Company, the fair value of the unsecured credit facilities was
$170.2 million
and
$40.0 million
at
December 31, 2012
and
2011
, respectively.
(b) Fair Value Measurements
Internally developed fair value measurements, including the unobservable inputs, are evaluated for reasonableness based on current transactions and experience in the real estate and capital markets. Service providers involved in fair value measurements are evaluated for competency and qualifications on an ongoing basis. The Company's valuation policies and procedures are determined by its Finance Group, which reports to the Chief Financial Officer, and the results of significant fair value measurements are discussed with the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors on a quarterly basis. The following describe valuation methods for each of our financial instruments required to be measured at fair value on a recurring basis.
101
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
Trading Securities Held in Trust
The Company has investments in marketable securities that are classified as trading securities held in trust on the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets. The fair value of the trading securities held in trust was determined using quoted prices in active markets, considered Level 1 inputs of the fair value hierarchy. Changes in the value of trading securities are recorded within net investment (income) loss from deferred compensation plan in the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Operations.
Derivative Financial Instruments
The valuation of these instruments is determined using widely accepted valuation techniques including discounted cash flow analysis on the expected cash flows of each derivative. This analysis reflects the contractual terms of the derivatives, including the period to maturity, and uses observable market-based inputs, including interest rate curves and implied volatilities. The Company incorporates credit valuation adjustments to appropriately reflect both its own nonperformance risk and the respective counterparty's nonperformance risk in the fair value measurements.
Although the Company has determined that the majority of the inputs used to value its derivatives fall within Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy, the credit valuation adjustments associated with its derivatives utilize Level 3 inputs, such as estimates of current credit spreads, to evaluate the likelihood of default by the Company and its counterparties. Changes in these credit valuation adjustments are not expected to result in a significant change in the valuation of the Company's derivatives.
The following are fair value measurements recorded on a recurring basis at
December 31, 2012
and
2011
, respectively (in thousands):
Fair Value Measurements at December 31, 2012
Quoted Prices in Active Markets for Identical Assets
Significant Other Observable Inputs
Significant Unobservable Inputs
Assets
Balance
(Level 1)
(Level 2)
(Level 3)
Trading securities held in trust
$
23,429
23,429
—
—
Interest rate derivatives
4,307
—
4,412
(105
)
Total
$
27,736
23,429
4,412
(105
)
Liabilities:
Interest rate derivatives
$
(76
)
—
(77
)
1
Fair Value Measurements at December 31, 2011
Quoted Prices in Active Markets for Identical Assets
Significant Other Observable Inputs
Significant Unobservable Inputs
Assets
Balance
(Level 1)
(Level 2)
(Level 3)
Trading securities held in trust
$
21,713
21,713
—
—
Liabilities:
Interest rate derivatives
$
(37
)
—
(38
)
1
102
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
The following are fair value measurements recorded on a nonrecurring basis at
December 31, 2012
and
2011
, respectively (in thousands):
Fair Value Measurements at December 31, 2012
Quoted Prices in Active Markets for Identical Assets
Significant Other Observable Inputs
Significant Unobservable Inputs
Total Losses
(1)
Assets
Balance
(Level 1)
(Level 2)
(Level 3)
Long-lived assets held and used
Operating and development properties
$
49,673
—
—
49,673
(54,500
)
(1)
Excludes impairments for properties sold during the year ended December 31, 2012.
Fair Value Measurements at December 31, 2011
Quoted Prices in Active Markets for Identical Assets
Significant Other Observable Inputs
Significant Unobservable Inputs
Total Losses
(1)
Assets
Balance
(Level 1)
(Level 2)
(Level 3)
Long-lived assets held and used
Operating and development properties
$
5,520
—
—
5,520
(11,843
)
Investment in real estate partnerships
1,893
—
—
1,893
(4,580
)
Total
$
7,413
—
—
7,413
(16,423
)
(1)
Excludes impairments for properties sold during the year ended December 31, 2011.
Long-lived assets held and used are comprised primarily of real estate. The Company recognized a
$54.5 million
impairment loss related to two operating properties during the year ended
December 31, 2012
. The Company has determined that it is more likely than not that one of the properties will be sold before the end of its previously estimated useful life, and the other property was exhibiting weak operating fundamentals including low economic occupancy for an extended period of time, which led to the impairments. As a result, the Company estimated the fair value of the properties and recorded the impairment losses. As discussed in Note 1, the Company considers a property to be held-for-sale when the property is under contract, significant non-refundable deposits have been made by the potential buyer, the assets are immediately available for transfer, and there are no contingencies related to the sale that may prevent the transaction from closing. Given the nature of all real estate sales contracts, these conditions or criteria are typically not satisfied until the actual closing of the transaction. However, each potential transaction is evaluated based on its separate facts and circumstances. The Company evaluated these properties and determined that they did not meet the criteria for held-for-sale as of
December 31, 2012
.
In addition, the Company recognized a
$16.4 million
impairment loss related to one operating property and the Company's investment in a real estate partnership during the year ended
December 31, 2011
. This operating property exhibited weak operating fundamentals, including low economic occupancy for an extended period of time, which lead to the impairment. As a result, the Company estimated the fair value of the properties and recorded an impairment loss.
103
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
Fair value for those assets measured using Level 3 inputs was determined through the use of an income approach. The income approach estimates an income stream for a property (typically 10 years) and discounts this income plus a reversion (presumed sale) into a present value at a risk adjusted rate. Overall cap rates and growth assumptions utilized in this approach are derived from market transactions as well as other financial and industry data. The terminal cap rate and discount rate are significant inputs to this valuation. The following are ranges of key inputs used in determining the fair value of real estate measured using Level 3 inputs as of
December 31, 2012
and
2011
:
2012
2011
Low
High
Low
High
Overall cap rates
8.3%
8.5%
7.5%
9.0%
Rental growth rates
(8.3)%
2.5%
2.0%
3.0%
Discount rates
10.5%
10.5%
8.5%
10.0%
Terminal cap rates
8.8%
8.8%
8.0%
9.5%
Changes in these inputs could result in a significant change in the valuation of the real estate and a change in the impairment loss recognized during the period.
104
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
11. Equity and Capital
Preferred Stock of the Parent Company
Issuances:
On
February 16, 2012
, the Parent Company issued
10 million
shares of
6.625%
Series 6 Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock with a liquidation preference of
$25
per share resulting in proceeds of
$241.4 million
, net of issuance costs, which were subsequently contributed to the Operating Partnership to redeem similar preferred unit interests as further discussed below.
On
August 23, 2012
, the Parent Company issued
3 million
shares of
6.00%
Series 7 Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock with a liquidation preference of
$25
per share resulting in proceeds of
$72.5 million
, net of issuance costs, which were subsequently used to redeem the Company's Series 5 Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock as further discussed below.
The Series 6 and 7 preferred shares are perpetual, absent a change in control of the Parent Company, are not convertible into common stock of the Parent Company, and are redeemable at par upon the Company’s election beginning
five
years after the issuance date. None of the terms of the preferred stock contain any unconditional obligations that would require the Company to redeem the securities at any time or for any purpose.
Redemptions:
On
March 31, 2012
, the Parent Company redeemed all issued and outstanding shares of its Series 3 and Series 4 Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock and on
September 13, 2012
, the Parent Company redeemed all issued and outstanding shares of its Series 5 Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock. These redemptions resulted in a reduction to net income available to common stockholders through non-cash charges of
$7.0 million
and
$2.3 million
, respectively, related to original issuance costs, which are included within the following financial statement line items:
Parent Company
Financial Statement Line Item
Consolidated Statements of Operations
Preferred stock dividends
Consolidated Statements of Equity
Redemption of preferred stock
Operating Partnership
Consolidated Statements of Operations
Preferred unit distributions
Consolidated Statements of Capital
Preferred units issued as a result of preferred stock issued by Parent Company, net of redemptions and issuance costs
Terms and conditions of the preferred stock outstanding at
December 31, 2012
and
2011
are summarized as follows:
Preferred Stock Outstanding at December 31, 2012
Series
Shares
Outstanding
Liquidation
Preference
Distribution
Rate
Callable
By Company
Series 6
10,000,000
$
250,000,000
6.625
%
2/16/2017
Series 7
3,000,000
75,000,000
6.000
%
8/23/2017
13,000,000
$
325,000,000
105
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
Preferred Stock Outstanding at December 31, 2011
Series
Shares
Outstanding
Liquidation
Preference
Distribution
Rate
Callable
By Company
Series 3
3,000,000
$
75,000,000
7.450
%
4/3/2008
Series 4
5,000,000
125,000,000
7.250
%
8/31/2009
Series 5
3,000,000
75,000,000
6.700
%
8/2/2010
11,000,000
$
275,000,000
Common Stock of the Parent Company
Issuances:
On August 10, 2012, the Parent Company entered into an at-the-market ("ATM") equity distribution agreement under which the Company may from time to time offer and sell up to
$150.0 million
of our common stock. The net proceeds are expected to fund potential acquisition opportunities, fund our development or redevelopment activities, repay amounts outstanding under our revolving credit facility and/or for general corporate purposes. During the year ended
December 31, 2012
,
442,786
shares were issued and sold at a weighted average price per share of
$49.70
for proceeds of
$21.5 million
, net of commissions of approximately
$331,000
and issuance costs of approximately
$135,000
. As of
December 31, 2012
, we had the capacity to issue
$128.0 million
in common stock under our ATM equity program.
On
March 9, 2011
, the Parent Company settled its forward sale agreements dated
December 4, 2009
(the "Forward Equity Offering") with J.P. Morgan and Wells Fargo Securities by delivering an aggregate
8 million
shares of common stock. Upon physical settlement of the Forward Equity Offering, the Company received net proceeds of
$215.4 million
. The Company used a portion of the proceeds to repay the Line, which had been drawn upon to repay unsecured notes of
$161.7 million
that matured in
January 2011
.
Preferred Units of the Operating Partnership
Issuances:
Series 6 and Series 7 preferred unit interests were issued to the Parent Company in relation to the Parent Company's issuance of
6.625%
Series 6 Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock and
6.00%
Series 7 Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock as discussed above.
Redemptions:
On
February 9, 2012
, the Operating Partnership purchased all of its issued and outstanding Series D Preferred Units at
3.75%
discount to par, resulting in an increase to net income available to common stockholders of
$1.0 million
, related to the discount offset by the write-off of the original issuance costs. This amount is included in preferred unit loss attributable to noncontrolling interests in the parent company's consolidated statements of operations and in preferred unit distributions in the operating partnership's consolidated statement of operations.
Terms and conditions for the Series D preferred units outstanding as of
December 31, 2011
are summarized as follows:
Units Outstanding
Amount
Outstanding
Distribution
Rate
Callable by
Company
Exchangeable
by Unit holder
500,000
$
50,000,000
7.45
%
9/29/2009
1/1/2014
The Series 3, 4 and 5 preferred unit interests owned by the Parent Company, as general partner, were redeemed in conjunction with the Parent Company's redemption of its Series 3, Series 4, and Series 5 Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock as discussed above.
106
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
Common Units of the Operating Partnership
Issuances:
Common units were issued to the Parent Company in relation to the Parent Company's issuance of common stock, as discussed above.
General Partner
As of
December 31, 2012
and
2011
, the Parent Company, as general partner, owned approximately
99.8%
or
90,394,486
of the total
90,571,650
Partnership Units outstanding and approximately
99.8%
or
89,921,858
of the total
90,099,022
Partnership Units outstanding, respectively.
Limited Partners
The Operating Partnership had
177,164
limited Partnership Units outstanding as of
December 31, 2012
and
2011
.
Noncontrolling Interests of Limited Partners' Interests in Consolidated Partnerships
Limited partners’ interests in consolidated partnerships not owned by the Company are classified as noncontrolling interests on the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets of the Parent Company. Subject to certain conditions and pursuant to the conditions of the agreement, the Company has the right, but not the obligation, to purchase the other member’s interest or sell its own interest in these consolidated partnerships. At
December 31, 2012
and
2011
, the Company’s noncontrolling interest in these consolidated partnerships was
$16.3 million
and
$13.1 million
, respectively.
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss
The following table presents changes in the balances of each component of accumulated other comprehensive loss for the year ended
December 31, 2012
(in thousands):
Loss on Settlement of Derivative Instruments
Fair Value of Derivative Instruments
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)
Beginning balance
$
(71,438
)
9
(71,429
)
Net gain on cash flow derivative instruments
—
4,255
4,255
Amounts reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income
9,447
12
9,459
Net current-period other comprehensive income
9,447
4,267
13,714
Ending balance
$
(61,991
)
4,276
(57,715
)
12. Stock-Based Compensation
The Company recorded stock-based compensation in general and administrative expenses in the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Operations, the components of which are further described below for the
year
s ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
(in thousands):
2012
2011
2010
Restricted stock
$
11,526
10,659
7,236
Directors' fees paid in common stock
259
269
231
Less: Amount capitalized
(1,979
)
(1,104
)
(852
)
Total
$
9,806
9,824
6,615
107
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
The recorded amounts of stock-based compensation expense represent amortization of the grant date fair value of restricted stock awards over the respective vesting periods. Compensation expense specifically identifiable to development and leasing activities is capitalized and included above.
The Company established the Plan under which the Board of Directors may grant stock options and other stock-based awards to officers, directors, and other key employees. The Plan allows the Company to issue up to approximately
4.1 million
shares in the form of the Parent Company's common stock or stock options. At
December 31, 2012
, there were approximately
3.1 million
shares available for grant under the Plan either through options or restricted stock.
Stock options are granted under the Plan with an exercise price equal to the Parent Company's stock's price at the date of grant. All stock options granted have
ten
-year lives, contain vesting terms of
one
to
five
years from the date of grant and some have dividend equivalent rights.
The fair value of each option award is estimated on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes-Merton closed-form (“Black-Scholes”) option valuation model. The Company believes that the use of the Black-Scholes model meets the fair value measurement objectives of FASB ASC Topic 718 and reflects all substantive characteristics of the instruments being valued.
The following table reports stock option activity during the
year
ended
December 31, 2012
:
Number of
Options
Weighted
Average
Exercise
Price
Weighted
Average
Remaining
Contractual
Term
(in years)
Aggregate
Intrinsic
Value
(in thousands)
Outstanding December 31, 2011
386,149
$
52.12
3.0
$
(5,598
)
Less: Exercised
7,619
34.34
Less: Forfeited
57,952
51.36
Less: Expired
4,654
72.29
Outstanding December 31, 2012
315,924
$
52.39
2.1
$
(1,664
)
Vested and expected to vest - December 31, 2012
315,924
$
52.39
2.1
$
(1,664
)
Exercisable December 31, 2012
315,924
$
52.39
2.1
$
(1,664
)
There were
no
stock options granted during
2012
,
2011
, or
2010
. The total intrinsic value of options exercised during the years ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
was approximately
$92,000
,
$130,000
, and
$1,000
, respectively. The Company issues new shares to fulfill option exercises from its authorized shares available.
The Company grants restricted stock under the Plan to its employees as a form of long-term compensation and retention. The terms of each grant vary depending upon the participant's responsibilities and position within the Company. The Company's stock grants can be categorized as either time-based awards, performance-based awards, or market-based awards. All awards were valued at the fair market value, earn dividends throughout the vesting period, and have no voting rights. Fair value is measured using the grant date market price for all time-based or performance-based awards. Market based awards are valued using a Monte Carlo simulation to estimate the fair value based on the probability of satisfying the market conditions and the projected stock price at the time of payout, discounted to the valuation date over the three year performance period. Assumptions include historic volatility over the previous three year period, risk-free interest rates, and Regency's historic daily return as compared to the market index. Because the award payout includes dividend equivalents and the total shareholder return includes the value of dividends, no dividend yield assumption is required for the valuation. Compensation expense is measured at the grant date and recognized over the vesting period.
•
Time-based awards vest 25% per year beginning on the first anniversary following the grant date. These grants are subject only to continued employment and not dependent on future performance measures; and accordingly, if such vesting criteria are not met, compensation cost previously recognized would be reversed. During
2012
, the Company granted
112,496
shares of time-based awards.
108
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
•
Performance-based awards are earned subject to future performance measurements, including individual goals, annual growth in earnings, and compounded
three
-year growth in earnings. Once the performance criteria are achieved and the actual number of shares earned is determined, shares will vest over a required service period. If such performance criteria are not met, compensation cost previously recognized would be reversed. The Company considers the likelihood of meeting the performance criteria based upon management's estimates from which it determines the amounts recognized as expense on a periodic basis. During
2012
, the Company granted
25,435
shares of performance-based awards.
•
Market-based awards are earned dependent upon the Company's total shareholder return in relation to the shareholder return of peer indices over a
three
-year period (“TSR Grant”). Once the market criteria are met and the actual number of shares earned is determined, 100% of the earned shares vest. The probability of meeting the market criteria is considered when calculating the estimated fair market value on the date of grant using a Monte Carlo simulation. These awards were accounted for as awards with market criteria, with compensation cost recognized over the service period, regardless of whether the market criteria are achieved and the awards are ultimately earned and vest. During
2012
, the Company granted
128,302
shares of market-based awards. The significant assumptions underlying determination of fair values for market-based awards granted during the years ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
were
2012
2011
2010
Volatility
48.80
%
66.50
%
66.40
%
Risk free interest rate
0.32
%
0.98
%
1.41
%
The following table reports non-vested restricted stock activity during the
year
ended
December 31, 2012
:
Number of
Shares
Intrinsic
Value
(in thousands)
Weighted
Average
Grant
Price
Non-vested at December 31, 2011
562,259
Add: Time-based awards granted
112,496
$
40.05
Add: Performance-based awards granted
25,435
$
39.00
Add: Market-based awards granted
128,302
$
39.00
Less: Vested and Distributed
152,019
$
43.13
Less: Forfeited
1,982
$
40.34
Non-vested at December 31, 2012
674,491
$
31,782
The weighted-average grant price for restricted stock granted during the
year
s ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
was
$39.44
,
$41.81
, and
$35.65
, respectively. The total intrinsic value of restricted stock vested during the
year
s ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
was
$6.6 million
,
$7.5 million
, and
$6.1 million
, respectively.
As of
December 31, 2012
, there was
$12.8 million
of unrecognized compensation cost related to non-vested restricted stock granted under the Parent Company's Long-Term Omnibus Plan. When recognized, this compensation results in additional paid in capital in the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Equity of the Parent Company and in general partner preferred and common units in the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Capital of the Operating Partnership. This unrecognized compensation cost is expected to be recognized over the next
three
years, through
2015
. The Company issues new restricted stock from its authorized shares available at the date of grant.
109
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
13. Saving and Retirement Plans
401 (k) Retirement Plan
The Company maintains a 401(k) retirement plan covering substantially all employees, which permits participants to defer up to the maximum allowable amount determined by the IRS of their eligible compensation. This deferred compensation, together with Company matching contributions equal to 100% of employee deferrals up to a maximum of
$5,000
of their eligible compensation, is fully vested and funded as of
December 31, 2012
. Costs related to matching portion of the plan were
$1.4 million
,
$1.2 million
, and
$1.1 million
for the years ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
, respectively.
Non-Qualified Deferred Compensation Plan
The Company maintains a non-qualified deferred compensation plan (“NQDCP”) which allows select employees and directors to defer part or all of their salary, cash bonus, and restricted stock awards. Restricted stock awards that are designated to be deferred into the NQDCP upon vesting are classified as liabilities from the grant date through the vesting date. All contributions into the participants' accounts are fully vested upon contribution to the NQDCP and are deposited in a Rabbi trust.
The Company accounts for the NQDCP in accordance with FASB Accounting Standards Codification ASC Topic 710 and the restricted stock awards under Topic 718. The assets in the Rabbi trust remain subject to the claims of creditors of the Company and are not the property of the participant. The NQDCP allows participants to allocate their account balance among various investments, including several mutual funds and the Company's common stock. Effective June 20, 2011, the Company amended its NQDCP such that participant account balances held in the Regency common stock fund, including future deferrals of Regency common stock, must remain allocated to the Regency common stock fund and may only be distributed to the participant in the form of Regency common stock upon termination from the plan. Additionally, participant account balances allocated to various diversified mutual funds are prohibited from being allocated into the Regency common stock fund. The assets of the Rabbi trust, exclusive of the shares of the Company's common stock, are classified as trading securities on the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets, and accordingly, realized and unrealized gains and losses are recognized within income from deferred compensation plan in the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Operations. Investments in shares of the Company's common stock are included, at cost, as treasury stock in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets of the Parent Company and as a reduction of general partner capital in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets of the Operating Partnership. The participants' deferred compensation liability, exclusive of the shares of the Company's common stock after the June 20, 2011 amendment, is included within accounts payable and other liabilities in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets and was
$22.8 million
and
$21.1 million
at
December 31, 2012
and
2011
, respectively. Increases or decreases in the deferred compensation liability, exclusive of amounts attributable to participant investments in the shares of the Company's common stock, are recorded as general and administrative expense within the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Operations. Changes in participant account balances related to the Regency common stock fund are recorded directly within stockholders' equity.
110
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
14. Earnings per Share and Unit
Parent Company Earnings per Share
The following summarizes the calculation of basic and diluted earnings per share for the years ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
, respectively (in thousands except per share data):
2012
2011
2010
Numerator:
Income from continuing operations
$
505
45,344
3,106
Income from discontinued operations
23,546
8,040
8,902
Gain on sale of real estate
2,158
2,404
993
Net income
26,209
55,788
13,001
Less: preferred stock dividends
32,531
19,675
19,675
Less: income attributable to noncontrolling interests
342
4,418
4,185
Net (loss) income attributable to common stockholders
(6,664
)
31,695
(10,859
)
Less: dividends paid on unvested restricted stock
572
615
542
Net income attributable to common stockholders - basic
(7,236
)
31,080
(11,401
)
Add: dividends paid on Treasury Method restricted stock
—
18
—
Net (loss) income for common stockholders - diluted
$
(7,236
)
31,098
(11,401
)
Denominator:
Weighted average common shares outstanding for basic EPS
89,630
87,825
81,068
Incremental shares to be issued under unvested restricted stock
39
—
—
Incremental shares under Forward Equity Offering
—
424
1,534
Weighted average common shares outstanding for diluted EPS
89,669
88,249
82,602
(Loss) income per common share – basic
Continuing operations
$
(0.34
)
0.26
(0.25
)
Discontinued operations
0.26
0.09
0.11
Net (loss) income attributable to common stockholders
$
(0.08
)
0.35
(0.14
)
(Loss) income per common share – diluted
Continuing operations
$
(0.34
)
0.26
(0.25
)
Discontinued operations
0.26
0.09
0.11
Net (loss) income attributable to common stockholders
$
(0.08
)
0.35
(0.14
)
Income (loss) allocated to noncontrolling interests of the Operating Partnership has been excluded from the numerator and Exchangeable Operating Partnership units have been omitted from the denominator for the purpose of computing diluted earnings per share since the effect of including these amounts in the numerator and denominator would have no impact. Weighted average Exchangeable Operating Partnership units outstanding for the
year
s ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
were
177,164
,
177,164
, and
270,706
, respectively.
111
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
Operating Partnership Earnings per Unit
The following summarizes the calculation of basic and diluted earnings per unit for the periods ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
respectively (in thousands except per unit data):
2012
2011
2010
Numerator:
Income from continuing operations
$
505
45,344
3,106
Income from discontinued operations
23,546
8,040
8,902
Gain on sale of real estate
2,158
2,404
993
Net income
26,209
55,788
13,001
Less: preferred unit distributions
31,902
23,400
23,400
Less: income attributable to noncontrolling interests
865
590
376
Net (loss) income attributable to common unit holders
(6,558
)
31,798
(10,775
)
Less: dividends paid on unvested restricted stock
572
615
542
Net income attributable to common unit holders - basic
(7,130
)
31,183
(11,317
)
Add: dividends paid on Treasury Method restricted stock
—
18
—
Net income for common unit holders - diluted
$
(7,130
)
31,201
(11,317
)
Denominator:
Weighted average common units outstanding for basic EPU
89,808
88,002
81,339
Incremental shares to be issued under unvested restricted stock
39
—
—
Incremental units under Forward Equity Offering
—
424
1,534
Weighted average common units outstanding for diluted EPU
89,847
88,426
82,873
(Loss) income per common unit – basic
Continuing operations
$
(0.34
)
0.26
(0.25
)
Discontinued operations
0.26
0.09
0.11
Net (loss) income attributable to common unit holders
$
(0.08
)
0.35
(0.14
)
(Loss) income per common unit – diluted
Continuing operations
$
(0.34
)
0.26
(0.25
)
Discontinued operations
0.26
0.09
0.11
Net (loss) income attributable to common unit holders
$
(0.08
)
0.35
(0.14
)
112
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
15. Operating Leases
The Company's properties are leased to tenants under operating leases with expiration dates extending to the year
2099
. Future minimum rents under non-cancelable operating leases as of
December 31, 2012
, excluding both tenant reimbursements of operating expenses and additional percentage rent based on tenants' sales volume, are as follows (in thousands):
Year Ending December 31,
Amount
2013
$
332,351
2014
311,905
2015
276,784
2016
240,376
2017
196,098
Thereafter
991,272
Total
$
2,348,786
The shopping centers' tenant base includes primarily national and regional supermarkets, drug stores, discount department stores and other retailers and, consequently, the credit risk is concentrated in the retail industry. There were
no
tenants that individually represented more than
5%
of the Company's annualized future minimum rents.
The Company has shopping centers that are subject to non-cancelable long-term ground leases where a third party owns and has leased the underlying land to the Company to construct and/or operate a shopping center. Ground leases expire through the year
2058
and in most cases provide for renewal options. In addition, the Company has non-cancelable operating leases pertaining to office space from which it conducts its business. Office leases expire through the year
2018
and in most cases provide for renewal options. Leasehold improvements are capitalized, recorded as tenant improvements, and depreciated over the shorter of the useful life of the improvements or the lease term. Operating lease expense, including capitalized ground lease payments on properties in development, was
$9.1 million
,
$9.2 million
and
$8.1 million
for the years ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
, respectively. The following table summarizes the future obligations under non-cancelable operating leases as of
December 31, 2012
, (in thousands):
Year Ending December 31,
Amount
2013
$
7,732
2014
7,136
2015
6,713
2016
6,181
2017
4,649
Thereafter
101,613
Total
$
134,024
16. Commitments and Contingencies
The Company is involved in litigation on a number of matters and is subject to certain claims which arise in the normal course of business, none of which, in the opinion of management, is expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company's consolidated financial position, results of operations, or liquidity. Legal fees are expensed as incurred.
The Company is also subject to numerous environmental laws and regulations as they apply to real estate pertaining to chemicals used by the dry cleaning industry, the existence of asbestos in older shopping centers, and underground petroleum storage tanks. The Company believes that the ultimate disposition of currently known environmental matters will not have a material effect on its financial position, liquidity, or operations; however, it can give no assurance that existing environmental studies with respect to the shopping centers have revealed all potential environmental liabilities; that any previous owner, occupant or tenant did not create any material environmental condition not known to it; that the current environmental condition of the shopping centers will not be affected by tenants and occupants, by the condition of
113
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
nearby properties, or by unrelated third parties; or that changes in applicable environmental laws and regulations or their interpretation will not result in additional environmental liability to the Company.
The Company has the right to issue letters of credit under the Line up to an amount not to exceed
$80.0 million
which reduces the credit availability under the Line. These letters of credit are primarily issued as collateral to facilitate the construction of development projects. As of
December 31, 2012
and
2011
, the Company had
$20.8 million
and
$17.4 million
letters of credit outstanding, respectively.
17. Summary of Quarterly Financial Data (Unaudited)
The following table sets forth selected Quarterly Financial Data for the Company on a historical basis for each of the years ended
December 31, 2012
and
2011
and has been derived from the accompanying consolidated financial statements as reclassified for discontinued operations (in thousands except per share and per unit data):
2012:
First
Second
Third
Fourth
Quarter
Quarter
Quarter
Quarter
Operating Data:
Revenues as originally reported
$
127,389
129,767
120,013
122,002
Reclassified to discontinued operations
(1,146
)
(524
)
(581
)
—
Adjusted Revenues
$
126,243
129,243
119,432
122,002
Net income (loss) attributable to common stockholders
$
13,181
5,697
11,637
(37,179
)
Net income (loss) of limited partners
54
23
39
(10
)
Net income (loss) attributable to common unit holders
$
13,235
5,720
11,676
(37,189
)
Net income (loss) attributable to common stock and unit holders per share and unit:
Basic
$
0.14
0.06
0.13
(0.41
)
Diluted
$
0.14
0.06
0.13
(0.41
)
2011:
Operating Data:
Revenues as originally reported
$
127,114
128,382
125,747
125,322
Reclassified to discontinued operations
(4,069
)
(4,344
)
(3,328
)
(1,726
)
Adjusted Revenues
$
123,045
124,038
122,419
123,596
Net income attributable to common stockholders
$
2,185
12,861
8,510
8,139
Net income of limited partners
13
37
27
26
Net income attributable to common unit holders
$
2,198
12,898
8,537
8,165
Net income attributable to common stock and unit holders per share and unit:
Basic
$
0.02
0.14
0.09
0.10
Diluted
$
0.02
0.14
0.09
0.10
114
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Schedule III - Consolidated Real Estate and Accumulated Depreciation
December 31, 2012
(in thousands)
Initial Cost
Total Cost
Total Cost
Shopping Centers
(1)
Land
Building & Improvements
Cost Capitalized
Subsequent to
Acquisition
(2)
Land
Building & Improvements
Properties held for Sale
Total
Accumulated Depreciation
Net of Accumulated Depreciation
Mortgages
4S Commons Town Center
30,760
35,830
(379
)
30,812
35,399
—
66,211
11,743
54,468
62,500
Airport Crossing
1,748
1,690
85
1,744
1,780
—
3,524
426
3,098
—
Amerige Heights Town Center
10,109
11,288
247
10,109
11,536
—
21,645
1,830
19,815
17,000
Anastasia Plaza
9,065
—
120
3,338
5,847
—
9,185
739
8,446
—
Anthem Marketplace
6,714
13,696
204
6,714
13,899
—
20,613
4,675
15,938
—
Ashburn Farm Market Center
9,835
4,812
369
9,835
5,181
—
15,016
2,943
12,073
—
Ashford Perimeter
2,584
9,865
514
2,584
10,379
—
12,963
5,217
7,746
—
Augusta Center
5,142
2,720
(5,456
)
1,547
859
—
2,406
(3
)
2,409
—
Aventura Shopping Center
2,751
10,459
29
2,751
10,488
—
13,239
9,561
3,678
—
Balboa Mesa Shopping Center
23,074
33,838
—
23,074
33,838
—
56,912
495
56,417
—
Beckett Commons
1,625
10,960
2,570
1,748
13,407
—
15,155
4,155
11,000
—
Belleview Square
8,132
9,756
1,965
8,298
11,555
—
19,853
4,188
15,665
7,208
Berkshire Commons
2,295
9,551
1,447
2,965
10,328
—
13,293
5,510
7,783
7,500
Bloomingdale Square
3,940
14,912
871
3,940
15,783
—
19,723
6,242
13,481
—
Boulevard Center
3,659
10,787
936
3,659
11,723
—
15,382
4,609
10,773
—
Boynton Lakes Plaza
2,628
11,236
3,436
3,464
13,836
—
17,300
4,185
13,115
—
Brentwood Plaza
2,788
3,473
18
2,788
3,491
—
6,279
267
6,012
—
Briarcliff La Vista
694
3,292
154
694
3,446
—
4,140
2,038
2,102
—
Briarcliff Village
4,597
24,836
1,069
4,597
25,905
—
30,502
13,223
17,279
—
Bridgeton
3,033
8,137
34
3,067
8,137
—
11,204
546
10,658
—
Buckhead Court
1,417
7,432
231
1,417
7,663
—
9,080
4,333
4,747
—
Buckley Square
2,970
5,978
583
2,970
6,561
—
9,531
2,802
6,729
—
Buckwalter Place Shopping Ctr
6,563
6,590
123
6,592
6,684
—
13,276
1,746
11,530
—
Caligo Crossing
2,459
4,897
441
2,459
5,338
—
7,797
1,181
6,616
—
Cambridge Square
774
4,347
634
774
4,982
—
5,756
2,207
3,549
—
Carmel Commons
2,466
12,548
3,819
3,406
15,426
—
18,832
5,551
13,281
—
Carriage Gate
833
4,974
268
835
5,240
—
6,075
3,665
2,410
—
Centerplace of Greeley III
6,661
11,502
2,255
6,796
13,623
—
20,419
2,364
18,055
—
Chasewood Plaza
4,612
20,829
307
4,681
21,067
—
25,748
12,241
13,507
—
115
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Schedule III - Consolidated Real Estate and Accumulated Depreciation
December 31, 2012
(in thousands)
Initial Cost
Total Cost
Total Cost
Shopping Centers
(1)
Land
Building & Improvements
Cost Capitalized
Subsequent to
Acquisition
(2)
Land
Building & Improvements
Properties held for Sale
Total
Accumulated Depreciation
Net of Accumulated Depreciation
Mortgages
Cherry Grove
3,533
15,862
1,424
3,581
17,238
—
20,819
6,540
14,279
—
Cheshire Station
9,896
8,344
(22
)
9,896
8,322
—
18,218
5,994
12,224
—
Clayton Valley Shopping Center
24,189
35,422
1,892
24,538
36,965
—
61,503
12,759
48,744
—
Cochran's Crossing
13,154
12,315
632
13,154
12,947
—
26,101
6,195
19,906
—
Corkscrew Village
8,407
8,004
89
8,407
8,094
—
16,501
1,759
14,742
8,436
Cornerstone Square
1,772
6,944
955
1,764
7,907
—
9,671
3,638
6,033
—
Corvallis Market Center
6,674
12,244
34
6,696
12,256
—
18,952
2,481
16,471
—
Costa Verde Center
12,740
26,868
984
12,798
27,794
—
40,592
11,523
29,069
—
Courtyard Landcom
5,867
4
3
5,867
7
—
5,874
1
5,873
—
Culpeper Colonnade
15,944
10,601
206
15,947
10,803
—
26,750
4,060
22,690
—
Dardenne Crossing
4,194
4,005
73
4,195
4,078
—
8,273
355
7,918
—
Deer Springs Town Center
41,031
42,841
(56,572
)
6,214
21,085
—
27,299
1,919
25,380
—
Delk Spectrum
2,985
12,001
386
3,000
12,372
—
15,372
4,992
10,380
—
Diablo Plaza
5,300
8,181
765
5,300
8,946
—
14,246
3,313
10,933
—
Dickson Tn
675
1,568
—
675
1,568
—
2,243
518
1,725
—
Dunwoody Village
3,342
15,934
1,302
3,342
17,236
—
20,578
9,127
11,451
—
East Pointe
1,730
7,189
338
1,730
7,527
—
9,257
3,335
5,922
—
East Towne Center
2,957
4,938
(101
)
2,957
4,837
—
7,794
2,212
5,582
—
El Camino Shopping Center
7,600
11,538
204
7,600
11,742
—
19,342
4,349
14,993
—
El Cerrito Plaza
11,025
27,371
618
11,025
27,989
—
39,014
4,039
34,975
39,976
El Norte Parkway Plaza
2,834
7,370
110
2,840
7,474
—
10,314
3,084
7,230
—
Encina Grande
5,040
11,572
—
5,040
11,572
—
16,612
4,523
12,089
—
Fairfax Shopping Center
15,239
11,367
(5,523
)
13,175
7,908
—
21,083
1,078
20,005
—
Falcon
1,340
4,168
26
1,340
4,194
—
5,534
1,002
4,532
—
Fenton Marketplace
2,298
8,510
(8,709
)
512
1,588
—
2,100
138
1,962
—
Fleming Island
3,077
11,587
2,296
3,111
13,849
—
16,960
4,604
12,356
786
French Valley Village Center
11,924
16,856
5
11,822
16,963
—
28,785
6,211
22,574
—
Friars Mission Center
6,660
28,021
509
6,660
28,530
—
35,190
10,061
25,129
393
Gardens Square
2,136
8,273
334
2,136
8,606
—
10,742
3,452
7,290
—
Gateway 101
24,971
9,113
671
24,971
9,785
—
34,756
1,726
33,030
—
Gateway Shopping Center
52,665
7,134
1,510
52,672
8,637
—
61,309
7,376
53,933
16,652
116
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Schedule III - Consolidated Real Estate and Accumulated Depreciation
December 31, 2012
(in thousands)
Initial Cost
Total Cost
Total Cost
Shopping Centers
(1)
Land
Building & Improvements
Cost Capitalized
Subsequent to
Acquisition
(2)
Land
Building & Improvements
Properties held for Sale
Total
Accumulated Depreciation
Net of Accumulated Depreciation
Mortgages
Gelson's Westlake Market Plaza
3,157
11,153
331
3,157
11,484
—
14,641
3,664
10,977
—
Glen Oak Plaza
4,103
12,951
228
4,103
13,179
—
17,282
1,087
16,195
3,555
Glenwood Village
1,194
5,381
132
1,194
5,513
—
6,707
3,108
3,599
—
Golden Hills Plaza
12,699
18,482
3,023
12,699
21,505
—
34,204
2,659
31,545
—
Grand Ridge Plaza
2,240
8,454
—
2,240
8,454
—
10,694
195
10,499
12,653
Greenwood Springs
2,720
3,059
(3,695
)
889
1,195
—
2,084
156
1,928
—
Hancock
8,232
28,260
866
8,232
29,127
—
37,359
11,388
25,971
—
Harpeth Village Fieldstone
2,284
9,443
178
2,284
9,621
—
11,905
3,660
8,245
—
Harris Crossing
7,199
3,677
—
7,199
3,677
—
10,876
684
10,192
—
Heritage Land
12,390
—
—
12,390
—
—
12,390
—
12,390
—
Heritage Plaza
—
26,097
12,882
108
38,871
—
38,979
10,662
28,317
—
Hershey
7
808
5
7
814
—
821
249
572
—
Hibernia Pavilion
4,929
5,065
25
4,929
5,089
—
10,018
1,260
8,758
—
Hibernia Plaza
267
230
1
267
231
—
498
32
466
—
Hickory Creek Plaza
5,629
4,564
279
5,629
4,842
—
10,471
1,604
8,867
—
Hillcrest Village
1,600
1,909
—
1,600
1,909
—
3,509
691
2,818
—
Hinsdale
5,734
16,709
1,415
5,734
18,125
—
23,859
6,899
16,960
—
Horton's Corner
3,137
2,779
31
3,216
2,731
—
5,947
693
5,254
—
Howell Mill Village
5,157
14,279
829
5,157
15,108
—
20,265
1,974
18,291
—
Hyde Park
9,809
39,905
1,306
9,809
41,211
—
51,020
17,450
33,570
—
Indio Towne Center
17,946
31,985
204
17,949
32,186
—
50,135
6,197
43,938
—
Inglewood Plaza
1,300
2,159
109
1,300
2,268
—
3,568
866
2,702
—
Jefferson Square
5,167
6,445
78
5,225
6,464
—
11,689
1,066
10,623
—
Keller Town Center
2,294
12,841
47
2,294
12,888
—
15,182
4,580
10,602
—
Kent Place
4,855
3,544
—
4,855
3,544
—
8,399
41
8,358
—
Kings Crossing Sun City
515
1,246
109
515
1,356
—
1,871
292
1,579
—
Kirkwood Commons
6,772
16,224
339
6,802
16,533
—
23,335
977
22,358
13,103
Kroger New Albany Center
3,844
6,599
356
3,844
6,955
—
10,799
3,852
6,947
3,041
Kulpsville
5,518
3,756
139
5,600
3,813
—
9,413
763
8,650
—
Lake Pine Plaza
2,008
7,632
276
2,029
7,887
—
9,916
2,967
6,949
—
Lebanon Center
3,865
5,751
30
3,865
5,781
—
9,646
1,419
8,227
—
117
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Schedule III - Consolidated Real Estate and Accumulated Depreciation
December 31, 2012
(in thousands)
Initial Cost
Total Cost
Total Cost
Shopping Centers
(1)
Land
Building & Improvements
Cost Capitalized
Subsequent to
Acquisition
(2)
Land
Building & Improvements
Properties held for Sale
Total
Accumulated Depreciation
Net of Accumulated Depreciation
Mortgages
Lebanon/Legacy Center
3,913
7,874
136
3,913
8,010
—
11,923
4,012
7,911
—
Littleton Square
2,030
8,859
324
2,030
9,183
—
11,213
3,320
7,893
—
Lloyd King
1,779
10,060
740
1,779
10,800
—
12,579
3,963
8,616
—
Loehmann's Plaza
3,983
18,687
557
3,983
19,244
—
23,227
9,087
14,140
—
Loehmanns Plaza California
5,420
9,450
490
5,420
9,940
—
15,360
3,770
11,590
—
Lower Nazareth Commons
15,992
12,964
3,154
16,361
15,749
—
32,110
3,066
29,044
—
Market at Colonnade Center
6,455
9,839
—
6,455
9,839
—
16,294
817
15,477
—
Market at Opitz Crossing
9,902
9,248
(5,836
)
6,597
6,717
—
13,314
1,017
12,297
—
Market at Preston Forest
4,400
11,445
820
4,400
12,265
—
16,665
4,416
12,249
—
Market at Round Rock
2,000
9,676
5,386
2,000
15,062
—
17,062
4,546
12,516
—
Marketplace Shopping Center
1,287
5,509
5,125
1,330
10,591
—
11,921
3,158
8,763
—
Marketplace at Briargate
1,706
4,885
5
1,727
4,869
—
6,596
1,424
5,172
—
Middle Creek Commons
5,042
8,100
151
5,091
8,202
—
13,293
2,097
11,196
—
Millhopper Shopping Center
1,073
5,358
4,529
1,796
9,164
—
10,960
4,917
6,043
—
Mockingbird Common
3,000
10,728
461
3,000
11,189
—
14,189
4,353
9,836
10,300
Monument Jackson Creek
2,999
6,765
608
2,999
7,373
—
10,372
3,878
6,494
—
Morningside Plaza
4,300
13,951
432
4,300
14,383
—
18,683
5,376
13,307
—
Murryhill Marketplace
2,670
18,401
420
2,670
18,821
—
21,491
7,372
14,119
7,284
Naples Walk
18,173
13,554
224
18,173
13,778
—
31,951
2,833
29,118
15,844
Newberry Square
2,412
10,150
220
2,412
10,370
—
12,782
6,182
6,600
—
Newland Center
12,500
10,697
575
12,500
11,272
—
23,772
4,655
19,117
—
Nocatee Town Center
10,124
8,691
—
10,124
8,691
—
18,815
1,339
17,476
—
North Hills
4,900
19,774
755
4,900
20,529
—
25,429
7,392
18,037
—
Northgate Marketplace
5,668
13,727
—
5,668
13,727
—
19,395
211
19,184
—
Northgate Plaza (Maxtown Road)
1,769
6,652
150
1,769
6,802
—
8,571
2,785
5,786
—
Northgate Square
5,011
8,692
183
5,011
8,875
—
13,886
1,823
12,063
5,711
Northlake Village
2,662
11,284
483
2,662
11,767
—
14,429
4,098
10,331
—
Oak Shade Town Center
6,591
28,966
24
6,591
28,990
—
35,581
1,403
34,178
11,771
Oakbrook Plaza
4,000
6,668
203
4,000
6,871
—
10,871
2,675
8,196
—
Oakleaf Commons
3,503
11,671
40
3,503
11,711
—
15,214
2,698
12,516
—
Ocala Corners
1,816
10,515
79
1,816
10,594
—
12,410
736
11,674
5,640
118
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Schedule III - Consolidated Real Estate and Accumulated Depreciation
December 31, 2012
(in thousands)
Initial Cost
Total Cost
Total Cost
Shopping Centers
(1)
Land
Building & Improvements
Cost Capitalized
Subsequent to
Acquisition
(2)
Land
Building & Improvements
Properties held for Sale
Total
Accumulated Depreciation
Net of Accumulated Depreciation
Mortgages
Old St Augustine Plaza
2,368
11,405
364
2,368
11,769
—
14,137
5,167
8,970
—
Orangeburg & Central
2,071
2,384
(84
)
2,071
2,300
—
4,371
518
3,853
—
Orchards Market Center II
6,602
9,690
(2,922
)
5,497
7,873
—
13,370
805
12,565
—
Paces Ferry Plaza
2,812
12,639
181
2,812
12,820
—
15,632
6,453
9,179
—
Panther Creek
14,414
14,748
2,366
15,212
16,317
—
31,529
7,627
23,902
—
Peartree Village
5,197
19,746
776
5,197
20,522
—
25,719
8,521
17,198
8,575
Pike Creek
5,153
20,652
505
5,153
21,157
—
26,310
8,396
17,914
—
Pima Crossing
5,800
28,143
1,032
5,800
29,175
—
34,975
11,232
23,743
—
Pine Lake Village
6,300
10,991
545
6,300
11,536
—
17,836
4,270
13,566
—
Pine Tree Plaza
668
6,220
155
668
6,375
—
7,043
2,498
4,545
—
Plaza Hermosa
4,200
10,109
600
4,224
10,685
—
14,909
3,710
11,199
13,800
Powell Street Plaza
8,248
30,716
1,435
8,248
32,152
—
40,400
9,343
31,057
—
Powers Ferry Square
3,687
17,965
4,503
5,090
21,065
—
26,155
9,575
16,580
—
Powers Ferry Village
1,191
4,672
236
1,191
4,908
—
6,099
2,499
3,600
—
Prairie City Crossing
4,164
13,032
366
4,164
13,398
—
17,562
4,048
13,514
—
Prestonbrook
7,069
8,622
115
7,069
8,737
—
15,806
4,946
10,860
6,800
Red Bank
10,336
9,505
(178
)
10,105
9,558
—
19,663
971
18,692
—
Regency Commons
3,917
3,616
44
3,917
3,659
—
7,576
1,455
6,121
—
Regency Solar (Saugus)
758
6
752
—
758
21
737
—
Regency Square
4,770
25,191
2,741
4,777
27,925
—
32,702
17,753
14,949
—
Rockwall Town Center
4,438
5,140
(48
)
4,438
5,092
—
9,530
1,809
7,721
—
Rona Plaza
1,500
4,917
118
1,500
5,035
—
6,535
2,100
4,435
—
Russell Ridge
2,234
6,903
698
2,234
7,601
—
9,835
3,456
6,379
—
Sammamish
9,300
8,075
768
9,300
8,843
—
18,143
3,162
14,981
—
San Leandro Plaza
1,300
8,226
61
1,300
8,287
—
9,587
3,052
6,535
—
Sandy Springs
6,889
28,056
—
6,889
28,056
—
34,945
88
34,857
17,624
Saugus
19,201
17,984
(1,130
)
18,805
17,250
—
36,055
3,576
32,479
—
Seminole Shoppes
8,593
7,523
53
8,629
7,540
—
16,169
718
15,451
9,000
Sequoia Station
9,100
18,356
1,023
9,100
19,379
—
28,479
6,748
21,731
21,100
Sherwood II
2,731
6,360
(10
)
2,731
6,350
—
9,081
1,731
7,350
—
Sherwood Market Center
3,475
16,362
77
3,475
16,439
—
19,914
6,246
13,668
—
119
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Schedule III - Consolidated Real Estate and Accumulated Depreciation
December 31, 2012
(in thousands)
Initial Cost
Total Cost
Total Cost
Shopping Centers
(1)
Land
Building & Improvements
Cost Capitalized
Subsequent to
Acquisition
(2)
Land
Building & Improvements
Properties held for Sale
Total
Accumulated Depreciation
Net of Accumulated Depreciation
Mortgages
Shoppes @ 104
11,193
—
—
6,652
4,540
—
11,192
673
10,519
—
Shoppes at Fairhope Village
6,920
11,198
132
6,920
11,330
—
18,250
1,875
16,375
—
Shoppes of Grande Oak
5,091
5,985
123
5,091
6,107
—
11,198
3,289
7,909
—
Shops at Arizona
3,063
3,243
51
3,063
3,294
—
6,357
1,497
4,860
—
Shops at County Center
9,957
11,269
322
10,160
11,388
—
21,548
3,894
17,654
—
Shops at Erwin Mill
236
131
—
236
131
—
367
4
363
—
Shops at Johns Creek
1,863
2,014
(309
)
1,501
2,068
—
3,569
772
2,797
—
Shops at Quail Creek
1,487
7,717
184
1,486
7,902
—
9,388
1,204
8,184
—
Signature Plaza
2,396
3,898
244
2,396
4,142
—
6,538
1,861
4,677
—
South Bay Village
11,714
15,580
—
11,714
15,580
—
27,294
344
26,950
—
South Lowry Square
3,434
10,445
772
3,434
11,217
—
14,651
4,036
10,615
—
Southcenter
1,300
12,750
787
1,300
13,537
—
14,837
4,754
10,083
—
SouthPoint Crossing
4,412
12,235
211
4,412
12,445
—
16,857
4,494
12,363
—
Starke
71
1,683
1
71
1,684
—
1,755
513
1,242
—
State Street Crossing
1,283
1,970
33
1,283
2,003
—
3,286
197
3,089
—
Sterling Ridge
12,846
12,162
432
12,846
12,594
—
25,440
6,146
19,294
13,900
Stonewall
27,511
22,123
5,267
28,127
26,774
—
54,901
6,736
48,165
—
Strawflower Village
4,060
8,084
204
4,060
8,287
—
12,347
3,239
9,108
—
Stroh Ranch
4,280
8,189
250
4,280
8,439
—
12,719
4,513
8,206
—
Suncoast Crossing
4,057
5,545
10,229
9,030
10,800
—
19,830
2,177
17,653
—
Sunnyside 205
1,200
9,459
1,246
1,200
10,705
—
11,905
3,588
8,317
—
Tanasbourne Market
3,269
10,861
(45
)
3,269
10,816
—
14,085
2,219
11,866
—
Tassajara Crossing
8,560
15,464
388
8,560
15,852
—
24,412
5,789
18,623
19,800
Tech Ridge Center
12,945
37,169
61
12,945
37,231
—
50,176
2,000
48,176
11,888
Town Square
883
8,132
236
883
8,368
—
9,251
3,614
5,637
—
Twin City Plaza
17,245
44,225
1,328
17,263
45,535
—
62,798
8,966
53,832
41,112
Twin Peaks
5,200
25,827
393
5,200
26,220
—
31,420
9,363
22,057
—
Uptown District
18,773
61,906
—
18,773
61,906
—
80,679
154
80,525
—
Valencia Crossroads
17,921
17,659
257
17,921
17,916
—
35,837
11,090
24,747
—
Ventura Village
4,300
6,648
418
4,300
7,066
—
11,366
2,536
8,830
—
Village at Lee Airpark
11,099
12,955
—
11,099
12,955
—
24,054
2,070
21,984
—
120
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Schedule III - Consolidated Real Estate and Accumulated Depreciation
December 31, 2012
(in thousands)
Initial Cost
Total Cost
Total Cost
Shopping Centers
(1)
Land
Building & Improvements
Cost Capitalized
Subsequent to
Acquisition
(2)
Land
Building & Improvements
Properties held for Sale
Total
Accumulated Depreciation
Net of Accumulated Depreciation
Mortgages
Village Center
3,885
14,131
481
3,885
14,611
—
18,496
6,416
12,080
—
Vine at Castaic
4,799
5,884
(5,801
)
2,170
2,712
—
4,882
147
4,735
—
Vista Village IV
2,287
2,765
(933
)
2,287
1,832
—
4,119
931
3,188
—
Walker Center
3,840
7,232
2,830
3,864
10,038
—
13,902
2,956
10,946
—
Walton Towne Center
3,872
3,298
34
3,872
3,332
—
7,204
667
6,537
—
Welleby Plaza
1,496
7,787
454
1,496
8,241
—
9,737
5,049
4,688
—
Wellington Town Square
2,041
12,131
213
2,041
12,344
—
14,385
4,931
9,454
12,800
West Park Plaza
5,840
5,759
723
5,840
6,482
—
12,322
2,318
10,004
—
Westbrook Commons
3,366
11,751
(1,047
)
3,091
10,979
—
14,070
3,566
10,504
—
Westchase
5,302
8,273
208
5,302
8,481
—
13,783
1,648
12,135
7,493
Westchester Plaza
1,857
7,572
239
1,857
7,811
—
9,668
3,847
5,821
—
Westlake Plaza and Center
7,043
27,195
1,410
7,043
28,605
—
35,648
10,717
24,931
—
Westridge Village
9,529
11,397
100
9,529
11,496
—
21,025
4,574
16,451
—
Westwood Village
19,933
25,301
317
20,135
25,416
—
45,551
6,084
39,467
—
White Oak
2,144
3,069
2
2,144
3,071
—
5,215
1,940
3,275
—
Willow Festival
1,954
56,501
294
1,954
56,795
—
58,749
3,772
54,977
40,710
Windmiller Plaza Phase I
2,638
13,241
35
2,638
13,276
—
15,914
5,436
10,478
—
Woodcroft Shopping Center
1,419
6,284
300
1,421
6,582
—
8,003
2,967
5,036
—
Woodman Van Nuy
5,500
7,195
166
5,500
7,361
—
12,861
2,713
10,148
—
Woodmen and Rangewood
7,621
11,018
416
7,621
11,434
—
19,055
7,819
11,236
—
Woodside Central
3,500
9,288
389
3,500
9,677
—
13,177
3,554
9,623
—
—
—
Corporately Held Assets
264
—
264
—
264
2,999
(2,735
)
—
Properties in Development
(200
)
1,078,886
(886,619
)
—
192,067
—
192,067
—
192,067
—
1,264,741
3,491,039
(845,868
)
1,215,659
2,694,253
—
3,909,912
782,749
3,127,163
473,955
(1)
See Item 2. Properties for geographic location and year each operating property was acquired.
(2)
The negative balance for costs capitalized subsequent to acquisition could include out-parcels sold, provision for loss recorded and development transfers subsequent to the initial costs.
See accompanying report of independent registered public accounting firm.
121
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION AND REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
Schedule III - Consolidated Real Estate and Accumulated Depreciation, continued
December 31, 2012
(in thousands)
Depreciation and amortization of the Company's investment in buildings and improvements reflected in the statements of operations is calculated over the estimated useful lives of the assets, which are up to 40 years. The aggregate cost for Federal income tax purposes was approxim
ately
$3.4 billion
at
December 31, 2012
.
The changes in total real estate assets for the years ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
are as follows:
2012
2011
2010
Balance, beginning of year
$
4,101,912
3,989,154
3,933,778
Developed or acquired properties
324,142
198,836
93,759
Improvements
38,005
21,727
18,772
Sale of properties
(491,438
)
(92,872
)
(14,503
)
Provision for impairment
(62,709
)
(14,933
)
(42,652
)
Balance, end of year
$
3,909,912
4,101,912
3,989,154
The changes in accumulated depreciation for the years ended
December 31, 2012
,
2011
, and
2010
are as follows:
2012
2011
2010
Balance, beginning of year
$
791,619
700,878
622,163
Depreciation for year
104,087
107,932
99,554
Sale of properties
(104,748
)
(14,101
)
(2,052
)
Provision for impairment
(8,209
)
(3,090
)
(18,787
)
Balance, end of year
$
782,749
791,619
700,878
See accompanying report of independent registered public accounting firm.
Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure
None.
Item 9A. Controls and Procedures
Controls and Procedures (Regency Centers Corporation)
Conclusion Regarding the Effectiveness of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
Under the supervision and with the participation of the Parent Company's management, including its chief executive officer and chief financial officer, the Parent Company conducted an evaluation of its disclosure controls and procedures, as such term is defined under Rule 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act). Based on this evaluation, the Parent Company's chief executive officer and chief financial officer concluded that its disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of the end of the period covered by this annual report on Form 10-K to ensure information required to be disclosed in the reports filed or submitted under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported, within the time period specified in the SEC's rules and forms. These disclosure controls and procedures include controls and procedures designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by the Parent Company in the reports it files or submits is accumulated and communicated to management, including its chief executive officer and chief financial officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.
122
Management's Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting
The Parent Company's management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, as such term is defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f). Under the supervision and with the participation of its management, including its chief executive officer and chief financial officer, the Parent Company conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting based on the framework in
Internal Control - Integrated Framework
issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on its evaluation under the framework in
Internal Control - Integrated Framework
, the Parent Company's management concluded that its internal control over financial reporting was effective as of
December 31, 2012
.
KPMG LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, has audited the consolidated financial statements included in this annual report on Form 10-K and, as part of their audit, has issued a report, included herein, on the effectiveness of the Parent Company's internal control over financial reporting.
The Parent Company's system of internal control over financial reporting was designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the preparation and fair presentation of published financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. All internal control systems, no matter how well designed, have inherent limitations. Therefore, even those systems determined to be effective can provide only reasonable assurance and 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.
Changes in Internal Controls
There have been no changes in the Parent Company's internal controls over financial reporting identified in connection with this evaluation that occurred during the fourth quarter of
2012
and that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, its internal controls over financial reporting.
Controls and Procedures (Regency Centers, L.P.)
Conclusion Regarding the Effectiveness of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
Under the supervision and with the participation of the Operating Partnership's management, including the chief executive officer and chief financial officer of its general partner, the Operating Partnership conducted an evaluation of its disclosure controls and procedures, as such term is defined under Rule 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act). Based on this evaluation, the chief executive officer and chief financial officer of its general partner concluded that its disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of the end of the period covered by this annual report on Form 10-K to ensure information required to be disclosed in the reports filed or submitted under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported, within the time period specified in the SEC's rules and forms. These disclosure controls and procedures include controls and procedures designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by the Operating Partnership in the reports it files or submits is accumulated and communicated to management, including the chief executive officer and chief financial officer of its general partner, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.
Management's Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting
The Operating Partnership's management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, as such term is defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f). Under the supervision and with the participation of its management, including the chief executive officer and chief financial officer of its general partner, the Operating Partnership conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting based on the framework in
Internal Control - Integrated Framework
issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on its evaluation under the framework in
Internal Control - Integrated Framework
, the Operating Partnership's management concluded that its internal control over financial reporting was effective as of
December 31, 2012
.
KPMG LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, has audited the consolidated financial statements included in this annual report on Form 10-K and, as part of their audit, has issued a report, included herein, on the effectiveness of the Operating Partnership's internal control over financial reporting.
The Operating Partnership's system of internal control over financial reporting was designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the preparation and fair presentation of published financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. All internal control systems, no matter how well designed, have inherent limitations. Therefore, even those systems determined to be effective can provide only reasonable assurance and may not
123
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.
Changes in Internal Controls
There have been no changes in the Operating Partnership's internal controls over financial reporting identified in connection with this evaluation that occurred during the fourth quarter of
2012
and that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, its internal controls over financial reporting.
Item 9B. Other Information
Not applicable
PART III
Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers, and Corporate Governance
Information concerning the directors of Regency is incorporated herein by reference to Regency's definitive proxy statement to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after the end of the fiscal year covered by this Form 10-K with respect to its
2013
Annual Meeting of Stockholders.
Information regarding executive officers is included in Part I of this Form 10-K as permitted by General Instruction G(3).
Audit Committee, Independence, Financial Experts.
Incorporated herein by reference to Regency's definitive proxy statement to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after the end of the fiscal year covered by this Form 10‑K with respect to its
2013
Annual Meeting of Stockholders.
Compliance with Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act
. Information concerning filings under Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act by the directors or executive officers of Regency is incorporated herein by reference to Regency's definitive proxy statement to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after the end of the fiscal year covered by this Form 10-K with respect to its
2013
Annual Meeting of Stockholders.
Code of Ethics.
We have adopted a code of ethics applicable to our Board of Directors, principal executive officers, principal financial officer, principal accounting officer and persons performing similar functions. The text of this code of ethics may be found on our web site at www.regencycenters.com. We intend to post notice of any waiver from, or amendment to, any provision of our code of ethics on our web site.
Item 11. Executive Compensation
Incorporated herein by reference to Regency's definitive proxy statement to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after the end of the fiscal year covered by this Form 10-K with respect to its
2013
Annual Meeting of Stockholders.
124
Item 12.
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters
Equity Compensation Plan Information
(a)
(b)
(c)
Plan Category
Number of securities to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options, warrants and rights
Weighted-average exercise price of outstanding options, warrants and rights
(1)
Number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans (excluding securities reflected in column
(2)
Equity compensation plans
approved by security holders
315,924
$
52.39
3,058,399
Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders
N/A
N/A
N/A
Total
315,924
$
52.39
3,058,399
(1)
The weighted average exercise price excludes stock rights awards, which we sometimes refer to as unvested restricted stock.
(2)
The Regency Centers Corporation 2011 Omnibus Incentive Plan, (“Omnibus Plan”), as approved by stockholders at our 2011 annual meeting, provides that an aggregate maximum of 4.1 million shares of our common stock are reserved for issuance under the Omnibus Plan.
Information about security ownership is incorporated herein by reference to Regency's definitive proxy statement to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after the end of the fiscal year covered by this Form 10-K with respect to its
2013
Annual Meeting of Stockholders.
Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence
Incorporated herein by reference to Regency's definitive proxy statement to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after the end of the fiscal year covered by this Form 10-K with respect to its
2013
Annual Meeting of Stockholders.
Item 14.
Principal Accountant Fees and Services
Incorporated herein by reference to Regency's definitive proxy statement to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after the end of the fiscal year covered by this Form 10-K with respect to its
2013
Annual Meeting of Stockholders.
PART IV
Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules
(a) Financial Statements and Financial Statement Schedules:
Regency Centers Corporation and Regency Centers, L.P.
2012
financial statements and financial statement schedule, together with the reports of KPMG LLP are listed on the index immediately preceding the financial statements in Item 8, Consolidated Financial Statements and Supplemental Data.
(b) Exhibits:
In reviewing the agreements included as exhibits to this report, please remember they are included to provide you with information regarding their terms and are not intended to provide any other factual or disclosure information about the Company, its subsidiaries or other parties to the agreements. The Agreements contain representations and warranties by each of the parties
125
to the applicable agreement. These representations and warranties have been made solely for the benefit of the other parties to the applicable agreement and:
•
should not in all instances be treated as categorical statements of fact, but rather as a way of allocating the risk to one of the parties if those statements prove to be inaccurate;
•
have been qualified by disclosures that were made to the other party in connection with the negotiation of the applicable agreement, which disclosures are not necessarily reflected in the agreement;
•
may apply standards of materiality in a way that is different from what may be viewed as material to you or other investors; and
•
were made only as of the date of the applicable agreement or such other date or dates as may be specified in the agreement and are subject to more recent developments.
Accordingly, these representations and warranties may not describe the actual state of affairs as of the date they were made or at any other time. We acknowledge that, notwithstanding the inclusion of the foregoing cautionary statements, we are responsible for considering whether additional specific disclosures of material information regarding material contractual provisions are required to make the statements in this report not misleading. Additional information about the Company may be found elsewhere in this report and the Company's other public files, which are available without charge through the SEC's website at
http://www.sec.gov
.
Unless otherwise indicated below, the Commission file number to the exhibit is No. 001-12298.
1. Underwriting Agreement
(a)
Equity Distribution Agreement (the “Wells Agreement”) among the Company, Regency Centers, L.P. and Wells Fargo Securities, LLC dated August 10, 2012 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 1.1 to the Company's report on Form 8-K filed on August 10, 2012).
The Equity Distribution Agreements listed below are substantially identical in all material respects to the Wells Agreement except for the identities of the parties, and have not been filed as exhibits to the Company's 1934 Act reports pursuant to Instruction 2 to Item 601 of Regulation S-K:
(i)
Equity Distribution Agreement among the Company, Regency Centers, L.P. and Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated dated August 10, 2012; and
(ii)
Equity Distribution Agreement among the Company, Regency Centers, L.P. and J.P. Morgan Securities LLC dated August 10, 2012.
3. Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws
(a)
Restated Articles of Incorporation of Regency Centers Corporation (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Company's Form 8-K filed on February 19, 2008).
(i)
Amendment designating the preferences, rights and limitations of 10,000,000 shares of 6.625% Series 6 Cumulative Preferred Stock (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.2 to the Company's Form 8-A filed on February 14, 2012).
(ii)
Amendment designating the preferences, rights and limitations of 3,000,000 shares of 6.0% Series 7 Cumulative Preferred Stock (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Company's report on Form 8-K filed on August 16, 2012).
(b)
Amended and Restated Bylaws of Regency Centers Corporation (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.2(b) to the Company's Form 8-K filed on November 7, 2008).
(c)
Fourth Amended and Restated Certificate of Limited Partnership of Regency Centers, L.P. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3(a) to Regency Centers, L.P.'s Form 10-K filed on March 17, 2009).
(d)
Fourth Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of Regency Centers, L.P., as amended (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10(m) to the Company's Form 10-K filed on March 12, 2004).
126
(i)
Amendment to Fourth Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership relating to 6.625% Series 6 Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.2 to the Company's report on Form 8-K filed on February 16, 2012).
(ii)
Amendment to Fourth Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership relating to 6.0% Series 7 Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.2 to the Company's report on Form 8-K filed on August 16, 2012).
4. Instruments Defining Rights of Security Holders
(a)
See Exhibits 3(a) and 3(b) for provisions of the Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws of the Company defining the rights of security holders. See Exhibit 3(d) for provisions of the Partnership Agreement of Regency Centers, L.P. defining rights of security holders.
(b)
Indenture dated December 5, 2001 between Regency Centers, L.P., the guarantors named therein and First Union National Bank, as trustee (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.4 to Regency Centers, L.P.'s Form 8-K filed on December 10, 2001).
(i)
First Supplemental Indenture dated as of June 5, 2007 among Regency Centers, L.P., the Company as guarantor and U.S. Bank National Association, as successor to Wachovia Bank, National Association (formerly known as First Union National Bank), as trustee (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to Regency Centers, L.P.'s Form 8-K filed on June 5, 2007).
(c)
Indenture dated July 18, 2005 between Regency Centers, L.P., the guarantors named therein and Wachovia Bank, National Bank, as trustee (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to Regency Centers, L.P's registration statement on Form S-4 filed on August 5, 2005, No. 333-127274).
10. Material Contracts (~ indicates management contract or compensatory plan)
~(a)
Regency Centers Corporation Long Term Omnibus Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.9 to the Company's Form 10-Q filed on May 8, 2008).
~(i)
Form of Stock Rights Award Agreement pursuant to the Company's Long Term Omnibus Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10(b) to the Company's Form 10-K filed on March 10, 2006).
~(ii)
Form of 409A Amendment to Stock Rights Award Agreement (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10(b)(i) to the Company's Form 10-K filed on March on 17, 2009).
~(iii)
Form of Nonqualified Stock Option Agreement pursuant to the Company's Long Term Omnibus Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10(c) to the Company's Form 10-K filed on March 10, 2006).
~(iv)
Form of 409A Amendment to Stock Option Agreement (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10(c)(i) to the Company's Form 10-K filed on March 17, 2009).
~(v)
Amended and Restated Deferred Compensation Plan dated May 6, 2003 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10(k) to the Company's Form 10-K filed on March 12, 2004).
~(vi)
Regency Centers Corporation 2005 Deferred Compensation Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10(s) to the Company's Form 8-K filed on December 21, 2004).
127
~(vii)
First Amendment to Regency Centers Corporation 2005 Deferred Compensation Plan dated December 2005 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10(q)(i) to the Company's Form 10-K filed on March 10, 2006).
~(viii)
Second Amendment to the Regency Centers Corporation Amended and Restated Deferred Compensation Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Company's Form 8-K filed on June 13, 2011).
~(ix)
Third Amendment to the Regency Centers Corporation 2005 Deferred Compensation Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company's Form 8-K filed on June 13, 2011).
~(b)
Regency Centers Corporation 2011 Omnibus Plan (incorporated by reference to Annex A to the Company's 2011 Annual Meeting Proxy Statement filed on March 24, 2011).
~(c)
Form of Director/Officer Indemnification Agreement (filed as an Exhibit to Pre-effective Amendment No. 2 to the Company's registration statement on Form S-11 filed on October 5, 1993 (33-67258), and incorporated by reference).
~(d)
2011 Amended and Restated Severance and Change of Control Agreement dated as of January 1, 2011 by and between the Company and Martin E. Stein, Jr. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of the Company's Form 8-K filed on January 3, 2011).
~(e)
2011 Amended and Restated Severance and Change of Control Agreement dated as of January 1, 2011 by and between the Company and Bruce M. Johnson (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 of the Company's Form 8-K filed on January 3, 2011).
~(f)
2011 Amended and Restated Severance and Change of Control Agreement dated as of January 1, 2011 by and between the Company and Brian M. Smith (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 of the Company's Form 8-K filed on January 3, 2011).
(g)
Third Amended and Restated Credit Agreement dated as of September 7, 2011 by and among Regency Centers, , L.P., the Company, each of the financial institutions party thereto, and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company's Form 10-Q filed on November 8, 2011).
(i)
First Amendment to Third Amended and Restated Credit Agreement dated September 13, 2012 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company's Form 10-Q filed on November 9, 2012).
(h)
Term Loan Agreement dated as of November 17, 2011 by and among Regency Centers, L.P., the Company, each of the financial institutions party thereto and Wells Fargo Securities, LLC (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company's Form 10-K filed on February 29, 2012).
(i)
First Amendment to Term Loan Agreement dated as of June 19, 2012.
(ii)
Second Amendment to Term Loan Agreement dated as of December 19, 2012.
(i)
Second Amended and Restated Limited Liability Company Agreement of Macquarie CountryWide-Regency II, LLC dated as of July 31, 2009 by and among Global Retail Investors, LLC, Regency Centers, L.P. and Macquarie CountryWide (US) No. 2 LLC (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company's Form 10-Q filed on November 6, 2009).
(i)
Amendment No. 1 to Second Amended and Restate Limited Liability Company Agreement of GRI-Regency, LLC (formerly Macquarie CountryWide-Regency II, LLC).
(j)
Limited Partnership Agreement dated as of December 21, 2006 of RRP Operating, LP (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10(u) to the Company's Form 10-K filed on February 27, 2007).
128
(k)
Equity Distribution Agreement among the Company, the Operating Partnership and Wells Fargo Securities, LLC dated August 10, 2012 (incorporated by reference to the Company's Form 8-K filed on August 10, 2012).
12. Computation of ratios
12.1 Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
21. Subsidiaries of Regency Centers Corporation.
23. Consents of Independent Accountants
23.1 Consent of KPMG LLP for Regency Centers Corporation.
23.2 Consent of KPMG LLP for Regency Centers, L.P.
31. Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certifications.
31.1 Rule 13a-14 Certification of Chief Executive Officer for Regency Centers Corporation.
31.2 Rule 13a-14 Certification of Chief Financial Officer for Regency Centers Corporation.
31.3 Rule 13a-14 Certification of Chief Executive Officer for Regency Centers, L.P.
31.4 Rule 13a-14 Certification of Chief Financial Officer for Regency Centers, L.P.
32. Section 1350 Certifications.
The certifications in this exhibit 32 are being furnished solely to accompany this report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, and are not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and are not to be incorporated by reference into any of the Company's filings, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.
32.1
18 U.S.C. § 1350 Certification of Chief Executive Officer for Regency Centers Corporation.
32.2
18 U.S.C. § 1350 Certification of Chief Financial Officer for Regency Centers Corporation.
32.3 18 U.S.C. § 1350 Certification of Chief Executive Officer for Regency Centers, L.P.
32.4 18 U.S.C. § 1350 Certification of Chief Financial Officer for Regency Centers, L.P.
101. Interactive Data Files
101.INS+ XBRL Instance Document
101.SCH+ XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document
101.CAL+ XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document
101.DEF+ XBRL Taxonomy Definition Linkbase Document
101.LAB+ XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document
101.PRE+ XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document
__________________________
+ Submitted electronically with this Annual Report
129
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
March 1, 2013
REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION
By:
/s/ Martin E. Stein, Jr.
Martin E. Stein. Jr., Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
March 1, 2013
REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.
By:
Regency Centers Corporation, General Partner
By:
/s/ Martin E. Stein, Jr.
Martin E. Stein. Jr., Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
130
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
March 1, 2013
/s/ Martin E. Stein, Jr.
Martin E. Stein. Jr., Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
March 1, 2013
/s/ Brian M. Smith
Brian M. Smith, President, Chief Operating Officer and Director
March 1, 2013
/s/ Lisa Palmer
Lisa Palmer, Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer), and Director
March 1, 2013
/s/ J. Christian Leavitt
J. Christian Leavitt, Senior Vice President and Treasurer (Principal Accounting Officer)
March 1, 2013
/s/ Raymond L. Bank
Raymond L. Bank, Director
March 1, 2013
/s/ C. Ronald Blankenship
C. Ronald Blankenship, Director
March 1, 2013
/s/ A.R. Carpenter
A.R. Carpenter, Director
March 1, 2013
/s/ J. Dix Druce
J. Dix Druce, Director
March 1, 2013
/s/ Mary Lou Fiala
Mary Lou Fiala, Director
March 1, 2013
/s/ David P. O'Connor
David P. O'Connor, Director
March 1, 2013
/s/ Douglas S. Luke
Douglas S. Luke, Director
March 1, 2013
/s/ John C. Schweitzer
John C. Schweitzer, Director
March 1, 2013
/s/ Thomas G. Wattles
Thomas G. Wattles, Director
131