Form 10-Q
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, DC 20549
FORM 10-Q
|
|
|
þ |
|
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15 (d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the quarterly period ended September 30, 2010
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
1-10524 (UDR, Inc.)
333-156002-01 (United Dominion Realty, L.P.)
UDR, Inc.
United Dominion Realty, L.P.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Maryland (UDR, Inc.)
|
|
54-0857512 |
Delaware (United Dominion Realty, L.P.)
|
|
54-1776887 |
(State or other jurisdiction of
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer |
incorporation of organization)
|
|
Identification No.) |
1745 Shea Center Drive, Suite 200, Highlands Ranch, Colorado 80129
(Address of principal executive offices) (zip code)
(720) 283-6120
(Registrants telephone number, including area code)
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UDR, Inc.
|
|
Yes þ
|
|
No o |
|
|
United Dominion Realty, L.P.
|
|
Yes o
|
|
No þ |
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on
its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and
posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such
shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UDR, Inc.
|
|
Yes þ
|
|
No o |
|
|
United Dominion Realty, L.P.
|
|
Yes o
|
|
No 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):
UDR, Inc.:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Large accelerated filer þ
|
|
Accelerated filer o
|
|
Non-accelerated filer o
|
|
Smaller reporting company o |
|
|
|
|
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company) |
|
|
United Dominion Realty, L.P.:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Large accelerated filer o
|
|
Accelerated filer o
|
|
Non-accelerated filer þ
|
|
Smaller reporting company o |
|
|
|
|
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company) |
|
|
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule
12b-2 of the Exchange Act).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UDR, Inc.
|
|
Yes o
|
|
No þ |
|
|
United Dominion Realty, L.P.
|
|
Yes o
|
|
No þ |
The
number of shares of UDR, Inc.s common stock, $0.01 par value,
outstanding as of November 8, 2010, was 182,137,034.
UDR, INC.
UNITED DOMINION REALTY, L.P.
INDEX
EXPLANATORY NOTE
This combined Form 10-Q includes information with respect to both UDR, Inc. (UDR or the
Company), a Maryland corporation, and United Dominion Realty, L.P., (the Operating
Partnership), a Delaware limited partnership, of which UDR is the sole general partner. As of
September 30, 2010, UDR owned 110,883 units of the general partnership interests of the
Operating Partnership and 174,369,059 units (or approximately 96.9%) of the limited partnership
interests of the Operating Partnership (the OP Units). UDR conducts a substantial amount of its
business and holds a substantial amount of its assets through the Operating Partnership, and, by
virtue of its ownership of the OP Units and being the Operating Partnerships sole general partner,
UDR has the ability to control all of the day-to-day operations of the Operating Partnership.
Separate financial statements and accompanying notes, as well as separate discussions under
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, are
provided for each of UDR and the Operating Partnership. This combined Form 10-Q is being filed
separately by UDR and the Operating Partnership.
PART I FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
UDR, Inc.
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(unaudited) |
|
|
(audited) |
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate owned: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate held for investment |
|
$ |
6,758,458 |
|
|
$ |
5,975,239 |
|
Less: accumulated depreciation |
|
|
(1,560,239 |
) |
|
|
(1,346,689 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate held for investment, net |
|
|
5,198,219 |
|
|
|
4,628,550 |
|
Real estate under development
(net of accumulated depreciation of $628 and $1,226) |
|
|
94,249 |
|
|
|
318,531 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate held for disposition
(net of accumulated depreciation of $0 and $3,378) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,673 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total real estate owned, net of accumulated depreciation |
|
|
5,292,468 |
|
|
|
4,963,754 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
10,107 |
|
|
|
5,985 |
|
Marketable securities |
|
|
41,873 |
|
|
|
37,650 |
|
Restricted cash |
|
|
14,879 |
|
|
|
8,879 |
|
Deferred financing costs, net |
|
|
26,225 |
|
|
|
26,601 |
|
Notes receivable |
|
|
7,800 |
|
|
|
7,800 |
|
Investment in unconsolidated joint ventures |
|
|
16,391 |
|
|
|
14,126 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
67,615 |
|
|
|
67,822 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
5,477,358 |
|
|
$ |
5,132,617 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Secured debt |
|
$ |
2,045,810 |
|
|
$ |
1,989,434 |
|
Unsecured debt |
|
|
1,433,860 |
|
|
|
1,437,155 |
|
Real estate taxes payable |
|
|
28,871 |
|
|
|
16,976 |
|
Accrued interest payable |
|
|
19,939 |
|
|
|
19,146 |
|
Security deposits and prepaid rent |
|
|
27,037 |
|
|
|
31,798 |
|
Distributions payable |
|
|
36,582 |
|
|
|
30,857 |
|
Deferred gains on the sale of depreciable property |
|
|
28,824 |
|
|
|
28,826 |
|
Accounts payable, accrued expenses, and other liabilities |
|
|
63,766 |
|
|
|
80,685 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
3,684,689 |
|
|
|
3,634,877 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Redeemable non-controlling interests in operating partnership |
|
|
117,012 |
|
|
|
98,758 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, no par value; 50,000,000 shares authorized |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,803,812 shares of 8.00% Series E Cumulative Convertible issued
and outstanding (2,803,812 shares at December 31, 2009) |
|
|
46,571 |
|
|
|
46,571 |
|
3,405,562 shares of 6.75% Series G Cumulative Redeemable issued
and outstanding (3,432,962 shares at December 31, 2009) |
|
|
85,139 |
|
|
|
85,824 |
|
Common stock, $0.01 par value; 250,000,000 shares authorized |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
182,128,994 shares issued and outstanding (155,465,482 shares at December 31, 2009) |
|
|
1,821 |
|
|
|
1,555 |
|
Additional paid-in capital |
|
|
2,437,284 |
|
|
|
1,948,669 |
|
Distributions in excess of net income |
|
|
(895,069 |
) |
|
|
(687,180 |
) |
Accumulated other comprehensive (loss)/income, net |
|
|
(3,741 |
) |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total UDR, Inc. stockholders equity |
|
|
1,672,005 |
|
|
|
1,395,441 |
|
Non-controlling interest |
|
|
3,652 |
|
|
|
3,541 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total equity |
|
|
1,675,657 |
|
|
|
1,398,982 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and stockholders equity |
|
$ |
5,477,358 |
|
|
$ |
5,132,617 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements
3
UDR, Inc.
Consolidated Statements of Operations
(In thousands, except per share data)
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
REVENUES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rental income |
|
$ |
159,795 |
|
|
$ |
149,756 |
|
|
$ |
464,256 |
|
|
$ |
451,102 |
|
Non-property income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income |
|
|
2,195 |
|
|
|
1,627 |
|
|
|
7,571 |
|
|
|
10,609 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Revenues |
|
|
161,990 |
|
|
|
151,383 |
|
|
|
471,827 |
|
|
|
461,711 |
|
EXPENSES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rental expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate taxes and insurance |
|
|
19,280 |
|
|
|
18,838 |
|
|
|
57,861 |
|
|
|
57,559 |
|
Personnel |
|
|
14,787 |
|
|
|
12,975 |
|
|
|
42,267 |
|
|
|
38,264 |
|
Utilities |
|
|
9,097 |
|
|
|
8,183 |
|
|
|
25,723 |
|
|
|
23,868 |
|
Repair and maintenance |
|
|
9,737 |
|
|
|
8,295 |
|
|
|
26,109 |
|
|
|
23,346 |
|
Administrative and marketing |
|
|
4,165 |
|
|
|
3,617 |
|
|
|
11,973 |
|
|
|
10,491 |
|
Property management |
|
|
4,394 |
|
|
|
4,119 |
|
|
|
12,767 |
|
|
|
12,406 |
|
Other operating expenses |
|
|
1,396 |
|
|
|
1,437 |
|
|
|
4,338 |
|
|
|
5,110 |
|
Real estate depreciation and amortization |
|
|
75,569 |
|
|
|
69,561 |
|
|
|
221,229 |
|
|
|
207,341 |
|
Interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expense incurred |
|
|
37,307 |
|
|
|
33,909 |
|
|
|
109,193 |
|
|
|
105,794 |
|
Net loss/(gain) on debt extinguishment |
|
|
91 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,121 |
|
|
|
(9,849 |
) |
Amortization of convertible debt discount |
|
|
859 |
|
|
|
967 |
|
|
|
2,754 |
|
|
|
3,316 |
|
Expenses related to tender offer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,764 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,764 |
|
Storm related (income)/expenses |
|
|
(52 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
669 |
|
|
|
127 |
|
General and administrative |
|
|
12,046 |
|
|
|
8,673 |
|
|
|
31,258 |
|
|
|
27,189 |
|
Other depreciation and amortization |
|
|
1,224 |
|
|
|
858 |
|
|
|
3,755 |
|
|
|
3,730 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Expenses |
|
|
189,900 |
|
|
|
175,196 |
|
|
|
551,017 |
|
|
|
512,456 |
|
Loss from operations |
|
|
(27,910 |
) |
|
|
(23,813 |
) |
|
|
(79,190 |
) |
|
|
(50,745 |
) |
Loss from unconsolidated entities |
|
|
(835 |
) |
|
|
(16,742 |
) |
|
|
(2,757 |
) |
|
|
(18,187 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations |
|
|
(28,745 |
) |
|
|
(40,555 |
) |
|
|
(81,947 |
) |
|
|
(68,932 |
) |
Income from discontinued operations |
|
|
4,140 |
|
|
|
800 |
|
|
|
4,676 |
|
|
|
3,094 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated net loss |
|
|
(24,605 |
) |
|
|
(39,755 |
) |
|
|
(77,271 |
) |
|
|
(65,838 |
) |
Net loss attributable to non-controlling interests |
|
|
839 |
|
|
|
1,779 |
|
|
|
2,828 |
|
|
|
3,175 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss attributable to UDR, Inc. |
|
|
(23,766 |
) |
|
|
(37,976 |
) |
|
|
(74,443 |
) |
|
|
(62,663 |
) |
Distributions to preferred stockholders Series E (Convertible) |
|
|
(932 |
) |
|
|
(931 |
) |
|
|
(2,794 |
) |
|
|
(2,793 |
) |
Distributions to preferred stockholders Series G |
|
|
(1,436 |
) |
|
|
(1,869 |
) |
|
|
(4,325 |
) |
|
|
(5,607 |
) |
Discount on preferred stock repurchases, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss attributable to common stockholders |
|
$ |
(26,134 |
) |
|
$ |
(40,776 |
) |
|
$ |
(81,537 |
) |
|
$ |
(71,063 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings per weighted average common share basic: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders |
|
$ |
(0.18 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.28 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.54 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.50 |
) |
Income from discontinued operations |
|
$ |
0.02 |
|
|
$ |
0.01 |
|
|
$ |
0.03 |
|
|
$ |
0.02 |
|
Net loss attributable to common stockholders |
|
$ |
(0.16 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.27 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.51 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.48 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings per weighted average common share diluted: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations attributable to common stockholders |
|
$ |
(0.18 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.28 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.54 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.50 |
) |
Income from discontinued operations |
|
$ |
0.02 |
|
|
$ |
0.01 |
|
|
$ |
0.03 |
|
|
$ |
0.02 |
|
Net loss attributable to common stockholders |
|
$ |
(0.16 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.27 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.51 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.48 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common distributions declared per share |
|
$ |
0.185 |
|
|
$ |
0.180 |
|
|
$ |
0.545 |
|
|
$ |
0.665 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding basic |
|
|
165,403 |
|
|
|
150,000 |
|
|
|
160,841 |
|
|
|
147,883 |
|
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding diluted |
|
|
165,403 |
|
|
|
150,000 |
|
|
|
160,841 |
|
|
|
147,883 |
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements
4
UDR, Inc.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(In thousands, except for share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(unaudited) |
|
|
(unaudited) |
|
Operating Activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated net loss |
|
$ |
(77,271 |
) |
|
$ |
(65,838 |
) |
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash provided by operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
225,246 |
|
|
|
211,477 |
|
Net gain on the sale of depreciable property |
|
|
(4,034 |
) |
|
|
(2,486 |
) |
Loss/(gain) on debt extinguishment |
|
|
1,121 |
|
|
|
(9,849 |
) |
Write off of bad debt |
|
|
2,036 |
|
|
|
2,635 |
|
Write off of note receivable and other assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,089 |
|
Loss from unconsolidated entities |
|
|
2,757 |
|
|
|
18,187 |
|
Amortization of deferred financing costs and other |
|
|
5,861 |
|
|
|
5,499 |
|
Amortization of deferred compensation |
|
|
9,079 |
|
|
|
5,862 |
|
Amortization of convertible debt discount |
|
|
2,754 |
|
|
|
3,316 |
|
Changes in income tax accrual |
|
|
(2,702 |
) |
|
|
1,846 |
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Increase)/decrease in operating assets |
|
|
(10,364 |
) |
|
|
7,489 |
|
Increase in operating liabilities |
|
|
3,006 |
|
|
|
10,423 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities |
|
|
157,489 |
|
|
|
189,650 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investing Activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from sales of real estate investments, net |
|
|
20,688 |
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from note receivable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
200,000 |
|
Payments related to the buyout of joint venture partner |
|
|
(16,141 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Acquisition of real estate assets (net of liabilities assumed) and initial capital expenditures |
|
|
(342,697 |
) |
|
|
(28,528 |
) |
Development of real estate assets |
|
|
(79,718 |
) |
|
|
(142,195 |
) |
Capital expenditures and other major improvements real estate assets,
net of escrow reimbursement |
|
|
(52,681 |
) |
|
|
(63,881 |
) |
Capital expenditures non-real estate assets |
|
|
(3,332 |
) |
|
|
(6,290 |
) |
Investment in unconsolidated joint ventures |
|
|
(5,697 |
) |
|
|
(23,871 |
) |
Distributions received from unconsolidated joint venture |
|
|
730 |
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase of marketable securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(30,942 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities |
|
|
(478,848 |
) |
|
|
(95,707 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financing Activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments on secured debt |
|
|
(99,745 |
) |
|
|
(34,205 |
) |
Proceeds from the issuance of secured debt |
|
|
62,833 |
|
|
|
434,860 |
|
Proceeds from the issuance of unsecured debt |
|
|
149,190 |
|
|
|
|
|
Payments on unsecured debt |
|
|
(79,488 |
) |
|
|
(401,958 |
) |
Net (repayment)/proceeds of revolving bank debt |
|
|
(76,700 |
) |
|
|
25,000 |
|
Payment of financing costs |
|
|
(5,040 |
) |
|
|
(5,267 |
) |
Issuance of common and restricted stock, net |
|
|
4,680 |
|
|
|
(969 |
) |
Proceeds from the issuance of common shares through public offering, net |
|
|
467,783 |
|
|
|
32,953 |
|
Payments on the repurchase of Series G preferred stock, net |
|
|
(637 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Distributions paid to non-controlling interests |
|
|
(3,069 |
) |
|
|
(5,925 |
) |
Distributions paid to preferred stockholders |
|
|
(7,119 |
) |
|
|
(8,400 |
) |
Distributions paid to common stockholders |
|
|
(87,207 |
) |
|
|
(117,020 |
) |
Repurchase of common stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(798 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by/(used in) financing activities |
|
|
325,481 |
|
|
|
(81,729 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase in cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
4,122 |
|
|
|
12,214 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period |
|
|
5,985 |
|
|
|
12,740 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period |
|
$ |
10,107 |
|
|
$ |
24,954 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental Information: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest paid during the year, net of amounts capitalized |
|
$ |
120,424 |
|
|
$ |
122,577 |
|
Non-cash transactions: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conversion of operating partnership non-controlling interests to common stock
(445,560 in 2010 and 1,839,216 shares in 2009) |
|
|
8,320 |
|
|
|
17,423 |
|
Secured debt assumed with the acquisition of properties, net of fair value adjustment |
|
|
93,262 |
|
|
|
|
|
Retirement of fully depreciated assets |
|
|
8,680 |
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of restricted stock awards |
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Payment of Special Dividend through the issuance of 11,358,042 shares of common stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
132,787 |
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements
5
UDR, Inc.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOME/(LOSS)
(In thousands, except per share data)
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributions in |
|
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred Stock |
|
|
Common Stock |
|
|
Paid-in |
|
|
Excess of |
|
|
Comprehensive |
|
|
Non-controlling |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Capital |
|
|
Net Income |
|
|
Income/(Loss) |
|
|
interest |
|
|
Total |
|
Balance, December 31, 2009 |
|
|
6,236,774 |
|
|
$ |
132,395 |
|
|
|
155,465,482 |
|
|
$ |
1,555 |
|
|
$ |
1,948,669 |
|
|
$ |
(687,180 |
) |
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
3,541 |
|
|
$ |
1,398,982 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income (loss) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(74,443 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(74,443 |
) |
Change in equity attributable to non-controlling interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
111 |
|
|
|
111 |
|
Other comprehensive income (loss) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in fair value of marketable securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,151 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,151 |
|
Unrealized loss on derivative financial instruments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6,030 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6,030 |
) |
Allocation to redeemable non-controlling interests |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
136 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
136 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income (loss) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(74,443 |
) |
|
|
(3,743 |
) |
|
|
111 |
|
|
|
(78,075 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of common and restricted shares |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,673,585 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
12,738 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,755 |
|
Issuance of common shares through public offering |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24,544,367 |
|
|
|
245 |
|
|
|
467,538 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
467,783 |
|
Repurchase of 27,400 shares of 6.75% Series G Cumulative
Redeemable Shares |
|
|
(27,400 |
) |
|
|
(685 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(637 |
) |
Adjustment for conversion of non-controlling interests
of unitholders in operating partnerships |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
445,560 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
8,316 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,320 |
|
Common stock distributions declared ($0.545 per share) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(92,331 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(92,331 |
) |
Preferred stock distributions declared-Series E ($0.9966 per share) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,794 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,794 |
) |
Preferred stock distributions declared-Series G ($1.265625 per share) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,325 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,325 |
) |
Adjustment to reflect redeemable non-controlling redemption value |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(34,021 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(34,021 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, September 30, 2010 |
|
|
6,209,374 |
|
|
$ |
131,710 |
|
|
|
182,128,994 |
|
|
$ |
1,821 |
|
|
$ |
2,437,284 |
|
|
$ |
(895,069 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,741 |
) |
|
$ |
3,652 |
|
|
$ |
1,675,657 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements
6
UDR, Inc.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
September 30, 2010
(UNAUDITED)
1. CONSOLIDATION AND BASIS OF PRESENTATION
Consolidation and Basis of Presentation
UDR, Inc., collectively with our consolidated subsidiaries (we, our, us, the Company
or UDR) is a self-administered real estate investment trust, or REIT, that owns, acquires,
renovates, develops, and manages apartment communities. The accompanying consolidated financial
statements include the accounts of UDR and its subsidiaries, including United Dominion Realty, L.P.
(the Operating Partnership), and Heritage Communities L.P. (the Heritage OP). As of September
30, 2010, there were 179,909,408 units in the Operating Partnership outstanding, of which
174,369,059 units or 96.9% were owned by UDR and 5,540,349 units or 3.1% were owned by limited
partners. The consolidated financial statements of UDR include the non-controlling interests of the
unitholders in the Operating Partnership. The consolidated financial statements of UDR include the
non-controlling interests of the unitholders in the Heritage OP prior to UDRs ownership of 100% of
the units outstanding in Heritage OP as of December 31, 2009.
The accompanying interim unaudited consolidated financial statements have been prepared
according to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission. Certain
information and footnote disclosures normally included in financial statements prepared in
accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States have been condensed
or omitted according to such rules and regulations, although management believes that the
disclosures are adequate to make the information presented not misleading. In the opinion of
management, all adjustments and eliminations necessary for the fair presentation of our financial
position as of September 30, 2010, and results of operations for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2010 and 2009 have been included. Such adjustments are normal and recurring in
nature. The interim results presented are not necessarily indicative of results that can be
expected for a full year. The accompanying interim unaudited consolidated financial statements
should be read in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements and related notes
appearing in UDRs Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009, filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on February 25, 2010.
The accompanying interim unaudited consolidated financial statements are presented in
accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). GAAP requires management to
make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the
disclosure of contingent liabilities at the dates of the interim unaudited consolidated financial
statements and the amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting periods. Actual amounts
realized or paid could differ from those estimates. All significant intercompany accounts and
transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. Certain previously reported amounts have been
reclassified to conform to the current financial statement presentation.
The Company evaluated subsequent events through the date its financial statements were issued.
No recognized or non-recognized subsequent events were noted except as noted in Note 15.
2. SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Accounting Policies
Real Estate Sales
For sales transactions meeting the requirements for full accrual profit recognition, such as
the Company no longer having continuing involvement in the property, we remove the related assets
and liabilities from our consolidated balance sheet and record the gain or loss in the period the
transaction closes. For sale transactions that
do not meet the full accrual sale criteria due to our continuing involvement, we evaluate the
nature of the continuing involvement and account for the transaction under an alternate method of
accounting.
7
Sales of real estate to entities in which we retain or otherwise own an interest are accounted
for as partial sales. If all other requirements for recognizing profit under the full accrual
method have been satisfied and no other forms of continuing involvement are present, we recognize
profit proportionate to the interest of the buyer in the real estate and defer the gain on the
interest we retain in the real estate. The Company will recognize any deferred gain when the
property is then sold to a third party. In transactions accounted by us as partial sales, we
determine if the buyer of the majority equity interest in the venture was provided a preference as
to cash flows in either an operating or a capital waterfall. If a cash flow preference has been
provided, we recognize profit only to the extent that proceeds from the sale of the majority equity
interest exceed costs related to the entire property.
Redeemable non-controlling interests in operating partnerships
Interests in operating partnerships held by limited partners are represented by operating
partnership units (OP Units). The income is allocated to holders of OP Units based upon net
income available to common stockholders and the weighted average number of OP Units outstanding to
total common shares plus OP Units outstanding during the period. Capital contributions,
distributions, and profits and losses are allocated to non-controlling interests in accordance with
the terms of the individual partnership agreements.
Limited partners have the right to require the Operating Partnership to redeem all or a
portion of the OP Units held by the limited partner at a redemption price equal to and in the form
of the Cash Amount (as defined in the limited partnership agreement of the Operating Partnership
(the Partnership Agreement)), provided that such OP Units have been outstanding for at least one
year. UDR, as the general partner of the Operating Partnership may, in its sole discretion,
purchase the OP Units by paying to the limited partner either the Cash Amount or the REIT Share
Amount (generally one share of common stock of the Company for each OP Unit), as defined in the
Partnership Agreement. Accordingly, the Company records the OP Units outside of permanent equity
and reports the OP Units at their redemption value at each balance sheet date.
Marketable Securities
Marketable securities represent common stock restricted for trading and debt securities in
publicly held companies. These securities are classified as available for sale and carried at
fair value, with unrealized gains and losses reported as a separate component of stockholders
equity. Declines in the value of public and private investments that management determines are
other than temporary are recorded as a provision for loss on investments. The amortization of any
discount and interest income are recorded in Other Income on the Consolidated Statements of
Operations.
Investment in Unconsolidated Joint Ventures
We continually evaluate our investments in unconsolidated joint ventures when events or
changes in circumstances indicate that there may be an other-than-temporary decline in value. We
consider various factors to determine if a decrease in the value of the investment is
other-than-temporary. These factors include, but are not limited to, age of the venture, our intent
and ability to retain our investment in the entity, the financial condition and long-term prospects
of the entity, and the relationships with the other joint venture partners and its lenders. The
amount of loss recognized is the excess of the investments carrying amount over its estimated fair
value. If we believe that the decline in fair value is temporary, no impairment is recorded. The
aforementioned factors are taken as a whole by management in determining the valuation of our
investment in unconsolidated entities. Should the actual results differ from managements judgment,
the valuation could be negatively affected and may result in a negative impact to our Consolidated
Financial Statements.
8
Income Taxes
Due to the structure of the Company as a REIT and the nature of the operations for the
operating properties, no provision for federal income taxes has been provided for at UDR.
Historically, the Company has generally incurred
only state and local income, excise and franchise taxes. UDR has elected for certain
consolidated subsidiaries to be treated as Taxable REIT Subsidiaries (TRS), primarily those
engaged in development activities.
Income taxes for our TRS are accounted for under the asset and liability method. Deferred tax
assets and liabilities are recognized for future tax consequences attributable to differences
between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their
respective tax basis. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are measured using enacted tax rates
expected to apply to taxable income in the years in which those temporary differences are expected
to be recovered or settled. The effect on deferred tax assets and liabilities from a change in tax
rate is recognized in earnings in the period of the enactment date. The Companys deferred tax
assets are generally the result of differing depreciable lives on capitalized assets and timing of
expense recognition for certain accrued liabilities. UDR recorded income tax benefit of $2.7
million and $2.6 million from the write-off of income tax payable for the three and nine months
ended September 30, 2010, respectively, which are classified on the Consolidated Statements of
Operations in the line item entitled General and Administrative.
Effective January 1, 2007, the Company adopted guidance which defines a recognition threshold
and measurement attribute for the financial statement recognition and measurement of a tax position
taken or expected to be taken in a tax return. It also provides guidance on derecognition,
classification, interest and penalties, accounting for interim periods, disclosure and transition.
The Company recognizes its tax positions and evaluates them using a two-step process. First,
we determine whether a tax position is more likely than not (greater than 50 percent probability)
to be sustained upon examination, including resolution of any related appeals or litigation
processes, based on the technical merits of the position. Then the Company will determine the
amount of benefit to recognize and record the amount that is more likely than not to be realized
upon ultimate settlement.
UDR had no unrecognized tax benefit, accrued interest or penalties at September 30, 2010. UDR
and its subsidiaries are subject to U.S. federal income tax as well as income tax of multiple state
jurisdictions. The tax years 2005 2009 remain open to examination by the major taxing
jurisdictions to which we are subject. When applicable, UDR recognizes interest and/or penalties
related to uncertain tax positions in income tax expense.
9
3. REAL ESTATE OWNED
Real estate assets owned by the Company consist of income producing operating properties,
properties under development and land held for future development. As of September 30, 2010 the
Company owned and consolidated 172 communities in 10 states plus the District of Columbia totaling
48,409 apartment homes. The following table summarizes the carrying amounts for our real estate
owned (at cost) as of September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009 (dollar amounts in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, 2010 |
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land |
|
$ |
1,885,656 |
|
|
$ |
1,622,838 |
|
Depreciable property held and used: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Building and improvements |
|
|
4,582,697 |
|
|
|
4,104,165 |
|
Furniture, fixtures and equipment |
|
|
290,105 |
|
|
|
248,236 |
|
Under development: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land |
|
|
27,052 |
|
|
|
65,525 |
|
Construction in progress |
|
|
67,825 |
|
|
|
254,232 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Held for disposition: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land |
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,563 |
|
Building and improvements |
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,089 |
|
Furniture, fixtures and equipment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
399 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate owned |
|
$ |
6,853,335 |
|
|
$ |
6,315,047 |
|
Accumulated depreciation |
|
|
(1,560,867 |
) |
|
|
(1,351,293 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate owned, net |
|
$ |
5,292,468 |
|
|
$ |
4,963,754 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table summarizes UDRs real estate community acquisitions for the three and nine
months ended September 30, 2010 (dollar amounts in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase |
|
Property Name |
|
Market |
|
Acquisition Date |
|
Units |
|
|
Price (a) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1818 Platinum Triangle |
|
Orange County, CA |
|
August 2010 |
|
|
265 |
|
|
$ |
70,500 |
|
Domain Brewers Hill |
|
Baltimore, MD |
|
August 2010 |
|
|
180 |
|
|
|
46,000 |
|
Garrison Square |
|
Boston, MA |
|
September 2010 |
|
|
160 |
|
|
|
98,000 |
|
Marina Pointe |
|
Los Angeles, CA |
|
September 2010 |
|
|
583 |
|
|
|
157,500 |
|
Ridge at Blue Hills |
|
Boston, MA |
|
September 2010 |
|
|
186 |
|
|
|
40,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,374 |
|
|
$ |
412,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
The purchase price is the contractual amount paid by UDR to the third party and does not
include any costs that the Company incurred in the pursuit of the property. |
The
$412 million purchase price was allocated $153.6 million to
land; $253.5 million to building and improvements;
$2.5 million to furniture, fixtures, and equipment; and
$2.4 million to intangible assets based on preliminary estimates
and are subject to change as we obtain more complete information
during the measurement period.
During the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010, the Company also acquired land
located in San Francisco, CA with a purchase price of $23.6 million.
The Company incurred $2.7 million of acquisition related costs during the three and nine
months ended September 30, 2010, and $13,000 and $274,000 during the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2009, respectively. These expenses are classified on the Consolidated Statements of
Operations in the line item entitled General and administrative.
The Company did not have any acquisitions for the three and nine months ended September 30,
2009.
10
4. DISCONTINUED OPERATIONS
Discontinued operations represent properties that UDR has either sold or which management
believes meet the criteria to be classified as held for sale. In order to be classified as held for
sale and reported as discontinued operations, a propertys operations and cash flows have been or
will be divested to a third party by the Company whereby UDR will not have any significant
continuing involvement in the ownership or operation of the property after the sale or disposition.
The results of operations of the property are presented as discontinued operations for all periods
presented and do not impact the net earnings reported by the Company. Once a property is deemed as
held for sale, depreciation is no longer recorded. However, if the Company determines that the
property no longer meets the criteria of held for sale, the Company will recapture any unrecorded
depreciation for the property. The assets and liabilities of properties deemed as held for sale are
presented separately on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Properties deemed as held for sale are
reported at the lower of their carrying amount or their estimated fair value less the costs to sell
the assets.
UDR sold one 149 unit community during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010. UDR
recognized gains for financial reporting purposes of $3.9 million on this sale, which is included
in discontinued operations. UDR did not dispose of any communities in the three and nine months
ended September 30, 2009. The results of operations for the following properties are classified on
the Consolidated Statements of Operations in the line item entitled Income from discontinued
operations.
The following is a summary of income from discontinued operations for the three and nine
months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009 (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
Rental income |
|
$ |
530 |
|
|
$ |
555 |
|
|
$ |
1,619 |
|
|
$ |
1,667 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rental expenses |
|
|
231 |
|
|
|
207 |
|
|
|
637 |
|
|
|
607 |
|
Property management fee |
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
Real estate depreciation |
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
134 |
|
|
|
295 |
|
|
|
406 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
268 |
|
|
|
356 |
|
|
|
977 |
|
|
|
1,059 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before net gain on the sale of depreciable property |
|
|
262 |
|
|
|
199 |
|
|
|
642 |
|
|
|
608 |
|
Net gain on the sale of depreciable property, excluding RE3 |
|
|
3,878 |
|
|
|
555 |
|
|
|
3,999 |
|
|
|
2,440 |
|
RE3 gain on the sale of depreciable property, net of tax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from discontinued operations |
|
$ |
4,140 |
|
|
$ |
800 |
|
|
$ |
4,676 |
|
|
$ |
3,094 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5. JOINT VENTURES
UDR has entered into joint ventures with unrelated third parties that are either consolidated
and included in real estate owned on our Consolidated Balance Sheets or are accounted for under the
equity method of accounting, which are not consolidated and are included in investment in
unconsolidated joint ventures on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. The Company consolidates an
entity in which we own less than 100% when we have the power to direct the activities of the entity
that most significantly affect the entitys economic performance. In addition, the Company
consolidates any joint venture in which we are the general partner or managing member and the third
party partner or member does not have the ability to substantively participate in the
decision-making process nor the ability to remove us as general partner or managing member, without
cause.
UDRs joint ventures are funded with a combination of debt and equity. Our losses are limited
to our investment and the Company does not guarantee any debt issued by our unconsolidated joint
ventures, capital payout or other obligations associated with our joint ventures. The Company
guarantees 100% of the debt owed by one of our consolidated joint ventures for which our equity
ownership percentage is 98%.
11
Consolidated Joint Ventures
UDR is a partner with an unaffiliated third party in a joint venture (989 Elements) which
owns and operates a 23-story, 166 home high-rise apartment community in the central business
district of Bellevue, Washington. On December 30, 2009, UDR entered into an agreement with our
partner to purchase its 49% interest in 989 Elements for $7.7 million. Concurrently, our partner
resigned as managing member and appointed UDR as managing member. In addition, our partner
relinquished its voting rights and approval rights and its ability to substantively participate in
the decision-making process of the joint venture resulting in the consolidation of the joint
venture. The joint venture assets and liabilities were recorded at fair value. The fair value of
the assets was $55.0 million ($54.8 million of real estate owned and $200,000 of current assets)
and the fair value of liabilities was $34.1 million ($33.4 million of a construction loan, net of
fair market value adjustment of $1.6 million and $700,000 of current liabilities) at the
consolidation date. On December 31, 2009, the Company repaid the outstanding balance of $35.0
million on the construction loan held by 989 Elements. In March 2010, the Company paid $7.7
million and acquired our partners 49% interest in the joint venture. At closing of the agreement
and at September 30, 2010, the Companys interest in 989 Elements was 98%.
UDR is a partner with an unaffiliated third party in a joint venture (Elements Too) which
owns and operates a 274 home apartment community in the central business district of Bellevue,
Washington. Construction began in the fourth quarter of 2006 and was completed in the first
quarter of 2010. On October 16, 2009, our partner resigned as managing member and appointed UDR as
managing member. In addition, our partner relinquished its voting rights and approval rights and
its ability to substantively participate in the decision-making process of the joint venture
resulting in the consolidation of the joint venture. The joint venture assets and liabilities were
recorded at fair value. Prior to consolidation, our equity investment in Elements Too was $24.4
million (net of an $11.0 million equity loss recorded as of December 31, 2009) at October 16, 2009.
The fair value of the assets was $100.3 million ($99.5 million of real estate owned and $814,000 of
current assets) and the fair value of liabilities was $75.6 million ($70.5 million of a
construction loan, $917,000 of a derivative instrument, and $4.2 million of current liabilities).
On December 30, 2009, UDR entered into an agreement with our partner to purchase its 49% interest
in Elements Too for $3.2 million. In March 2010, the Company paid the outstanding balance of $3.2
million and acquired our partners 49% interest in the joint venture. At closing of the agreement
and at September 30, 2010, the Companys interest in Elements Too was 98%. During the nine months
ended September 30, 2010, the Company repaid the outstanding balance of $70.5 million on the
construction loan held by Elements Too.
UDR is a partner with an unaffiliated third party in a joint venture (Bellevue) which owns
an operating retail site in Bellevue, Washington. The Company initially planned to develop a 430
home high rise apartment building with ground floor retail on an existing operating retail center.
However, during the year ended December 31, 2009, the joint venture decided to continue to operate
the retail property as opposed to developing a high rise apartment building on the site. On
December 30, 2009, UDR entered into an agreement with our partner to purchase its 49% interest in
Bellevue for $5.2 million. In addition, our partner resigned as managing member and appointed UDR
as managing member. Concurrent with its resignation, our partner relinquished its voting rights and
approval rights and its ability to substantively participate in the decision-making process of the
joint venture resulting in the consolidation of the joint venture at fair value. Prior to
consolidation, our equity investment in Bellevue was $5.0 million (net of a $5.0 million equity
loss recorded as of December 31, 2009). The fair value of the assets was $33.0 million ($32.8
million of real estate owned and $211,000 of current assets) and the fair value of liabilities was
$23.0 million ($22.3 million of a mortgage payable, $506,000 of a derivative instrument, and
$213,000 of current liabilities). In March 2010, the Company paid $5.2 million and acquired our
partners 49% interest in the joint venture. At closing of the agreement and at September 30, 2010,
the Companys interest in Bellevue was 98%. At September 30, 2010, the carrying value of the
mortgage payable guaranteed by the Company was $22.3 million.
Prior to their consolidation in 2009, we evaluated our investments in these joint ventures
when events or changes in circumstances indicate that there may be an other-than-temporary decline
in value. We considered various factors to determine if a decrease in value of each of these
investments is other-than-temporary. In 2009, we recognized a non-cash charge of $16.0 million
representing the other-than-temporary decline in fair values below the carrying values of two of
the Companys Bellevue, Washington joint ventures. The Company did not recognize any
other-than-temporary decrease in the value of its other investments in unconsolidated joint
ventures during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010.
12
The activities and accounts of these joint ventures are included in the Companys consolidated
financial position as of September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, consolidated results of
operations for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010, and consolidated cash flows for
the nine months ended September 30, 2010.
Unconsolidated Joint Ventures
The Company recognizes earnings or losses from our investments in unconsolidated joint
ventures consisting of our proportionate share of the net earnings or loss of the joint venture.
In addition, we may earn fees for providing management services to the unconsolidated joint
ventures. As of September 30, 2010, UDR had investments in the following unconsolidated joint
ventures which are accounted for under the equity method of accounting.
In August 2009, UDR and an unaffiliated third party formed a jointed venture for the
investment of up to $450.0 million in multifamily properties located in key, high barrier to entry
markets. The partners will contribute equity of $180.0 million of which the Companys maximum
equity will be 30% or $54.0 million when fully invested. During the quarter ended June 30, 2010,
the joint venture acquired its first property (151 homes) located in Metropolitan Washington D.C.
for $43.1 million. At closing and at September 30, 2010, the Company owned 30%. Our investment at
September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009 was $5.3 million and $242,000, respectively.
In November 2007, UDR and an unaffiliated third party formed a joint venture which owns and
operates 10 operating properties located in Texas (3,992 homes). UDR contributed cash and property
equal to 20% of the fair value of the properties. The unaffiliated member contributed cash equal
to 80% of the fair value of the properties comprising the joint venture, which was then used to
purchase the nine operating properties from UDR. Our initial investment was $20.4 million. Our
investment at September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009 was $11.1 million and $13.9 million,
respectively.
We evaluate our investments in unconsolidated joint ventures when events or changes in
circumstances indicate that there may be an other-than-temporary decline in value. We consider
various factors to determine if a decrease in the value of the investment is other-than-temporary.
During the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010, the Company did not recognize any
other-than-temporary decreases in the value of its investments in unconsolidated joint ventures.
Summary financial information relating to 100% of all the unconsolidated joint ventures
operations (not just our proportionate share), is presented below for the three and nine months
ended September 30, (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 (a) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the three months ended September 30,: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues |
|
$ |
11,015 |
|
|
$ |
11,417 |
|
Real estate depreciation and amortization |
|
|
5,753 |
|
|
|
5,474 |
|
Net loss |
|
|
(3,945 |
) |
|
|
(4,761 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the nine months ended September 30,: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues |
|
$ |
31,647 |
|
|
$ |
34,454 |
|
Real estate depreciation and amortization |
|
|
16,322 |
|
|
|
15,861 |
|
Net loss |
|
|
(12,610 |
) |
|
|
(11,188 |
) |
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Includes results of operations of joint ventures subsequently consolidated during the
fourth quarter of 2009. See Consolidated Joint Ventures above. |
13
The combined summary balance sheets relating to 100% of all the unconsolidated joint ventures
(not just our proportionate share) are presented below as of September 30, 2010 and December 31,
2009 (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Real estate, net |
|
$ |
350,073 |
|
|
$ |
320,786 |
|
Total assets |
|
|
360,758 |
|
|
|
332,694 |
|
Amount due to UDR |
|
|
839 |
|
|
|
779 |
|
Third party debt |
|
|
280,000 |
|
|
|
254,000 |
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
289,935 |
|
|
|
265,091 |
|
Equity |
|
|
70,823 |
|
|
|
67,603 |
|
As of September 30, 2010, the Company had deferred profit from the sale of properties of $28.8
million, which the Company will not recognize until the underlying property is sold to a third
party. The Company recognized $453,000 and $1.5 million and $466,000 and $1.5 million of management
fees for our involvement in the joint ventures for the three and nine months ended September 30,
2010 and 2009, respectively.
The Company may, in the future, make additional capital contributions to certain of our joint
ventures should additional capital contributions be necessary to fund acquisitions and operating
shortfalls.
6. SECURED DEBT
Our secured debt instruments generally feature either monthly interest and principal or
monthly interest-only payments with balloon payments due at maturity. For purposes of
classification of the following table, variable rate debt with a derivative financial instrument
designated as a cash flow hedge is deemed as fixed rate debt due to the Company having effectively
established a fixed interest rate for the underlying debt instrument. Secured debt on continuing
operations, which encumbers $3.2 billion or 47% of UDRs real estate owned based upon book value
($3.6 billion or 53% of UDRs real estate owned is unencumbered) consists of the following as of
September 30, 2010 (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30, 2010 |
|
|
|
Principal Outstanding |
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
Number of |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
Average |
|
|
Average |
|
|
Communities |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Interest Rate |
|
|
Years to Maturity |
|
|
Encumbered |
|
Fixed Rate Debt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage notes payable |
|
$ |
344,048 |
|
|
$ |
506,203 |
|
|
|
5.18 |
% |
|
|
2.7 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
Tax-exempt secured notes payable |
|
|
13,325 |
|
|
|
13,325 |
|
|
|
5.30 |
% |
|
|
20.4 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Fannie Mae credit facilities |
|
|
948,002 |
|
|
|
949,971 |
|
|
|
5.40 |
% |
|
|
6.3 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total fixed rate secured debt |
|
|
1,305,375 |
|
|
|
1,469,499 |
|
|
|
5.34 |
% |
|
|
5.5 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Variable Rate Debt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage notes payable |
|
|
385,284 |
|
|
|
243,810 |
|
|
|
2.34 |
% |
|
|
3.0 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
Tax-exempt secured note payable |
|
|
94,700 |
|
|
|
27,000 |
|
|
|
1.09 |
% |
|
|
19.5 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Fannie Mae credit facilities |
|
|
260,451 |
|
|
|
249,125 |
|
|
|
1.68 |
% |
|
|
5.4 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total variable rate secured debt |
|
|
740,435 |
|
|
|
519,935 |
|
|
|
1.95 |
% |
|
|
5.9 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total secured debt |
|
$ |
2,045,810 |
|
|
$ |
1,989,434 |
|
|
|
4.11 |
% |
|
|
5.7 |
|
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14
UDR has five secured credit facilities with Fannie Mae with an aggregate commitment of $1.4
billion at September 30, 2010. The Fannie Mae credit facilities are for an initial term of 10
years, bear interest at floating and fixed rates, and certain variable rate facilities can be
extended for an additional five years at our option. We have $948.0 million of the funded balance
fixed at a weighted average interest rate of 5.4% and the remaining balance on these facilities is
currently at a weighted average variable rate of 1.7%.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, 2010 |
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
(dollar amounts in thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Borrowings outstanding |
|
$ |
1,208,453 |
|
|
$ |
1,199,096 |
|
Weighted average borrowings during the period ended |
|
|
1,206,806 |
|
|
|
1,033,658 |
|
Maximum daily borrowings during the period ended |
|
|
1,209,739 |
|
|
|
1,199,322 |
|
Weighted average interest rate during the period ended |
|
|
4.6 |
% |
|
|
4.6 |
% |
Weighted average interest rate at the end of the period |
|
|
4.6 |
% |
|
|
4.6 |
% |
The Company will from time to time acquire properties subject to fixed rate debt
instruments. In those situations, management will record the secured debt at its estimated fair
value and amortize any difference between the fair value and par to interest expense over the life
of the underlying debt instrument. The unamortized fair market adjustment was a net discount of
$779,000 and $987,000 at September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, respectively.
Fixed Rate Debt
Mortgage notes payable. Fixed rate mortgage notes payable are generally due in monthly
installments of principal and interest and mature at various dates from January 2011 through
February 2017 and carry interest rates ranging from 2.66% to 6.60%. Mortgage notes payable includes
debt associated with development activities.
Tax-exempt secured notes payable. Fixed rate mortgage notes payable that secure tax-exempt
housing bond issues mature in March 2031 and carry an interest rate of 5.30%. Interest on these
notes is payable in semi-annual installments.
Secured credit facilities. At September 30, 2010, the Company had $948.0 million outstanding
of fixed rate secured credit facilities with Fannie Mae with a weighted average fixed interest rate
of 5.40%.
Variable Rate Debt
Mortgage notes payable. Variable rate mortgage notes payable are generally due in monthly
installments of principal and interest and mature at various dates from January 2011 through April
2016. The mortgage notes payable are based on LIBOR plus basis points, which translate into
interest rates ranging from 0.98% to 5.25% at September 30, 2010.
Tax-exempt secured notes payable. The variable rate mortgage notes payable that secure
tax-exempt housing bond issues mature at various dates from August 2019 and March 2030. Interest on
these notes is payable in monthly installments. The variable mortgage notes have interest rates
ranging from 1.07% to 1.10% as of September 30, 2010.
Secured credit facilities. At September 30, 2010, the Company had $260.5 million outstanding
of variable rate secured credit facilities with Fannie Mae with a weighted average floating
interest rate of 1.68%.
15
The aggregate maturities, including amortizing principal payments, of our secured debt due
during each of the next five calendar years and thereafter are as follows (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed |
|
|
Variable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage |
|
|
Tax Exempt |
|
|
Credit |
|
|
Mortgage |
|
|
Tax Exempt |
|
|
Credit |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes |
|
|
Notes Payable |
|
|
Facilities |
|
|
Notes |
|
|
Notes Payable |
|
|
Facilities |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
$ |
909 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
684 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
1,593 |
|
2011 |
|
|
129,868 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52,808 |
|
|
|
110,524 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39,513 |
|
|
|
332,713 |
|
2012 |
|
|
57,390 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
177,944 |
|
|
|
58,621 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
59,529 |
|
|
|
353,484 |
|
2013 |
|
|
62,010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38,631 |
|
|
|
38,509 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
139,150 |
|
2014 |
|
|
381 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,328 |
|
|
|
101,102 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
104,811 |
|
Thereafter |
|
|
93,490 |
|
|
|
13,325 |
|
|
|
674,607 |
|
|
|
76,528 |
|
|
|
94,700 |
|
|
|
161,409 |
|
|
|
1,114,059 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
344,048 |
|
|
$ |
13,325 |
|
|
$ |
948,002 |
|
|
$ |
385,284 |
|
|
$ |
94,700 |
|
|
$ |
260,451 |
|
|
$ |
2,045,810 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7. UNSECURED DEBT
A summary of unsecured debt as of September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009 is as follows
(dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Commercial Banks |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Borrowings outstanding under an unsecured credit facility due July 2012 (a) |
|
$ |
112,600 |
|
|
$ |
189,300 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Unsecured Notes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.90% Medium-Term Notes due March 2010 (includes premium of $34) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
50,034 |
|
3.63% Convertible Senior Notes due September 2011 (net of discount of $1,497
and $3,351) (b), (d), (h) |
|
|
95,602 |
|
|
|
122,984 |
|
5.00% Medium-Term Notes due January 2012 |
|
|
100,000 |
|
|
|
100,000 |
|
3.02% Term Notes due December 2013 (c) |
|
|
100,000 |
|
|
|
100,000 |
|
6.05% Medium-Term Notes due June 2013 |
|
|
122,500 |
|
|
|
122,500 |
|
5.13% Medium-Term Notes due January 2014 (e) |
|
|
184,000 |
|
|
|
184,000 |
|
5.50% Medium-Term Notes due April 2014 (net of discount of $243 and $295) (e) |
|
|
128,257 |
|
|
|
128,205 |
|
5.25% Medium-Term Notes due January 2015 (includes net discount of $551 and
premium $177) (e),(f) |
|
|
324,624 |
|
|
|
175,352 |
|
5.25% Medium-Term Notes due January 2016 (e) |
|
|
83,260 |
|
|
|
83,260 |
|
8.50% Debentures due September 2024 |
|
|
15,644 |
|
|
|
15,644 |
|
4.00% Convertible Senior Notes due December 2035 (net of discount of $416
and $1,916) (g), (h) |
|
|
167,334 |
|
|
|
165,834 |
|
Other |
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,321,260 |
|
|
|
1,247,855 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,433,860 |
|
|
$ |
1,437,155 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
We have a $600 million unsecured revolving credit facility that matures in July 2012.
Under certain circumstances, we may increase the $600 million credit facility to $750 million.
Based on our current credit rating, the $600 million credit facility carries an interest rate
equal to LIBOR plus 47.5 basis points. In addition, the unsecured credit facility contains a
provision that allows us to bid up to 50% of the commitment and we can bid out the entire
unsecured credit facility once per quarter so long as we maintain an investment grade rating. |
16
|
|
|
(b) |
|
Subject to the restrictions on ownership of our common stock and certain other conditions, at
any time on or after July 15, 2011 and prior to the close of business on the second business
day prior to the maturity date of September 15, 2011, and also following the occurrence of
certain events, holders of outstanding 3.625% notes may convert their notes into cash and, if
applicable, shares of our common stock, at the conversion rate in effect at such time. Upon
conversion of the notes, UDR will deliver cash and common stock, if any, based on a daily
conversion value calculated on a proportionate basis for each trading day of the relevant 30
trading day observation period. The initial conversion rate for each $1,000 principal amount
of notes was 26.6326 shares of our common stock (equivalent to an initial conversion price of
approximately $37.55 per share), subject to adjustment under certain circumstances. The
Companys Special Dividend paid in January 2009 met the criteria to adjust the conversion rate
and resulted in an adjusted conversion rate of 29.0207 shares of our common stock for each
$1,000 of principal (equivalent to a conversion price of approximately $34.46 per share). If
UDR undergoes certain change in control transactions, holders of the 3.625% notes may require
us to repurchase their notes in whole or in part for cash equal to 100% of the principal
amount of the notes to be repurchased plus any unpaid interest accrued to the repurchase date.
In connection with the issuance of the 3.625% notes, UDR entered into a capped call
transaction covering approximately 6.7 million shares of our common stock, subject to
anti-dilution adjustments similar to those contained in the notes. The capped call expires on
the maturity date
of the 3.625% notes. The capped call transaction combines a purchased call option with a strike
price of $37.548 with a written call option with a strike price of $43.806. The capped call
transaction effectively increased the initial conversion price to $43.806 per share,
representing a 40% conversion premium. The net cost of approximately $12.6 million of the capped
call transaction was included in stockholders equity. |
|
(c) |
|
The Company had an interest rate swap agreement related to these notes, which expired during
the three months ended March 31, 2010. The notes carried a variable interest rate of 3.02% at
September 30, 2010 and a fixed interest rate of 6.26% at December 31, 2009. |
|
(d) |
|
During the nine months ended September 30, 2010, the Company repurchased some of its 3.625%
convertible Senior Notes in open market purchases. As a result of these transactions, we
retired debt with a notional value of $29.2 million for $29.4 million of cash. Consistent with
our accounting policy, the Company expensed $206,000 of unamortized financing costs and
$599,000 of unamortized discount on convertible debt as a result of these debt retirements for
the nine months ended September 30, 2010. The loss of $1.0 million is included within a
separate component of interest expense on our Consolidated Statements of Operations for the
nine months ended September 30, 2010. |
|
(e) |
|
During the nine months ended September 30, 2009, the Company repurchased several different
tranches of its unsecured debt in open market purchases. As a result of these transactions, we
retired debt with a notional value of $238.9 million for $222.3 million of cash. Consistent
with our accounting policy, the Company expensed $3.4 million of unamortized discount on
convertible debt as a result of these debt retirements for the nine months ended September 30,
2009. The gains of $9.8 million are presented as a separate component of interest expense on
our Consolidated Statements of Operations for the three and nine months ended September 30,
2009. |
|
(f) |
|
On December 7, 2009, the Company entered into an Amended and Restated Distribution Agreement
with respect to the issue and sale by the Company from time to time of its Medium-Term Notes,
Series A Due Nine Months or More From Date of Issue. During the three months ended March 31,
2010, the Company issued $150 million of 5.25% senior unsecured medium-term notes under the
Amended and Restated Distribution Agreement. These notes were priced at 99.46% of the
principal amount at issuance and had a discount of $701,000 at September 30, 2010. |
|
(g) |
|
Holders of the outstanding 4.00% notes may require us to repurchase their notes in whole or
in part on January 15, 2011, December 15, 2015, December 15, 2020, December 15, 2025 and
December 15, 2030, or upon the occurrence of a fundamental change, for cash equal to 100% of
the principal amount of the notes to be repurchased plus any accrued and unpaid interest. On
or after January 15, 2011, UDR will have the right to redeem the 4.00% notes in whole or in
part, at any time or from time to time, for cash equal to 100% of the principal amount of the
notes to be redeemed plus any accrued and unpaid interest. Subject to the restrictions on
ownership of shares of our common stock and certain other conditions, holders of the 4.00%
notes may convert their notes, into cash and, if applicable, shares of our common stock, at
the conversion rate in effect at such time, as follows: (i) prior to the close of business on
the second business day immediately preceding the stated maturity date at any time on or after
December 15, 2030, and (ii) prior to December 15, 2030 under certain specified circumstances.
The initial conversion rate for the notes was 35.2988 shares of our common stock per $1,000
principal amount of notes (equivalent to an initial conversion price of approximately $28.33
per share), subject to adjustment under certain circumstances. The Companys Special Dividend
paid in January 2009 met the criteria to adjust the conversion rate and the conversion rate
was adjusted to 38.7123 shares of our common stock for each $1,000 of principal (equivalent to
a conversion price of approximately $25.83 per share). |
17
|
|
|
(h) |
|
Effective January 1, 2009, the Company adopted guidance that applies to all convertible debt
instruments that have a net settlement feature, which means that such convertible debt
instruments, by their terms, may be settled either wholly or partially in cash upon
conversion. This guidance requires issuers of convertible debt instruments that may be
settled wholly or partially in cash upon conversion to separately account for the liability
and equity components in a manner reflective of the issuers nonconvertible debt borrowing
rate. The adoption impacted the historical accounting for the 3.625% convertible senior notes
due September 2011 and the 4.00% convertible senior notes due December 2035, and resulted in
increased interest expense of $859,000
and $2.8 million and $967,000 and $3.3 million for the three and nine months ended September 30,
2010 and 2009, respectively. |
The following is a summary of short-term bank borrowings under UDRs bank credit facility at
September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009 (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revolving credit facility |
|
$ |
600,000 |
|
|
$ |
600,000 |
|
Borrowings outstanding at end of period (1) |
|
|
112,600 |
|
|
|
189,300 |
|
Weighted average daily borrowings during the period ended |
|
|
150,342 |
|
|
|
83,875 |
|
Maximum daily borrowings during the period ended |
|
|
337,600 |
|
|
|
279,400 |
|
Weighted average interest rate during the period ended |
|
|
0.8 |
% |
|
|
0.9 |
% |
Weighted average interest rate at the end of the period |
|
|
0.8 |
% |
|
|
0.7 |
% |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Excludes $8.0 million of letters of credit at September 30, 2010 |
The convertible notes are convertible at the option of the holder, and as such are
presented as if the holder will convert the debt instrument at the earliest available date. The
aggregate maturities of unsecured debt for the five years subsequent to September 30, 2010 are as
follows (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bank |
|
|
Unsecured |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lines |
|
|
Debt |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
2011 (a) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
262,743 |
|
|
|
262,743 |
|
2012 |
|
|
112,600 |
|
|
|
199,808 |
|
|
|
312,408 |
|
2013 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
122,308 |
|
|
|
122,308 |
|
2014 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
312,353 |
|
|
|
312,353 |
|
Thereafter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
424,048 |
|
|
|
424,048 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
112,600 |
|
|
$ |
1,321,260 |
|
|
$ |
1,433,860 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
The convertible debt balances have been adjusted to reflect the effect of guidance adopted
effective January 2009. Excluding the adjustment, the total maturities in 2011 would be $262.9
million. |
Our debt instruments contain covenants that we were in compliance with at September 30, 2010.
On September 30, 2010, the Operating Partnership guaranteed certain outstanding debt
securities of UDR, Inc. These guarantees provide that the Operating Partnership, as primary
obligor and not merely as surety, irrevocably and unconditionally guarantees to each holder of the
applicable securities and to the trustee and their successors and assigns under the respective
indenture (a) the full and punctual payment when due, whether as stated maturity, by acceleration
or otherwise, of all obligations of the Company under the respective indenture whether for
principal or interest on the securities (and premium, if any), and all other monetary obligations
of the Company under the respective indenture and the terms of the applicable securities and (b)
the full and punctual performance within the applicable grace periods of all other obligations of
the Company under the respective indenture and the terms of applicable securities.
18
8. LOSS PER SHARE
Basic loss per common share is computed based upon the weighted average number of common
shares outstanding during the period. Diluted loss per common share is computed based upon common
shares outstanding plus the effect of dilutive stock options and other potentially dilutive common
stock equivalents such as the non-vested restricted stock awards.
The following table sets forth the computation of basic and diluted loss per share for the
periods presented (amounts in thousands, except per share data):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended |
|
|
Nine months ended |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Numerator for loss per share basic and diluted: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss attributable to common stockholders |
|
$ |
(26,134 |
) |
|
$ |
(40,776 |
) |
|
$ |
(81,537 |
) |
|
$ |
(71,063 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denominator for loss per share basic and diluted: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average common shares outstanding |
|
|
167,056 |
|
|
|
150,801 |
|
|
|
162,294 |
|
|
|
148,932 |
|
Non-vested restricted stock awards |
|
|
(1,653 |
) |
|
|
(801 |
) |
|
|
(1,453 |
) |
|
|
(1,049 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denominator for basic and diluted loss per share |
|
|
165,403 |
|
|
|
150,000 |
|
|
|
160,841 |
|
|
|
147,883 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss per share basic and diluted |
|
$ |
(0.16 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.27 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.51 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.48 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The effect of the conversion of the OP Units, convertible preferred stock, convertible
debt, stock options and restricted stock is not dilutive and is therefore not included in the above
calculations as the Company reported a loss from continuing operations.
If the OP Units were converted to common stock, the additional weighted average common shares
outstanding for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009, would be 5,615,619 and
5,850,432 and 6,317,556 and 6,889,816 respectively.
The effect of the conversion of the Series E Out-Performance Partnership Shares (the Series E
Out-Performance Program terminated on December 31, 2009) is not dilutive for the three and nine
months ended September 30, 2009 and is not included in the above calculations as the Company
reported a loss from continuing operations.
If the convertible preferred stock were converted to common stock, the additional shares of
common stock outstanding for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009 would be
3,035,548 weighted average common shares.
The dilution from unvested restricted stock and stock options would be an additional 2,425,654
and 2,209,025, and 844,219 and 320,905 weighted average common shares for the three and nine months
ended September 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
19
9. FAIR VALUE OF DERIVATIVES AND FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS
Fair value is based on the price that would be received to sell an asset or the exit price
that would be paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at
the measurement date. A three-level valuation hierarchy prioritizes observable and unobservable
inputs used to measure fair value. The fair value hierarchy consists of three broad levels, which
are described below:
|
|
|
Level 1 Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the
entity has the ability to access. |
|
|
|
|
Level 2 Observable inputs other than prices included in Level 1, such as quoted prices
for similar assets and liabilities in active markets; quoted prices for identical or
similar assets and liabilities in markets that are not active; or other inputs that are
observable or can be corroborated with observable market data. |
|
|
|
|
Level 3 Unobservable inputs that are supported by little or no market activity and
that are significant to the fair value of the assets and liabilities. This includes
certain pricing models, discounted cash flow methodologies and similar techniques that use
significant unobservable inputs. |
The estimated fair values of the Companys financial instruments either recorded or disclosed
on a recurring basis as of September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009 are summarized as follows
(dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value at September 30, 2010 Using |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quoted Prices in |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Active Markets for |
|
|
Significant Other |
|
|
Significant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Identical Assets or |
|
|
Observable |
|
|
Unobservable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities |
|
|
Inputs |
|
|
Inputs |
|
|
|
September 30, 2010 |
|
|
(Level 1) |
|
|
(Level 2) |
|
|
(Level 3) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Description: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available-for-sale debt securities Corporate debt |
|
$ |
39,488 |
|
|
$ |
39,488 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
Available-for-sale equity securities Real Estate Industry |
|
|
2,385 |
|
|
|
2,385 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total available-for-sale securities |
|
|
41,873 |
|
|
|
41,873 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivatives Interest rate contracts (c) |
|
|
279 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
279 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
42,152 |
|
|
$ |
41,873 |
|
|
$ |
279 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivatives Interest rate contracts (c) |
|
$ |
10,133 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
10,133 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
Contingent purchase consideration (d) |
|
|
5,402 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,402 |
|
Secured debt instruments fixed rate: (a) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage notes payable |
|
|
363,566 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
363,566 |
|
Tax-exempt secured notes payable |
|
|
16,423 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,423 |
|
Fannie Mae credit facilities |
|
|
1,006,860 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,006,860 |
|
Secured debt instruments- variable rate: (a) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage notes payable |
|
|
385,284 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
385,284 |
|
Tax-exempt secured notes payable |
|
|
94,700 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
94,700 |
|
Fannie Mae credit facilities |
|
|
260,451 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
260,451 |
|
Unsecured debt instruments: (b) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial bank |
|
|
112,600 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
112,600 |
|
Senior Unsecured Notes |
|
|
1,391,996 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,391,996 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
$ |
3,647,415 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
10,133 |
|
|
$ |
3,637,282 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value at December 31, 2009 Using |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quoted Prices in |
|
|
Significant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Active Markets for |
|
|
Other |
|
|
Significant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Identical Assets or |
|
|
Observable |
|
|
Unobservable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities |
|
|
Inputs |
|
|
Inputs |
|
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
|
(Level 1) |
|
|
(Level 2) |
|
|
(Level 3) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Description: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available-for-sale debt securities Corporate debt |
|
$ |
37,650 |
|
|
$ |
37,650 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
Derivatives Interest rate contracts (c) |
|
|
2,294 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,294 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
39,944 |
|
|
$ |
37,650 |
|
|
$ |
2,294 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivatives Interest rate contracts (c) |
|
$ |
5,947 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
5,947 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Secured debt instruments fixed rate: (a) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage notes payable |
|
|
516,578 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
516,578 |
|
Tax-exempt secured notes payable |
|
|
13,540 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,540 |
|
Fannie Mae credit facilities |
|
|
952,468 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
952,468 |
|
Secured debt instruments variable rate: (a) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage notes payable |
|
|
243,810 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
243,810 |
|
Tax-exempt secured notes payable |
|
|
27,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27,000 |
|
Fannie Mae credit facilities |
|
|
249,125 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
249,125 |
|
Unsecured debt instruments: (b) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial bank |
|
|
189,300 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
189,300 |
|
Senior Unsecured Notes |
|
|
1,236,515 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,236,515 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
$ |
3,434,283 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
5,947 |
|
|
$ |
3,428,336 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
See Note 6, Secured Debt |
|
(b) |
|
See Note 7, Unsecured Debt |
|
(c) |
|
See Note 10, Derivatives and Hedging Activity |
|
(d) |
|
As of June 30, 2010, the Company accrued a liability of $6.0 million related to a
contingent purchase consideration on one of its properties. The contingent consideration was
determined based on the fair market value of the related asset which is estimated using Level
3 inputs utilized in a third party appraisal. During the quarter ended September 30, 2010,
the Company paid approximately $635,000 of the liability. |
Financial Instruments Carried at Fair Value
The fair values of the corporate debt securities and equity securities are determined by Level
1 inputs which utilize quoted prices in active markets where we have the ability to access values
for identical assets.
21
The cost, gross unrealized gains and fair values of the Companys investments at September 30,
2010 and December 31, 2009 are as follows (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate debt |
|
|
Corporate equity |
|
|
Total available-for- |
|
|
|
securities- U.S. |
|
|
securities- U.S. |
|
|
sale securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of September 30, 2010: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost (a) |
|
$ |
34,763 |
|
|
$ |
374 |
|
|
$ |
35,137 |
|
Gross unrealized gains |
|
|
4,725 |
|
|
|
2,011 |
|
|
|
6,736 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated fair value (net carrying amount) |
|
$ |
39,488 |
|
|
$ |
2,385 |
|
|
$ |
41,873 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2009: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost (a) |
|
$ |
33,066 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
33,066 |
|
Gross unrealized gains |
|
|
4,584 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,584 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated fair value (net carrying amount) |
|
$ |
37,650 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
37,650 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Amortized cost is presented for corporate debt securities. |
The fair values of interest rate swaps are determined using the market standard
methodology of netting the discounted future fixed cash receipts (or payments) and the discounted
expected variable cash payments (or receipts). The variable cash payments (or receipts) are based
on an expectation of future interest rates (forward curves) derived from observable market interest
rate curves. The fair values of interest rate options are determined using the market standard
methodology of discounting the future expected cash receipts that would occur if variable interest
rates rise above the strike rate of the caps. The variable interest rates used in the calculation
of projected receipts on the cap are based on an expectation of future interest rates derived from
observable market interest rate curves and volatilities.
The Company incorporates credit valuation adjustments to appropriately reflect both its own
nonperformance risk and the respective counterpartys nonperformance risk in the fair value
measurements. In adjusting the fair value of its derivative contracts for the effect of
nonperformance risk, the Company has considered the impact of netting and any applicable credit
enhancements, such as collateral postings, thresholds, mutual puts, and guarantees.
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 itself and its counterparties. However, as of September
30, 2010 and 2009, the Company has assessed the significance of the impact of the credit valuation
adjustments on the overall valuation of its derivative positions and has determined that the credit
valuation adjustments are not significant to the overall valuation of its derivatives. As a
result, the Company has determined that its derivative valuations in their entirety are classified
in Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.
Financial Instruments Not Carried at Fair Value
At September 30, 2010, the fair values of cash and cash equivalents, restricted cash, notes
receivable, accounts receivable, prepaids, real estate taxes payable, accrued interest payable,
security deposits and prepaid rent, distributions payable and accounts payable approximated their
carrying values because of the short term nature of these instruments. The estimated fair values
of other financial instruments were determined by the Company using available market information
and appropriate valuation methodologies. Considerable judgment is necessary to interpret market
data and develop estimated fair values. Accordingly, the estimates presented herein are not
necessarily indicative of the amounts the Company would realize on the disposition of the financial
instruments. The use of different market assumptions or estimation methodologies may have a
material effect on the estimated fair value amounts.
We estimate the fair value of our debt instruments by discounting the remaining cash
flows of the debt instrument at a discount rate equal to the replacement market credit spread plus
the corresponding treasury yields. Factors considered in determining a replacement market credit
spread include general market conditions, borrower specific credit spreads, time remaining to
maturity, loan-to-value ratios and collateral quality (Level 3).
22
We record impairment losses on long-lived assets used in operations when events and
circumstances indicate that the assets might be impaired and the undiscounted cash flows estimated
to be generated by the future operation and disposition of those assets are less than the net book
value of those assets. Our cash flow estimates are based upon historical results adjusted to
reflect our best estimate of future market and operating conditions and our estimated holding
periods. The net book value of impaired assets is reduced to fair value. Our estimates of fair
value represent our best estimate based upon Level 3 inputs such as industry trends and reference
to market rates and transactions.
We consider various factors to determine if a decrease in the value of the investment is
other-than-temporary. These factors include, but are not limited to, age of the venture, our intent
and ability to retain our investment in the entity, the financial condition and long-term prospects
of the entity, and the relationships with the other joint venture partners and its lenders. Based
on the significance of the unobservable inputs, we classify these fair value measurements within
Level 3 of the valuation hierarchy. In 2009, we recognized a non-cash charge of $16.0 million
representing the other-than-temporary decline in fair values below the carrying values of two of
our unconsolidated joint ventures. The Company did not recognize any other-than-temporary decrease
in the value of its other investments in unconsolidated joint ventures during the three and nine
months ended September 30, 2010.
After determining an other-than-temporary decrease in the value of an equity method investment
has occurred, we estimate the fair value of our investment by estimating the proceeds we would
receive upon a hypothetical liquidation of the investment at the date of measurement. Inputs
reflect managements best estimate of what market participants would use in pricing the investment
giving consideration to the terms of the joint venture agreement and the estimated discounted
future cash flows to be generated from the underlying joint venture asset. The inputs and
assumptions utilized to estimate the future cash flows of the underlying asset are based upon the
Companys evaluation of the economy, market trends, operating results, and other factors, including
judgments regarding costs to complete any construction activities, lease up and occupancy rates,
rental rates, inflation rates, capitalization rates utilized to estimate the projected cash flows
at the disposition, and discount rates.
10. DERIVATIVES AND HEDGING ACTIVITY
Risk Management Objective of Using Derivatives
The Company is exposed to certain risk arising from both its business operations and economic
conditions. The Company principally manages its exposures to a wide variety of business and
operational risks through management of its core business activities. 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 may enter into derivative financial instruments to manage exposures that
arise from business activities that result in the receipt or payment of future known and uncertain
cash amounts, the value of which are determined by interest rates. The Companys derivative
financial instruments are used to manage differences in the amount, timing, and duration of the
Companys known or expected cash receipts and its known or expected cash payments principally
related to the Companys investments and borrowings.
Cash Flow Hedges of Interest Rate Risk
The Companys objectives in using interest rate derivatives are to add stability to interest
expense and to manage its exposure to interest rate movements. To accomplish this objective, the
Company primarily uses interest rate swaps and caps as part of its interest rate risk management
strategy. 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. Interest rate caps designated as
cash flow hedges involve the receipt of variable-rate amounts from a counterparty if interest rates
rise above the strike rate on the contract in exchange for an up front premium.
The effective portion of changes in the fair value of derivatives designated and that qualify
as cash flow hedges is recorded in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income/(Loss) and is
subsequently reclassified into earnings in the period that the hedged forecasted transaction
affects earnings. During the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009, such
derivatives were used to hedge the variable cash flows associated with existing variable-rate debt.
The ineffective portion of the change in fair value of the derivatives is recognized directly in
earnings. During the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009, the Company recorded
less than a $1,000 loss of ineffectiveness in earnings attributable to reset date and index mismatches
between the derivative and the hedged item, and the fair value of interest rate swaps that were not
zero at inception of the hedging relationship.
23
Amounts reported in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income/(Loss) related to derivatives
will be reclassified to interest expense as interest payments are made on the Companys
variable-rate debt. Through September 30, 2011, the Company estimates that an additional $5.7
million will be reclassified as an increase to interest expense.
As of September 30, 2010, the Company had the following outstanding interest rate derivatives
that were designated as cash flow hedges of interest rate risk (dollar amounts in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of |
|
|
|
|
Interest Rate Derivative |
|
Instruments |
|
|
Notional |
|
Interest rate swaps |
|
|
12 |
|
|
$ |
424,880 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate caps |
|
|
3 |
|
|
$ |
137,004 |
|
Derivatives not designated as hedges are not speculative and are used to manage the Companys
exposure to interest rate movements and other identified risks but do not meet the strict hedge
accounting requirements of FASB ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging (formerly SFAS 133, Accounting
for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities). Changes in the fair value of derivatives not
designated in hedging relationships are recorded directly in earnings and resulted in losses of
$468,000 and $1.1 million for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010, and gains of
$20,000 and $685,000 for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009, respectively. As of
September 30, 2010, the Company had the following outstanding derivatives that were not designated
as hedges in qualifying hedging relationships (dollar amounts in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of |
|
|
|
|
Product |
|
Instruments |
|
|
Notional |
|
Interest rate caps |
|
|
5 |
|
|
$ |
309,984 |
|
Tabular Disclosure of Fair Values of Derivative Instruments on the Balance Sheet
The table below presents the fair value of the Companys derivative financial instruments as
well as their classification on the Consolidated Balance Sheets as of September 30, 2010 and
December 31, 2009 (amounts in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset Derivatives |
|
|
Liability Derivatives |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value at: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value at: |
|
|
|
Balance |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
Balance |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
Sheet Location |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Sheet Location |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Derivatives
designated as
hedging
instruments: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest Rate
Products |
|
Other Assets |
|
$ |
132 |
|
|
$ |
1,348 |
|
|
Other Liabilities |
|
$ |
10,133 |
|
|
$ |
5,282 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total derivatives
designated as
hedging instruments |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
132 |
|
|
$ |
1,348 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
10,133 |
|
|
$ |
5,282 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivatives not
designated as
hedging
instruments: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest Rate
Products |
|
Other Assets |
|
$ |
147 |
|
|
$ |
946 |
|
|
Other Liabilities |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
665 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total derivatives
not designated as
hedging instruments |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
147 |
|
|
$ |
946 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
665 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24
Tabular Disclosure of the Effect of Derivative Instruments on the Consolidated Statements of
Operations
The tables below present the effect of the Companys derivative financial instruments on the
Consolidated Statements of Operations for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010 and
2009 (dollar amounts in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Location of Gain or |
|
|
Amount of Gain or (Loss) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount of Gain or (Loss) |
|
|
(Loss Recognized in |
|
|
Recognized in Income on |
|
|
|
Amount of Gain or (Loss) |
|
|
Location of Gain or |
|
|
Reclassified from |
|
|
Income on Derivative |
|
|
Derivative (Ineffective |
|
|
|
Recognized in OCI on |
|
|
(Loss) Reclassified |
|
|
Accumulated OCI into |
|
|
(Ineffective Portion |
|
|
Portion and Amount |
|
|
|
Derivative (Effective |
|
|
from Accumulated |
|
|
Income (Effective |
|
|
and Amount |
|
|
Excluded from |
|
Derivatives in Cash Flow |
|
Portion) |
|
|
OCI into Income |
|
|
Portion) |
|
|
Excluded from |
|
|
Effectiveness Testing) |
|
Hedging Relationships |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
(Effective Portion) |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Effectiveness Testing) |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the three months ended September 30, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate
products |
|
$ |
(4,751 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,340 |
) |
|
Interest expense |
|
$ |
(1,559 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,386 |
) |
|
Other expense |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
(4,751 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,340 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(1,559 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,386 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the nine months ended September 30, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate
products |
|
$ |
(11,220 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,815 |
) |
|
Interest expense |
|
$ |
(5,191 |
) |
|
$ |
(9,170 |
) |
|
Other expense |
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
(11,220 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,815 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(5,191 |
) |
|
$ |
(9,170 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* NOTE: |
|
The Company recorded less than $1,000 of ineffectiveness during the three and six months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Location of Gain or (Loss) |
|
|
Amount of Gain or (Loss) Recognized in |
|
|
|
Recognized in Income on |
|
|
Income on Derivative |
|
Derivatives
Not Designated as Hedging Instruments |
|
Derivative |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the three months ended September 30, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest Rate Products |
|
Other income / (expense) |
|
$ |
(468 |
) |
|
$ |
20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(468 |
) |
|
$ |
20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the nine months ended September 30, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest Rate Products |
|
Other income / (expense) |
|
$ |
(1,115 |
) |
|
$ |
685 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(1,115 |
) |
|
$ |
685 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit-risk-related Contingent Features
The Company has agreements with some of its derivative counterparties that contain a provision
where (1) if the Company defaults on any of its indebtedness, including default where repayment of
the indebtedness has not been accelerated by the lender, then the Company could also be declared in
default on its derivative obligations; or (2) the Company could be declared in default on its
derivative obligations if repayment of the underlying indebtedness is accelerated by the lender due
to the Companys default on the indebtedness.
Certain of the Companys agreements with its derivative counterparties contain provisions
where if there is a change in the Companys financial condition that materially changes the
Companys creditworthiness in an adverse manner, the Company may be required to fully collateralize
its obligations under the derivative instrument.
The Company also has an agreement with a derivative counterparty that incorporates the loan
and financial covenant provisions of the Companys indebtedness with a lender affiliate of the
derivative counterparty. Failure to comply with these covenant provisions would result in the
Company being in default on any derivative instrument obligations covered by the agreement.
25
As of September 30, 2010, the fair value of derivatives in a net liability position, which
includes accrued interest but excludes any adjustment for nonperformance risk, related to these
agreements was $10.7 million. As of September 30, 2010, the Company has not posted any collateral
related to these agreements. If the Company had breached any of these provisions at September 30,
2010, it would have been required to settle its obligations under the agreements at their
termination value of $10.7 million.
11. OTHER COMPREHENSIVE INCOME/(LOSS)
During the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009, components of
comprehensive income/(loss) consisted of an unrealized gain of $3.1 million and $2.2 million and
$2.5 million and $4.5 million, respectively, from the mark-to-market of marketable securities
classified as available-for-sale and an unrealized (loss)/gain of ($3.2 million) and ($6.0 million)
and $46,000 and $5.4 million, respectively, from derivative financial instruments. The Company
allocated a pro-rata share of gain/(loss) of $1,000 and $136,000 and ($123,000) and ($662,000) to
redeemable non-controlling interests for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010 and
2009, respectively. Total comprehensive loss for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010
and 2009 was $23.9 million and $78.1 million and $35.5 million and $53.3 million, respectively.
12. STOCK BASED COMPENSATION
Effective January 1, 2006, the Company adopted the modified prospective method for stock based
compensation. During the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009, we recognized
$3.1 million and $9.1 million, and $1.7 million and $5.9 million, respectively, as stock based
compensation expense, which is inclusive of awards granted to our outside directors.
13. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
Commitments
Real Estate Under Development
The following summarizes the Companys real estate commitments at September 30, 2010 (dollars
in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of |
|
|
Costs Incurred |
|
|
Expected Costs |
|
|
|
Properties |
|
|
to Date |
|
|
to Complete |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wholly owned under development |
|
|
2 |
|
|
$ |
94,877 |
|
|
$ |
56,823 |
|
Contingencies
Litigation and Legal Matters
The Company is subject to various legal proceedings and claims arising in the ordinary course
of business. The Company cannot determine the ultimate liability with respect to such legal
proceedings and claims at this time. The Company believes that such liability, to the extent not
provided for through insurance or otherwise, will not have a material adverse effect on our
financial condition, results of operations or cash flow.
26
14. REPORTABLE SEGMENTS
GAAP guidance requires that segment disclosures present the measure(s) used by the chief
operating decision maker to decide how to allocate resources and for purposes of assessing such
segments performance. UDRs chief operating decision maker is comprised of several members of its
executive management team who use several generally accepted industry financial measures to assess
the performance of the business for our reportable operating segments.
UDR owns and operates multifamily apartment communities that generate rental and other
property related income through the leasing of apartment homes to a diverse base of tenants. The
primary financial measures for UDRs apartment communities are rental income and net operating
income (NOI). Rental income represents gross market rent less adjustments for concessions,
vacancy loss and bad debt. NOI is defined as total revenues less direct property operating
expenses. UDRs chief operating decision maker utilizes NOI as the key measure of segment profit or
loss.
UDRs two reportable segments are same communities and non-mature/other communities:
|
|
|
Same communities represent those communities acquired, developed, and stabilized prior to
July 1, 2009, and held as of September 30, 2010. A comparison of operating results from the
prior year is meaningful as these communities were owned and had stabilized occupancy and
operating expenses as of the beginning of the prior year, there is no plan to conduct
substantial redevelopment activities, and the community is not held for disposition within
the current year. A community is considered to have stabilized occupancy once it achieves
90% occupancy for at least three consecutive months. |
|
|
|
Non-mature/other communities represent those communities that were acquired or developed
in 2008, 2009 or 2010, sold properties, redevelopment properties, properties classified as
real estate held for disposition, condominium conversion properties, joint venture
properties, properties managed by third parties and the non-apartment components of mixed
use properties. |
Management evaluates the performance of each of our apartment communities on a same community
and non-mature/other basis, as well as individually and geographically. This is consistent with the
aggregation criteria under GAAP as each of our apartment communities generally has similar economic
characteristics, facilities, services, and tenants. Therefore, the Companys reportable segments
have been aggregated by geography in a manner identical to that which is provided to the chief
operating decision maker.
All revenues are from external customers and no single tenant or related group of tenants
contributed 10% or more of UDRs total revenues during the three and nine months ended September
30, 2010 and 2009.
27
The accounting policies applicable to the operating segments described above are the same as
those described in Note 2, Significant Accounting Policies. The following table details rental
income and NOI for UDRs reportable segments for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010
and 2009, and reconciles NOI to loss from continuing operations per the Consolidated Statements of
Operations (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reportable apartment home segment rental income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same Communities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Western Region |
|
$ |
58,489 |
|
|
$ |
59,687 |
|
|
$ |
174,576 |
|
|
$ |
180,645 |
|
Mid-Atlantic Region |
|
|
39,853 |
|
|
|
38,768 |
|
|
|
118,073 |
|
|
|
116,371 |
|
Southeastern Region |
|
|
29,803 |
|
|
|
29,816 |
|
|
|
89,126 |
|
|
|
90,380 |
|
Southwestern Region |
|
|
12,951 |
|
|
|
12,739 |
|
|
|
38,617 |
|
|
|
38,584 |
|
Non-Mature communities/Other |
|
|
19,229 |
|
|
|
9,301 |
|
|
|
45,483 |
|
|
|
26,789 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total segment and consolidated
rental income |
|
$ |
160,325 |
|
|
$ |
150,311 |
|
|
$ |
465,875 |
|
|
$ |
452,769 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reportable apartment home segment NOI |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same Communities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Western Region |
|
$ |
39,837 |
|
|
$ |
41,460 |
|
|
$ |
119,965 |
|
|
$ |
126,706 |
|
Mid-Atlantic Region |
|
|
26,903 |
|
|
|
26,192 |
|
|
|
79,951 |
|
|
|
79,560 |
|
Southeastern Region |
|
|
18,426 |
|
|
|
17,897 |
|
|
|
55,413 |
|
|
|
55,175 |
|
Southwestern Region |
|
|
7,504 |
|
|
|
7,020 |
|
|
|
22,565 |
|
|
|
21,570 |
|
Non-Mature communities/Other |
|
|
10,358 |
|
|
|
5,627 |
|
|
|
23,411 |
|
|
|
15,623 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total segment and consolidated NOI |
|
|
103,028 |
|
|
|
98,196 |
|
|
|
301,305 |
|
|
|
298,634 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reconciling items: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-property income |
|
|
2,195 |
|
|
|
1,627 |
|
|
|
7,571 |
|
|
|
10,609 |
|
Property management |
|
|
(4,409 |
) |
|
|
(4,134 |
) |
|
|
(12,812 |
) |
|
|
(12,452 |
) |
Other operating expenses |
|
|
(1,396 |
) |
|
|
(1,437 |
) |
|
|
(4,338 |
) |
|
|
(5,110 |
) |
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
(75,591 |
) |
|
|
(69,695 |
) |
|
|
(221,524 |
) |
|
|
(207,747 |
) |
Interest, net |
|
|
(38,257 |
) |
|
|
(38,640 |
) |
|
|
(113,068 |
) |
|
|
(103,025 |
) |
Storm related income/(expense) |
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(669 |
) |
|
|
(127 |
) |
General and administrative |
|
|
(12,046 |
) |
|
|
(8,673 |
) |
|
|
(31,258 |
) |
|
|
(27,189 |
) |
Other depreciation and amortization |
|
|
(1,224 |
) |
|
|
(858 |
) |
|
|
(3,755 |
) |
|
|
(3,730 |
) |
Loss from unconsolidated entities |
|
|
(835 |
) |
|
|
(16,742 |
) |
|
|
(2,757 |
) |
|
|
(18,187 |
) |
Net gain on sale of depreciable property |
|
|
3,878 |
|
|
|
601 |
|
|
|
4,034 |
|
|
|
2,486 |
|
Non-controlling interests |
|
|
839 |
|
|
|
1,779 |
|
|
|
2,828 |
|
|
|
3,175 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss attributable to UDR, Inc. |
|
$ |
(23,766 |
) |
|
$ |
(37,976 |
) |
|
$ |
(74,443 |
) |
|
$ |
(62,663 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28
The following table details the assets of UDRs reportable segments as of September 30, 2010
and December 31, 2009 (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Reportable apartment home segment assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same communities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Western Region |
|
$ |
2,539,167 |
|
|
$ |
2,527,332 |
|
Mid-Atlantic Region |
|
|
1,309,837 |
|
|
|
1,302,949 |
|
Southeastern Region |
|
|
946,619 |
|
|
|
936,874 |
|
Southwestern Region |
|
|
485,747 |
|
|
|
481,384 |
|
Non-mature communities/Other |
|
|
1,571,965 |
|
|
|
1,066,508 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total segment assets |
|
|
6,853,335 |
|
|
|
6,315,047 |
|
Accumulated depreciation |
|
|
(1,560,867 |
) |
|
|
(1,351,293 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total segment assets net book value |
|
|
5,292,468 |
|
|
|
4,963,754 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reconciling items: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
10,107 |
|
|
|
5,985 |
|
Marketable securities |
|
|
41,873 |
|
|
|
37,650 |
|
Restricted cash |
|
|
14,879 |
|
|
|
8,879 |
|
Deferred financing costs, net |
|
|
26,225 |
|
|
|
26,601 |
|
Notes receivable |
|
|
7,800 |
|
|
|
7,800 |
|
Investment in unconsolidated joint ventures |
|
|
16,391 |
|
|
|
14,126 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
67,615 |
|
|
|
67,822 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total consolidated assets |
|
$ |
5,477,358 |
|
|
$ |
5,132,617 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital expenditures related to our same communities totaled $11.7 million and $34.2 million
and $13.0 million and $40.4 million for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010 and
2009, respectively. Capital expenditures related to our non-mature/other communities totaled $1.0
million and $2.8 million and $800,000 and $3.5 million for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
Markets included in the above geographic segments are as follows:
|
i. |
|
Western Orange County, San Francisco, Seattle, Monterey Peninsula, Los Angeles, San
Diego, Inland Empire, Sacramento, and Portland |
|
ii. |
|
Mid-Atlantic Metropolitan DC, Richmond, Baltimore, Norfolk, and Other Mid-Atlantic |
|
|
iii. |
|
Southeastern Tampa, Orlando, Nashville, Jacksonville, and Other Florida |
|
|
iv. |
|
Southwestern Dallas, Phoenix, Austin, and Houston |
15. SUBSEQUENT EVENT
On
November 5, 2010, the Company acquired The Hanover Companys (Hanover) partnership interests in the Hanover/MetLife Master Limited
Partnership (the Partnership). The Partnership owns a portfolio of 26 operating communities containing 5,748 homes
and 11 land parcels with the potential to develop approximately 2,300 additional homes. Under the
terms of the Partnership, UDR will act as the general partner and earn fees for property and asset
management and financing transactions.
In consideration for its Partnership interest, UDR will pay
$63 million at closing, and has agreed to pay the balance to Hanover with two interest free installments in the
amounts of $20 million and $10 million on the first and second anniversaries of the closing,
respectively.
UDR
has agreed to indemnify Hanover for losses that may arise from $506 million recourse loans
which are secured by a security interest in the operating community
subject to the loan. The loans are to the sub-tier partnerships which
own the 26 operating communities. The Company
anticipates that these loans will be refinanced by the Partnership over the next twelve months.
29
[This page is intentionally left blank.]
UNITED DOMINION REALTY, L.P.
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(In thousands, except for unit data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(unaudited) |
|
|
(audited) |
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate owned: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate held for investment |
|
$ |
3,690,580 |
|
|
$ |
3,640,888 |
|
Less: accumulated depreciation |
|
|
(842,467 |
) |
|
|
(717,892 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total real estate owned, net of accumulated depreciation |
|
|
2,848,113 |
|
|
|
2,922,996 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
924 |
|
|
|
442 |
|
Restricted cash |
|
|
7,401 |
|
|
|
6,865 |
|
Deferred financing costs, net |
|
|
7,686 |
|
|
|
8,727 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
21,358 |
|
|
|
22,037 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
2,885,482 |
|
|
$ |
2,961,067 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND CAPITAL |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Secured debt |
|
$ |
1,131,615 |
|
|
$ |
1,122,198 |
|
Note payable due to General Partner |
|
|
71,547 |
|
|
|
71,547 |
|
Real estate taxes payable |
|
|
13,015 |
|
|
|
8,561 |
|
Accrued interest payable |
|
|
531 |
|
|
|
933 |
|
Security deposits and prepaid rent |
|
|
12,705 |
|
|
|
13,728 |
|
Distributions payable |
|
|
33,559 |
|
|
|
32,642 |
|
Deferred gains on the sale of depreciable property |
|
|
63,838 |
|
|
|
63,838 |
|
Accounts payable, accrued expenses, and other liabilities |
|
|
36,111 |
|
|
|
25,872 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
1,362,921 |
|
|
|
1,339,319 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Partners capital: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating partnership units: 179,909,408 OP units outstanding: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General partner: 110,883 OP units outstanding |
|
|
1,385 |
|
|
|
1,456 |
|
Limited partners: 179,798,525 OP units outstanding |
|
|
2,083,390 |
|
|
|
2,199,450 |
|
Accumulated other comprehensive loss |
|
|
(8,955 |
) |
|
|
(3,153 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total partners capital |
|
|
2,075,820 |
|
|
|
2,197,753 |
|
Receivable due from General Partner |
|
|
(565,354 |
) |
|
|
(588,185 |
) |
Non-controlling interest |
|
|
12,095 |
|
|
|
12,180 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total capital |
|
|
1,522,561 |
|
|
|
1,621,748 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and capital |
|
$ |
2,885,482 |
|
|
$ |
2,961,067 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements.
30
UNITED DOMINION REALTY, L.P.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(In thousands, except per unit data)
(unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
REVENUES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rental income |
|
$ |
88,222 |
|
|
$ |
87,745 |
|
|
$ |
261,517 |
|
|
$ |
267,005 |
|
Non-property income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income |
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
1,621 |
|
|
|
5,667 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues |
|
|
88,287 |
|
|
|
87,756 |
|
|
|
263,138 |
|
|
|
272,672 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EXPENSES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rental expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate taxes and insurance |
|
|
10,700 |
|
|
|
10,863 |
|
|
|
32,302 |
|
|
|
32,592 |
|
Personnel |
|
|
7,477 |
|
|
|
6,835 |
|
|
|
21,444 |
|
|
|
20,437 |
|
Utilities |
|
|
4,783 |
|
|
|
4,471 |
|
|
|
13,670 |
|
|
|
13,091 |
|
Repair and maintenance |
|
|
5,099 |
|
|
|
4,476 |
|
|
|
13,686 |
|
|
|
12,774 |
|
Administrative and marketing |
|
|
1,878 |
|
|
|
1,936 |
|
|
|
5,376 |
|
|
|
5,549 |
|
Property management |
|
|
2,426 |
|
|
|
2,413 |
|
|
|
7,192 |
|
|
|
7,343 |
|
Other operating expenses |
|
|
1,244 |
|
|
|
1,222 |
|
|
|
3,712 |
|
|
|
3,679 |
|
Real estate depreciation and amortization |
|
|
41,674 |
|
|
|
41,606 |
|
|
|
124,797 |
|
|
|
125,077 |
|
Interest expense: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest on secured debt |
|
|
13,134 |
|
|
|
12,538 |
|
|
|
38,963 |
|
|
|
35,136 |
|
Interest on note payable due to General Partner |
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
1,257 |
|
|
|
318 |
|
|
|
3,772 |
|
General and administrative |
|
|
8,355 |
|
|
|
3,656 |
|
|
|
19,010 |
|
|
|
11,467 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expenses |
|
|
96,876 |
|
|
|
91,273 |
|
|
|
280,470 |
|
|
|
270,917 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss)/income from continuing operations |
|
|
(8,589 |
) |
|
|
(3,517 |
) |
|
|
(17,332 |
) |
|
|
1,755 |
|
Income from discontinued operations |
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
146 |
|
|
|
124 |
|
|
|
1,562 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated net (loss)/income |
|
|
(8,562 |
) |
|
|
(3,371 |
) |
|
|
(17,208 |
) |
|
|
3,317 |
|
Net loss attributable to non-controlling interests |
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(44 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss)/income attributable to OP unitholders |
|
$ |
(8,571 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,371 |
) |
|
$ |
(17,252 |
) |
|
$ |
3,317 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings per OP unit- basic and diluted: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss)/income from continuing operations attributable to OP unitholders |
|
$ |
(0.05 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.02 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.10 |
) |
|
$ |
0.01 |
|
Income from discontinued operations |
|
$ |
0.00 |
|
|
$ |
0.00 |
|
|
$ |
0.00 |
|
|
$ |
0.01 |
|
(Loss)/income attributable to OP unitholders |
|
$ |
(0.05 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.02 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.10 |
) |
|
$ |
0.02 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average OP units outstanding |
|
|
179,909 |
|
|
|
179,909 |
|
|
|
179,909 |
|
|
|
178,449 |
|
See accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements.
31
UNITED DOMINION REALTY, L.P.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(In thousands, except for unit data)
(unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
Operating Activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated net (loss)/income |
|
$ |
(17,208 |
) |
|
$ |
3,317 |
|
Adjustments to reconcile net (loss)/income to net cash provided by operating
activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
124,797 |
|
|
|
125,077 |
|
Income from discontinued operations |
|
|
(124 |
) |
|
|
(1,562 |
) |
Write off of bad debt |
|
|
1,220 |
|
|
|
1,647 |
|
Amortization of deferred financing costs and other |
|
|
1,181 |
|
|
|
1,285 |
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Decrease in operating assets |
|
|
(1,019 |
) |
|
|
(231 |
) |
Increase/(decrease) in operating liabilities |
|
|
13,034 |
|
|
|
(1,618 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities |
|
|
121,881 |
|
|
|
127,915 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investing Activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital expenditures and other major improvements real estate assets,
net of escrow reimbursement |
|
|
(43,809 |
) |
|
|
(53,007 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities |
|
|
(43,809 |
) |
|
|
(53,007 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financing Activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net repayments and distributions to UDR, Inc. |
|
|
(82,493 |
) |
|
|
(318,995 |
) |
Proceeds from the issuance of secured debt |
|
|
11,326 |
|
|
|
267,345 |
|
Payments on secured debt |
|
|
(1,910 |
) |
|
|
(15,793 |
) |
Payment of financing costs |
|
|
(140 |
) |
|
|
(2,701 |
) |
OP unit redemption |
|
|
(327 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Distributions paid to non-affiliated partnership unitholders |
|
|
(4,046 |
) |
|
|
(4,682 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in financing activities |
|
|
(77,590 |
) |
|
|
(74,826 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase in cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
482 |
|
|
|
82 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period |
|
|
442 |
|
|
|
3,590 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period |
|
$ |
924 |
|
|
$ |
3,672 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental Information: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest paid during the year, net of amounts capitalized |
|
$ |
39,115 |
|
|
$ |
33,534 |
|
See accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements.
32
UNITED DOMINION REALTY, L.P.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF PARTNERS CAPITAL AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOME/(LOSS)
(In thousands)
(unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UDR, Inc. |
|
|
Accumulated Other |
|
|
Total |
|
|
Receivable due |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Class A Limited |
|
|
Limited |
|
|
|
|
|
|
General |
|
|
Comprehensive |
|
|
Partnership |
|
|
from General |
|
|
Non-Controlling |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Partner |
|
|
Partners |
|
|
Limited Partner |
|
|
Partner |
|
|
Income/(Loss) |
|
|
Capital |
|
|
Partner |
|
|
Interest |
|
|
Total |
|
|
Balance, January 1, 2010 |
|
$ |
28,797 |
|
|
$ |
69,622 |
|
|
$ |
2,101,031 |
|
|
$ |
1,456 |
|
|
$ |
(3,153 |
) |
|
$ |
2,197,753 |
|
|
$ |
(588,185 |
) |
|
$ |
12,180 |
|
|
$ |
1,621,748 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributions |
|
|
(1,746 |
) |
|
|
(2,217 |
) |
|
|
(94,856 |
) |
|
|
(60 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(98,879 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(98,879 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OP Unit Redemptions for common shares of UDR |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8,106 |
) |
|
|
8,106 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OP Unit Redemptions for cash |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(327 |
) |
|
|
327 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustment to reflect limited partners capital at
redemption value |
|
|
10,098 |
|
|
|
21,392 |
|
|
|
(31,490 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in UDR, L.P. non-controlling interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(129 |
) |
|
|
(129 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive income/(loss): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized loss on derivative financial instruments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,802 |
) |
|
|
(5,802 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,802 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income/(loss) |
|
|
(168 |
) |
|
|
(377 |
) |
|
|
(16,696 |
) |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(17,252 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
(17,208 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive income/(loss) |
|
|
(168 |
) |
|
|
(377 |
) |
|
|
(16,696 |
) |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
(5,802 |
) |
|
|
(23,054 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
(23,010 |
) |
Net change in receivable due from General Partner |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22,831 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22,831 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, September 30, 2010 |
|
$ |
36,981 |
|
|
$ |
79,987 |
|
|
$ |
1,966,422 |
|
|
$ |
1,385 |
|
|
$ |
(8,955 |
) |
|
$ |
2,075,820 |
|
|
$ |
(565,354 |
) |
|
$ |
12,095 |
|
|
$ |
1,522,561 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements.
33
UNITED DOMINION REALTY, L.P.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
SEPTEMBER 30, 2010
(UNAUDITED)
1. CONSOLIDATION AND BASIS OF PRESENTATION
Consolidation and Basis of Presentation
United Dominion Realty, L.P. (UDR, L.P., the Operating Partnership, we or our) is a
Delaware limited partnership, that owns, acquires, renovates, develops, redevelops, manages, and
disposes of multifamily apartment communities generally located in high barrier-to-entry markets
located in the United States. The high barrier-to-entry markets are characterized by limited land
for new construction, difficult and lengthy entitlement process, expensive single-family home
prices and significant employment growth potential. UDR, L.P. is a subsidiary of UDR, Inc. (UDR
or the General Partner), a real estate investment trust under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986,
and through which UDR conducts a significant portion of its business. During the nine months ended
September 30, 2010 and 2009, revenues of the Operating Partnership represented of 56% and 59% of
the General Partners consolidated revenues. At September 30, 2010, the Operating Partnerships
apartment portfolio consisted of 81 communities located in 19 markets consisting of 23,351
apartment homes.
Interests in UDR, L.P. are represented by Operating Partnership Units (OP Units). The
Operating Partnerships net income is allocated to the partners, which is initially based on their
respective distributions made during the year and secondly, their percentage interests.
Distributions are made in accordance with the terms of the Amended and Restated Agreement of
Limited Partnership of United Dominion Realty, L.P. (the Operating Partnership Agreement), on a
per unit basis that is generally equal to the dividend per share on UDRs common stock, which is
publicly traded on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) under the ticker symbol UDR.
As of September 30, 2010, there were 179,909,408 OP units in the Operating Partnership
outstanding, of which, 174,369,059 or 96.9% were owned by UDR and affiliated entities and 5,540,349
or 3.1%, which were owned by non-affiliated limited partners. There were 179,909,408 OP units in
the Operating Partnership outstanding as of December 31, 2009 of which, 173,922,816 or 96.7% were
owned by UDR and affiliated entities and 5,986,592 or 3.3%, which were owned by non-affiliated
limited partners. See Note 9, Capital Structure.
The accompanying interim unaudited consolidated financial statements have been prepared
according to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Certain
information and footnote disclosures normally included in financial statements prepared in
accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States have been condensed
or omitted according to such rules and regulations, although management believes that the
disclosures are adequate to make the information presented not misleading. In the opinion of
management, all adjustments and eliminations necessary for the fair presentation of our financial
position as of September 30, 2010, and results of operations for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2010 and 2009 have been included. Such adjustments are normal and recurring in
nature. The interim results presented are not necessarily indicative of results that can be
expected for a full year. The accompanying interim unaudited consolidated financial statements
should be read in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements and related notes
included in the Form 8-K filed by UDR with the SEC on September 30, 2010.
The accompanying interim unaudited consolidated financial statements are presented in
accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). GAAP requires management to
make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the
disclosure of contingent liabilities at the dates of the interim unaudited consolidated financial
statements and the amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting periods. Actual amounts
realized or paid could differ from those estimates. All intercompany accounts and transactions have
been eliminated in consolidation.
The Operating Partnership evaluated subsequent events through the date its financial
statements were issued. No recognized or non-recognized subsequent events were noted.
34
2. SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Accounting Policies
Real Estate Sales
For sales transactions meeting the requirements for full accrual profit recognition, such as
the Operating Partnership no longer having continuing involvement in the property, we remove the
related assets and liabilities from our consolidated balance sheet and record the gain or loss in
the period the transaction closes. For sale transactions that do not meet the full accrual sale
criteria due to our continuing involvement, we evaluate the nature of the continuing involvement
and account for the transaction under an alternate method of accounting.
Sales of real estate to entities in which we retain or otherwise own an interest are accounted
for as partial sales. If all other requirements for recognizing profit under the full accrual
method have been satisfied and no other forms of continuing involvement are present, we recognize
profit proportionate to the interest of the buyer in the real estate and defer the gain on the
interest we retain in the real estate. The Operating Partnership will recognize any deferred gain
when the property is then sold to a third party. In transactions accounted by us as partial sales,
we determine if the buyer of the majority equity interest in the venture was provided a preference
as to cash flows in either an operating or a capital waterfall. If a cash flow preference has been
provided, we recognize profit only to the extent that proceeds from the sale of the majority equity
interest exceed costs related to the entire property.
Income taxes
The taxable income or loss of the Operating Partnership is reported on the tax returns of the
partners. Accordingly, no provision has been made in the accompanying financial statements for
federal or state income taxes on income that is passed through to the partners. However, any state
or local revenue, excise or franchise taxes that result from the operating activities of the
Operating Partnership are recorded at the entity level. The Operating Partnerships tax returns are
subject to examination by federal and state taxing authorities. Net income for financial reporting
purposes differs from the net income for income tax reporting purposes primarily due to temporary
differences, principally real estate depreciation and the tax deferral of certain gains on property
sales. The differences in depreciation result from differences in the book and tax basis of
certain real estate assets and the differences in the methods of depreciation and lives of the real
estate assets.
The Operating Partnership adopted certain accounting guidance within ASC Topic 740, Income
Taxes, with respect to how uncertain tax positions should be recognized, measured, presented, and
disclosed in the financial statements. The guidance requires the accounting and disclosure of tax
positions taken or expected to be taken in the course of preparing the Operating Partnerships tax
returns to determine whether the tax positions are more-likely-than-not of being sustained by the
applicable tax authority. Tax positions not deemed to meet the more-likely-than-not threshold would
be recorded as a tax benefit or expense in the current year. Management of the Operating
Partnership is required to analyze all open tax years, as defined by the statute of limitations,
for all major jurisdictions, which include federal and certain states. The Operating Partnership
has no examinations in progress and none are expected at this time.
Management of the Operating Partnership has reviewed all open tax years (2005- 2009) and major
jurisdictions and concluded the adoption of the new accounting guidance resulted in no impact to
the Operating Partnerships financial position or results of operations. There is no tax liability
resulting from unrecognized tax benefits relating to uncertain income tax positions taken or
expected to be taken in future tax returns.
Earnings per OP unit
Basic earnings per OP Unit is computed by dividing net income/(loss) attributable to general
and limited partner units by the weighted average number of general and limited partner units
(including redeemable OP Units) outstanding during the year. Diluted earnings per OP Unit reflects
the potential dilution that could occur if securities or other contracts to issue OP Units were
exercised or converted into OP Units or resulted in the issuance of OP Units that shared in the
earnings of the Operating Partnership. For the three and nine months ended September 30,
2010 and 2009, there were no dilutive instruments outstanding, and therefore, diluted earnings
per OP Unit and basic earnings per OP Unit are the same.
35
3. REAL ESTATE OWNED
Real estate assets owned by the Operating Partnership consists of income producing operating
properties and land held for future development. At September 30, 2010, the Operating Partnership
owned and consolidated 81 communities in 8 states plus the District of Columbia totaling 23,351
apartment homes. The following table summarizes the carrying amounts for our real estate owned (at
cost) as of September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009 (dollar amounts in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land |
|
$ |
988,760 |
|
|
$ |
985,126 |
|
Depreciable property held and used |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Buildings and improvements |
|
|
2,561,882 |
|
|
|
2,525,812 |
|
Furniture, fixtures and equipment |
|
|
114,467 |
|
|
|
108,094 |
|
Land held for future development |
|
|
25,471 |
|
|
|
21,856 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate held for investment |
|
|
3,690,580 |
|
|
|
3,640,888 |
|
Accumulated depreciation |
|
|
(842,467 |
) |
|
|
(717,892 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate owned, net |
|
$ |
2,848,113 |
|
|
$ |
2,922,996 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Operating Partnership did not have any acquisitions during the nine months ended September
30, 2010.
4. DISCONTINUED OPERATIONS
Discontinued operations represent properties that the Operating Partnership has either sold or
which management believes meet the criteria to be classified as held for sale. In order to be
classified as held for sale and reported as discontinued operations, a propertys operations and
cash flows have or will be divested to a third party by the Operating Partnership whereby UDR, L.P.
will not have any significant continuing involvement in the ownership or operation of the property
after the sale or disposition. The results of operations of the property are presented as
discontinued operations for all periods presented and do not impact the net earnings reported by
the Operating Partnership. Once a property is deemed as held for sale, depreciation is no longer
recorded. However, if the Operating Partnership determines that the property no longer meets the
criteria of held for sale, the Operating Partnership will recapture any unrecorded depreciation for
the property. The assets and liabilities of properties deemed as held for sale are presented
separately on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Properties deemed as held for sale are reported at
the lower of their carrying amount or their estimated fair value less the costs to sell the assets.
The Operating Partnership did not dispose of any communities during the three and nine months
ended September 30, 2010 and 2009, nor did we have any communities classified as held for
disposition at September 30, 2010 or December 31, 2009. During the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2010 and 2009, the Operating Partnership recognized $27,000 and $124,000 and $146,000
and $1.6 million, respectively, of Income from Discontinued Operations which relates to residual
activities from sold communities.
36
5. DEBT
Our secured debt instruments generally feature either monthly interest and principal or
monthly interest-only payments with balloon payments due at maturity. For purposes of
classification in the following table, variable rate debt with a derivative financial instrument
designated as a cash flow hedge is deemed as fixed rate debt due to the Operating Partnership
having effectively established the fixed interest rate for the underlying debt instrument. Secured
debt consists of the following as of September 30, 2010 (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30, 2010 |
|
|
|
Principal Outstanding |
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
Number of |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
Average |
|
|
Average |
|
|
Communities |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Interest Rate |
|
|
Years to Maturity |
|
|
Encumbered |
|
Fixed Rate Debt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage notes payable |
|
$ |
228,943 |
|
|
$ |
230,852 |
|
|
|
5.58 |
% |
|
|
3.1 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
Tax-exempt secured notes payable |
|
|
13,325 |
|
|
|
13,325 |
|
|
|
5.30 |
% |
|
|
20.4 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Fannie Mae credit facilities |
|
|
587,403 |
|
|
|
587,403 |
|
|
|
5.30 |
% |
|
|
6.3 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total fixed rate secured debt |
|
|
829,671 |
|
|
|
831,580 |
|
|
|
5.38 |
% |
|
|
5.6 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Variable Rate Debt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage notes payable |
|
|
100,590 |
|
|
|
100,590 |
|
|
|
2.76 |
% |
|
|
4.5 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Tax-exempt secured note payable |
|
|
27,000 |
|
|
|
27,000 |
|
|
|
1.07 |
% |
|
|
19.5 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Fannie Mae credit facilities |
|
|
174,354 |
|
|
|
163,028 |
|
|
|
1.96 |
% |
|
|
5.0 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total variable rate secured debt |
|
|
301,944 |
|
|
|
290,618 |
|
|
|
2.15 |
% |
|
|
6.1 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total secured debt |
|
$ |
1,131,615 |
|
|
$ |
1,122,198 |
|
|
|
4.52 |
% |
|
|
5.8 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of September 30, 2010, the General Partner had secured credit facilities with Fannie Mae
(FNMA) with an aggregate commitment of $1.4 billion with $1.2 billion outstanding. The Fannie Mae
credit facilities are for an initial term of 10 years, bear interest at floating and fixed rates,
and certain variable rate facilities can be extended for an additional five years at the General
Partners option. At September 30, 2010, $948.0 million of the funded balance was fixed at a
weighted average interest rate of 5.4% and the remaining balance of $260.5 million on these
facilities had a weighted average variable rate of 1.7%. $761.8 million of these credit facilities
were allocated to the Operating Partnership at September 30, 2010 based on the ownership of the
assets securing the debt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, 2010 |
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
(dollar amounts in thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Borrowings outstanding |
|
$ |
761,757 |
|
|
$ |
750,431 |
|
Weighted average borrowings during the period ended |
|
|
760,719 |
|
|
|
646,895 |
|
Maximum daily borrowings during the period ended |
|
|
762,568 |
|
|
|
750,572 |
|
Weighted average interest rate during the period ended |
|
|
4.6 |
% |
|
|
4.6 |
% |
Weighted average interest rate at the end of the period |
|
|
4.6 |
% |
|
|
4.6 |
% |
The Operating Partnership may from time to time acquire properties subject to fixed rate debt
instruments. In those situations, management will record the secured debt at its estimated fair
value and amortize any difference between the fair value and par to interest expense over the life
of the underlying debt instrument. The unamortized fair value adjustment of the fixed rate debt
instruments on the Operating Partnerships properties was a net discount of $1.2 million at
September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009.
Fixed Rate Debt
Mortgage notes payable. Fixed rate mortgage notes payable are generally due in monthly
installments of principal and interest and mature at various dates from February 2011 through June
2016 and carry interest rates ranging from 5.03% to 5.94%.
Tax-exempt secured notes payable. Fixed rate mortgage notes payable that secure tax-exempt
housing bond issues mature in March 2031 and carry an interest rate of 5.30%. Interest on these
notes is payable in semi-annual installments.
37
Secured credit facilities. At September 30, 2010, the General Partner had borrowings against
its fixed rate facilities of $948.0 million of which $587.4 million was allocated to the Operating
Partnership based on the ownership of the assets securing the debt. As of September 30, 2010, the
fixed rate Fannie Mae credit facilities allocated to the Operating Partnership had a weighted
average fixed rate of interest of 5.30%.
Variable Rate Debt
Mortgage notes payable. Variable rate mortgage notes payable are generally due in monthly
installments of principal and interest and mature at various dates from July 2013 through April
2016. Interest on the variable rate mortgage notes is based on LIBOR plus some basis points, which
translated into interest rates ranging from 1.18% to 3.89% at September 30, 2010.
Tax-exempt secured note payable. The variable rate mortgage note payable that secures
tax-exempt housing bond issues matures in March 2030. Interest on this note is payable in monthly
installments. The mortgage note payable has an interest rate of 1.07% as of September 30, 2010.
Secured credit facilities. At September 30, 2010, the General Partner had borrowings against
its variable rate facilities of $260.5 million of which $174.4 million was allocated to the
Operating Partnership based on the ownership of the assets securing the debt. As of September 30,
2010, the variable rate borrowings under the Fannie Mae credit facilities allocated to the
Operating Partnership had a weighted average floating rate of interest of 1.96%.
The aggregate maturities of the Operating Partnerships secured debt due during each of the
next five calendar years and thereafter are as follows (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed |
|
|
Variable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage |
|
|
Tax-Exempt |
|
|
Credit |
|
|
Mortgage |
|
|
Tax Exempt |
|
|
Credit |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes |
|
|
Notes Payable |
|
|
Facilities |
|
|
Notes |
|
|
Notes Payable |
|
|
Facilities |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
$ |
643 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
643 |
|
2011 |
|
|
46,971 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
36,243 |
|
|
|
423 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28,641 |
|
|
|
112,278 |
|
2012 |
|
|
49,624 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
126,849 |
|
|
|
633 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
59,529 |
|
|
|
236,635 |
|
2013 |
|
|
61,379 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25,723 |
|
|
|
38,049 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
125,151 |
|
2014 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
634 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
634 |
|
Thereafter |
|
|
70,326 |
|
|
|
13,325 |
|
|
|
398,588 |
|
|
|
60,851 |
|
|
|
27,000 |
|
|
|
86,184 |
|
|
|
656,274 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
228,943 |
|
|
$ |
13,325 |
|
|
$ |
587,403 |
|
|
$ |
100,590 |
|
|
$ |
27,000 |
|
|
$ |
174,354 |
|
|
$ |
1,131,615 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guarantor on Unsecured Debt
The Operating Partnership is a guarantor on the General Partners unsecured credit facility,
with an aggregate borrowing capacity of $600 million, and a $100 million term loan. At September
30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, the outstanding balance under the unsecured credit facility was
$112.6 million and $189.3 million, respectively.
On September 30, 2010, the Operating Partnership guaranteed certain outstanding debt
securities of the General Partner. These guarantees provide that the Operating Partnership, as
primary obligor and not merely as surety, irrevocably and unconditionally guarantees to each holder
of the applicable securities and to the trustee and their successors and assigns under the
respective indenture (a) the full and punctual payment when due, whether as stated maturity, by
acceleration or otherwise, of all obligations of the General Partner under the respective indenture
whether for principal or interest on the securities (and premium, if any), and all other monetary
obligations of the General Partner under the respective indenture and the terms of the applicable
securities and (b) the full and punctual performance within the applicable grace periods of all
other obligations of the General Partner under the respective indenture and the terms of applicable
securities.
38
6. RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS
Receivable due from the General Partner
The Operating Partnership participates in the General Partners central cash management
program, wherein all the Operating Partnerships cash receipts are remitted to the General Partner
and all cash disbursements are funded by the General Partner. In addition, other miscellaneous
costs such as administrative expenses are incurred by the General Partner on behalf of the
Operating Partnership. As a result of these various transactions between the Operating Partnership
and the General Partner, the Operating Partnership had a net receivable balance of $565.4 million
and $588.2 million at September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, respectively, which is reflected as
a reduction in capital on the Consolidated Balance Sheets.
Allocation of General and Administrative Expenses
The General Partner performs various general and administrative and other overhead services
for the Operating Partnership including legal assistance, acquisitions analysis, marketing and
advertising, and allocates these expenses to the Operating Partnership first on the basis of direct
usage when identifiable, with the remainder allocated based on its pro-rata portion of UDRs total
apartment homes. During the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009, the general
and administrative expenses allocated to the Operating Partnership by UDR were $10.7 million and
$25.8 million and $5.9 million and $18.3 million, respectively, and are included in General and
Administrative expenses on the consolidated statements of operations. In the opinion of
management, this method of allocation reflects the level of services received by the Operating
Partnership from the General Partner.
Guaranty by the General Partner
The General Partner provided a bottom dollar guaranty to certain limited partners as part of
their original contribution to the Operating Partnership. The guaranty protects the tax basis of
the underlying contribution and is reflected on the OP unitholders Schedule K-1 tax form. The
guaranty was made in the form of a loan from the General Partner to the Operating Partnership at an
annual interest rate of 0.593% and 5.83% at September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009. Interest
payments are made monthly and the note is due December 31, 2010. At September 30, 2010 and December
31, 2009, the note payable due to the General Partner was $71.5 million.
7. FAIR VALUE OF DERIVATIVES AND FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS
Fair value is based on the price that would be received to sell an asset or the exit price
that would be paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at
the measurement date. A three-level valuation hierarchy prioritizes observable and unobservable
inputs used to measure fair value. The fair value hierarchy consists of three broad levels, which
are described below:
|
|
|
Level 1 Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the
entity has the ability to access. |
|
|
|
Level 2 Observable inputs other than prices included in Level 1, such as quoted prices
for similar assets and liabilities in active markets; quoted prices for identical or
similar assets and liabilities in markets that are not active; or other inputs that are
observable or can be corroborated with observable market data. |
|
|
|
Level 3 Unobservable inputs that are supported by little or no market activity and
that are significant to the fair value of the assets and liabilities. This includes
certain pricing models, discounted cash flow methodologies and similar techniques that use
significant unobservable inputs. |
39
The estimated fair values of the Operating Partnerships financial instruments either recorded
or disclosed on a recurring basis as of September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009 are summarized as
follows (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value at September 30, 2010 Using |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quoted Prices in |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Active Markets for |
|
|
Significant Other |
|
|
Significant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Identical Assets or |
|
|
Observable |
|
|
Unobservable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities |
|
|
Inputs |
|
|
Inputs |
|
|
|
September 30, 2010 |
|
|
(Level 1) |
|
|
(Level 2) |
|
|
(Level 3) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Description: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivatives- Interest rate contracts (b) |
|
$ |
204 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
204 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
204 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
204 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivatives- Interest rate contracts (b) |
|
$ |
8,457 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
8,457 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
Contingent purchase consideration (c) |
|
|
5,402 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,402 |
|
Secured debt instruments- fixed rate: (a) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage notes payable |
|
|
244,418 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
244,418 |
|
Tax-exempt secured notes payable |
|
|
16,423 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,423 |
|
Fannie Mae credit facilities |
|
|
615,248 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
615,248 |
|
Secured debt instruments- variable rate: (a) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage notes payable |
|
|
100,590 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100,590 |
|
Tax-exempt secured notes payable |
|
|
27,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27,000 |
|
Fannie Mae credit facilities |
|
|
174,354 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
174,354 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
$ |
1,191,892 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
8,457 |
|
|
$ |
1,183,435 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value at December 31, 2009 Using |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quoted Prices in |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Active Markets for |
|
|
Significant Other |
|
|
Significant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Identical Assets or |
|
|
Observable |
|
|
Unobservable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities |
|
|
Inputs |
|
|
Inputs |
|
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
|
(Level 1) |
|
|
(Level 2) |
|
|
(Level 3) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Description: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivatives- Interest rate contracts (b) |
|
|
1,992 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,992 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
1,992 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
1,992 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivatives- Interest rate contracts (b) |
|
$ |
3,832 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
3,832 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
Secured debt instruments- fixed rate: (a) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage notes payable |
|
|
239,814 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
239,814 |
|
Tax-exempt secured notes payable |
|
|
13,540 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,540 |
|
Fannie Mae credit facilities |
|
|
592,783 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
592,783 |
|
Secured debt instruments- variable rate: (a) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage notes payable |
|
|
100,590 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100,590 |
|
Tax-exempt secured notes payable |
|
|
27,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27,000 |
|
Fannie Mae credit facilities |
|
|
163,028 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
163,028 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
$ |
1,140,587 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
3,832 |
|
|
$ |
1,136,755 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
See Note 5, Debt |
|
(b) |
|
See Note 8, Derivatives and Hedging Activity |
|
(c) |
|
As of June 30, 2010, the Operating Partnership accrued a liability of $6.0 million related to
a contingent purchase consideration on one of its properties. The contingent consideration was
determined based on the fair market value of the related asset which is estimated using Level
3 inputs utilized in a third party appraisal. During the quarter ended September 30, 2010, the
Company paid approximately $635,000 towards the liability. |
40
Financial Instruments Carried at Fair Value
The fair values of interest rate swaps are determined using the market standard methodology of
netting the discounted future fixed cash receipts (or payments) and the discounted expected
variable cash payments (or receipts). The variable cash payments (or receipts) are based on an
expectation of future interest rates (forward curves) derived from observable market interest rate
curves. The fair values of interest rate options are determined using the market standard
methodology of discounting the future expected cash receipts that would occur if variable interest
rates rise above the strike rate of the caps. The variable interest rates used in the calculation
of projected receipts on the cap are based on an expectation of future interest rates derived from
observable market interest rate curves and volatilities.
The Operating Partnership incorporates credit valuation adjustments to appropriately reflect
both its own nonperformance risk and the respective counterpartys nonperformance risk in the fair
value measurements. In adjusting the fair value of its derivative contracts for the effect of
nonperformance risk, the Operating Partnership has considered the impact of netting and any
applicable credit enhancements, such as collateral postings, thresholds, mutual puts, and
guarantees.
Although the Operating Partnership 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 itself and its counterparties. However, as
of September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, the Operating Partnership has assessed the
significance of the impact of the credit valuation adjustments on the overall valuation of its
derivative positions and has determined that the credit valuation adjustments are not significant
to the overall valuation of its derivatives. As a result, the Operating Partnership has determined
that its derivative valuations in their entirety are classified in Level 2 of the fair value
hierarchy.
Financial Instruments Not Carried at Fair Value
At September 30, 2010, the fair values of cash and cash equivalents, restricted cash, accounts
receivable, prepaids, real estate taxes payable, accrued interest payable, security deposits and
prepaid rent, distributions payable and accounts payable approximated their carrying values because
of the short term nature of these instruments. The estimated fair values of other financial
instruments were determined by the Operating Partnership using available market information and
appropriate valuation methodologies. Considerable judgment is necessary to interpret market data
and develop estimated fair values. Accordingly, the estimates presented herein are not necessarily
indicative of the amounts the Operating Partnership would realize on the disposition of the
financial instruments. The use of different market assumptions or estimation methodologies may have
a material effect on the estimated fair value amounts.
The General Partner estimates the fair value of our debt instruments by discounting the
remaining cash flows of the debt instrument at a discount rate equal to the replacement market
credit spread plus the corresponding treasury yields. Factors considered in determining a
replacement market credit spread include general market conditions, borrower specific credit
spreads, time remaining to maturity, loan-to-value ratios and collateral quality (Level 3).
The Operating Partnership records impairment losses on long-lived assets used in operations
when events and circumstances indicate that the assets might be impaired and the undiscounted cash
flows estimated to be generated by the future operation and disposition of those assets are less
than the net book value of those assets. Cash flow estimates are based upon historical results
adjusted to reflect managements best estimate of future market and operating conditions and our
estimated holding periods. The net book value of impaired assets is reduced to fair value. The
General Partners estimates of fair value represent managements estimates based upon Level 3
inputs such as industry trends and reference to market rates and transactions.
41
8. DERIVATIVES AND HEDGING ACTIVITY
Risk Management Objective of Using Derivatives
The Operating Partnership is exposed to certain risk arising from both its business operations
and economic conditions. The General Partner principally manages its exposures to a wide variety of
business and operational risks through management of its core business activities. The General
Partner manages economic risks, including interest rate, liquidity, and credit risk primarily by
managing the amount, sources, and duration of its debt funding and through the use of derivative
financial instruments. Specifically, the General Partner enters into derivative financial
instruments to manage exposures that arise from business activities that result in the receipt or
payment of future known and uncertain cash amounts, the value of which are determined by interest
rates. The General Partners and the Operating Partnerships derivative financial instruments are
used to manage differences in the amount, timing, and duration of the General Partners known or
expected cash receipts and its known or expected cash payments principally related to the General
Partners investments and borrowings.
Cash Flow Hedges of Interest Rate Risk
The General Partners objectives in using interest rate derivatives are to add stability to
interest expense and to manage its exposure to interest rate movements. To accomplish this
objective, the General Partner primarily uses interest rate swaps and caps as part of its interest
rate risk management strategy. Interest rate swaps designated as cash flow hedges involve the
receipt of variable-rate amounts from a counterparty in exchange for the General Partner making
fixed-rate payments over the life of the agreements without exchange of the underlying notional
amount. Interest rate caps designated as cash flow hedges involve the receipt of variable-rate
amounts from a counterparty if interest rates rise above the strike rate on the contract in
exchange for an up front premium.
A portion of the General Partners interest rate derivatives have been allocated to the
Operating Partnership based on the General Partners underlying debt instruments allocated to the
Operating Partnership. (See Note 5, Debt.)
The effective portion of changes in the fair value of derivatives designated and that qualify
as cash flow hedges is recorded in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income/(Loss) and is
subsequently reclassified into earnings in the period that the hedged forecasted transaction
affects earnings. During the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009, such
derivatives were used to hedge the variable cash flows associated with existing variable-rate debt.
The ineffective portion of the change in fair value of the derivatives is recognized directly in
earnings. During the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009, the Operating
Partnership recorded less than $1,000 of ineffectiveness in earnings attributable to reset date and
index mismatches between the derivative and the hedged item.
Amounts reported in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income/(Loss) related to derivatives
will be reclassified to interest expense as interest payments are made on the General Partners
variable-rate debt that is allocated to the Operating Partnership. Through September 30, 2011, we
estimate that an additional $4.7 million will be reclassified as an increase to interest expense.
As of September 30, 2010, the Operating Partnership had the following outstanding interest
rate derivatives designated as cash flow hedges of interest rate risk (dollar amounts in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of |
|
|
|
|
Interest Rate Derivative |
|
Instruments |
|
|
Notional |
|
Interest rate swaps |
|
|
7 |
|
|
$ |
312,484 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate caps |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
106,825 |
|
42
Derivatives not designated as hedges are not speculative and are used to manage the Companys
exposure to interest rate movements and other identified risks but do not meet the strict hedge
accounting requirements of FASB ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging (formerly SFAS 133, Accounting
for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities). Changes in the fair value of derivatives not
designated in hedging relationships are recorded directly in earnings and resulted in losses of
$87,000 and $762,000 and gains of $18,000 and $619,000 for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively. As of September 30, 2010, we had the following
outstanding derivatives that were not designated as hedges in qualifying hedging relationships
(dollar amounts in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of |
|
|
|
|
Product |
|
Instruments |
|
|
Notional |
|
Interest rate caps |
|
|
4 |
|
|
$ |
218,815 |
|
Tabular Disclosure of Fair Values of Derivative Instruments on the Balance Sheet
The table below presents the fair value of the Operating Partnerships derivative financial
instruments as well as their classification on the Consolidated Balance Sheets as of September 30,
2010 and December 31, 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset Derivatives |
|
|
Liability Derivatives |
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value at: |
|
|
|
|
Fair Value at: |
|
|
|
Balance |
|
September 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
Balance |
|
September 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
Sheet Location |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Sheet Location |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Derivatives designated as hedging instruments: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest Rate Products |
|
Other Assets |
|
$ |
119 |
|
|
$ |
1,046 |
|
|
Other Liabilities |
|
$ |
8,457 |
|
|
$ |
3,832 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total derivatives designated as hedging instruments |
|
|
|
$ |
119 |
|
|
$ |
1,046 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
8,457 |
|
|
$ |
3,832 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest Rate Products |
|
Other Assets |
|
$ |
85 |
|
|
$ |
946 |
|
|
Other Liabilities |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total derivatives not designated as hedging instruments |
|
|
|
$ |
85 |
|
|
$ |
946 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tabular Disclosure of the Effect of Derivative Instruments on the Consolidated Statements of Operations
The tables below present the effect of the derivative financial instruments on the
Consolidated Statements of Operations for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010 and
2009 (dollar amounts in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Location of Loss |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reclassified from |
|
Amount of Gain or (Loss) Reclassified |
|
|
|
Amount of Gain or (Loss) Recognized in |
|
|
Accumulated OCI into |
|
from Accumulated OCI into Income |
|
Derivatives in Cash Flow Hedging |
|
OCI on Derivative (Effective Portion) |
|
|
Income (Effective |
|
(Effective Portion) |
|
Relationships |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Portion) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the three months ended September 30, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest Rate Products |
|
$ |
(1,210 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,221 |
) |
|
Interest expense |
|
$ |
(4,113 |
) |
|
$ |
5,752 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
(1,210 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,221 |
) |
|
|
|
$ |
(4,113 |
) |
|
$ |
5,752 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the nine months ended September 30, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest Rate Products |
|
$ |
(3,061 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,152 |
) |
|
Interest expense |
|
$ |
(8,863 |
) |
|
$ |
(290 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
(3,061 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,152 |
) |
|
|
|
$ |
(8,863 |
) |
|
$ |
(290 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Location of Gain or (Loss) |
|
Amount of Gain or (Loss) Recognized |
|
Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging |
|
Recognized in Income on |
|
in Income on Derivative |
|
Instruments |
|
Derivative |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the three months ended September 30, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest Rate Products |
|
Other income / (expense) |
|
$ |
(87 |
) |
|
$ |
18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
$ |
(87 |
) |
|
$ |
18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the nine months ended September 30, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest Rate Products |
|
Other income / (expense) |
|
$ |
(762 |
) |
|
$ |
619 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
$ |
(762 |
) |
|
$ |
619 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit-risk-related Contingent Features
The General Partner has agreements with some of its derivative counterparties that contain a
provision where (1) if the General Partner defaults on any of its indebtedness, including default
where repayment of the indebtedness has not been accelerated by the lender, then the General
Partner could also be declared in default on its derivative obligations; or (2) the General Partner
could be declared in default on its derivative obligations if repayment of the underlying
indebtedness is accelerated by the lender due to the General Partners default on the indebtedness.
Certain of the General Partner s agreements with its derivative counterparties contain
provisions where if there is a change in the General Partners financial condition that materially
changes the General Partner s creditworthiness in an adverse manner, the General Partner may be
required to fully collateralize its obligations under the derivative instrument.
The General Partner also has an agreement with a derivative counterparty that incorporates the
loan and financial covenant provisions of the General Partners indebtedness with a lender
affiliate of the derivative counterparty. Failure to comply with these covenant provisions would
result in the General Partner being in default on any derivative instrument obligations covered by
the agreement.
As of September 30, 2010, the fair value of derivatives in a net liability position that were
allocated to the Operating Partnership, which includes accrued interest but excludes any adjustment
for nonperformance risk, related to these agreements was $7.8 million. As of September 30, 2010,
the General Partner has not posted any collateral related to these agreements. If the General
Partner had breached any of these provisions at September 30, 2010, it would have been required to
settle its obligations under the agreements at their termination value of $7.8 million.
9. CAPITAL STRUCTURE
General Partnership Units
The General Partner has complete discretion to manage and control the operations and business
of the Operating Partnership, which includes but is not limited to the acquisition and disposition
of real property, construction of buildings and making capital improvements, and the borrowing of
funds from outside lenders or UDR and its subsidiaries to finance such activities. The General
Partner can authorize, issue, sell, redeem or purchase any OP unit or securities of the Operating
Partnership without the approval of the limited partners. The General Partner can also approve,
with regard to the issuances of OP units, the class or one or more series of classes, with
designations, preferences, participating, optional or other special rights, powers and duties
including rights, powers and duties senior to limited partnership interests without approval of any
limited partners. There were 110,883 OP units of general partnership interest at September 30, 2010
and December 31, 2009, all of which were held by UDR.
44
Limited Partnership Units
At September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, there were 179,798,525 OP units outstanding, of
which 1,751,671 were Class A Limited Partnership units. UDR owned 174,258,176 or 96.9% and
173,811,933 or 96.7% at September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, respectively. The remaining
5,540,349 or 3.1% and 5,986,592 or 3.3% OP units outstanding were held by non- affiliated partners
at September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009 of which 1,751,671, respectively, were Class A Limited
Partnership units.
The limited partners have the right to require the Operating Partnership to redeem all or a
portion of the OP units held by the limited partner at a redemption price equal to and in the form
of the Cash Amount (as defined in the Operating Partnership Agreement), provided that such OP Units
have been outstanding for at least one year. UDR, as general partner of the Operating Partnership
may, in its sole discretion, purchase the OP Units by paying to the limited partner either the Cash
Amount or the REIT Share Amount (generally one share of common stock of UDR for each OP Unit), as
defined in the Operating Partnership Agreement.
The non-affiliated limited partners capital is adjusted to redemption value at the end of
each reporting period with the corresponding offset against the UDR limited partner capital account
based on the redemption rights noted above. The aggregate value upon redemption of the
then-outstanding OP units held by limited partners was $117.0 million and $98.4 million as of
September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, respectively, based on the value of UDRs common stock at
each period end. Once an OP unit has been redeemed, the redeeming partner has no right to receive
any distributions from the Operating Partnership on or after the date of redemption.
Class A Limited Partnership Units
Class A Partnership units have a cumulative, annual, non-compounded preferred return, which is
equal to 8% based on a value of $16.61 per Class A Limited Partnership unit.
Holders of the Class A Limited Partnership units exclusively possess certain voting rights.
The Operating Partnership may not perform the following without approval of the holders of the
Class A Partnership units: (i) increase the authorized or issued amount of Class A Partnership
units, (ii) reclassify any other partnership interest into Class A Partnership units, (iii) create,
authorize or issue any obligations or security convertible into or the right to purchase any Class
Partnership units, without the approval of the holders of the Class A Partnership units, (iv) enter
into a merger or acquisition, or (v) amend or modify the Operating Partnership Agreement that
affects the rights, preferences or privileges of the Class A Partnership units.
Allocation of profits and losses
Profit of the Operating Partnership is allocated in the following order: (i) to the General
Partner and the Limited Partners in proportion to and up to the amount of cash distributions made
during the year, and (ii) to the General Partner and Limited Partners in accordance with their
percentage interests. Losses and depreciation and amortization expenses, non-recourse liabilities
are allocated to the General Partner and Limited Partners in accordance with their percentage
interests. Losses allocated to the Limited Partners are capped to the extent that such an
allocation would not cause a deficit in the Limited Partners capital account. Such losses are,
therefore, allocated to the General Partner. If any Partners capital balance were to fall into a
deficit any income and gains are allocated to each Partner sufficient to eliminate its negative
capital balance.
10. OTHER COMPREHENSIVE INCOME/(LOSS)
During the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009, other comprehensive
income/(loss) consisted of unrealized gain/(loss) from derivative financial instruments of ($2.9)
million and ($5.8) million and ($1.4) million and $1.1 million, respectively. Total comprehensive
income/(loss) for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009 was ($11.5) million
and ($23.0) million and ($4.8) million and $4.4 million, respectively.
45
11. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
Contingencies
Litigation and Legal Matters
The Operating Partnership is subject to various legal proceedings and claims arising in the
ordinary course of business. The Operating Partnership cannot determine the ultimate liability with
respect to such legal proceedings and claims at this time. The General Partner believes that such
liability, to the extent not provided for through insurance or otherwise, will not have a material
adverse effect on the Operating Partnerships financial condition, results of operations or cash
flow.
12. REPORTABLE SEGMENTS
FASB ASC Topic 280, Segment Reporting (formerly SFAS 131, Disclosures about Segments of an
Enterprise and Related Information) (Topic 280), requires that segment disclosures present the
measure(s) used by the chief operating decision maker to decide how to allocate resources and for
purposes of assessing such segments performance. The Operating Partnership has the same chief
operating decision maker as that of its parent, the General Partner. The chief operating decision
maker consists of several members of UDRs executive management team who use several generally
accepted industry financial measures to assess the performance of the business for our reportable
operating segments.
The Operating Partnership owns and operates multifamily apartment communities throughout the
United States that generate rental and other property related income through the leasing of
apartment homes to a diverse base of tenants. The primary financial measures of the Operating
Partnerships apartment communities are rental income and net operating income (NOI), and are
included in the chief operating decision makers assessment of UDRs performance on a consolidated
basis. Rental income represents gross market rent less adjustments for concessions, vacancy loss
and bad debt. NOI is defined as total revenues less direct property operating expenses. The chief
operating decision maker utilizes NOI as the key measure of segment profit or loss.
The Operating Partnerships two reportable segments are same communities and non-mature/other
communities:
|
|
|
Same store communities represent those communities acquired, developed, and stabilized
prior to July 1, 2009, and held as of September 30, 2010. A comparison of operating results
from the prior year is meaningful as these communities were owned and had stabilized
occupancy and operating expenses as of the beginning of the prior year, there is no plan to
conduct substantial redevelopment activities, and the community is not held for disposition
within the current year. A community is considered to have stabilized occupancy once it
achieves 90% occupancy for at least three consecutive months. |
|
|
|
Non-mature/other communities represent those communities that were acquired or developed
in 2008, 2009 or 2010, sold properties, redevelopment properties, properties classified as
real estate held for disposition, condominium conversion properties, joint venture
properties, properties managed by third parties, and the non-apartment components of mixed
use properties. |
Management evaluates the performance of each of our apartment communities on a same community
and non-mature/other basis, as well as individually and geographically. This is consistent with the
aggregation criteria of Topic 280 as each of our apartment communities generally has similar
economic characteristics, facilities, services, and tenants. Therefore, the Operating Partnerships
reportable segments have been aggregated by geography in a manner identical to that which is
provided to the chief operating decision maker.
All revenues are from external customers and no single tenant or related group of tenants
contributed 10% or more of the Operating Partnerships total revenues during the three and nine
months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009.
46
The accounting policies applicable to the operating segments described above are the same as
those described in Note 1, Summary of Significant Accounting Policies. The following table
details rental income and NOI for the Operating Partnerships reportable segments for the three and
nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009, and reconciles NOI to income from continuing and
discontinued operations per the consolidated statement of operations (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended September 30, |
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reportable apartment home segment rental income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same Store Communities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Western Region |
|
$ |
50,053 |
|
|
$ |
50,999 |
|
|
$ |
149,312 |
|
|
$ |
155,366 |
|
Mid-Atlantic Region |
|
|
16,217 |
|
|
|
15,456 |
|
|
|
47,937 |
|
|
|
46,518 |
|
Southeastern Region |
|
|
10,231 |
|
|
|
10,281 |
|
|
|
30,610 |
|
|
|
31,047 |
|
Southwestern Region |
|
|
6,624 |
|
|
|
6,620 |
|
|
|
19,789 |
|
|
|
20,156 |
|
Non-Mature communities/Other |
|
|
5,097 |
|
|
|
4,389 |
|
|
|
13,869 |
|
|
|
13,918 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total segment and consolidated rental income |
|
$ |
88,222 |
|
|
$ |
87,745 |
|
|
$ |
261,517 |
|
|
$ |
267,005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reportable apartment home segment NOI |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same Store Communities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Western Region |
|
$ |
34,127 |
|
|
$ |
35,402 |
|
|
$ |
102,605 |
|
|
$ |
109,552 |
|
Mid-Atlantic Region |
|
|
10,982 |
|
|
|
10,292 |
|
|
|
32,415 |
|
|
|
31,497 |
|
Southeastern Region |
|
|
6,233 |
|
|
|
6,340 |
|
|
|
19,061 |
|
|
|
19,524 |
|
Southwestern Region |
|
|
3,917 |
|
|
|
3,923 |
|
|
|
12,105 |
|
|
|
12,221 |
|
Non-Mature communities/Other |
|
|
3,026 |
|
|
|
3,207 |
|
|
|
8,853 |
|
|
|
9,768 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total segment and consolidated NOI |
|
|
58,285 |
|
|
|
59,164 |
|
|
|
175,039 |
|
|
|
182,562 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reconciling items: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-property income |
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
1,621 |
|
|
|
5,667 |
|
Property management |
|
|
(2,426 |
) |
|
|
(2,413 |
) |
|
|
(7,192 |
) |
|
|
(7,343 |
) |
Other operating expenses |
|
|
(1,244 |
) |
|
|
(1,222 |
) |
|
|
(3,712 |
) |
|
|
(3,679 |
) |
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
(41,674 |
) |
|
|
(41,606 |
) |
|
|
(124,797 |
) |
|
|
(125,077 |
) |
Interest |
|
|
(13,240 |
) |
|
|
(13,795 |
) |
|
|
(39,281 |
) |
|
|
(38,908 |
) |
General and administrative |
|
|
(8,355 |
) |
|
|
(3,656 |
) |
|
|
(19,010 |
) |
|
|
(11,467 |
) |
Income from discontinued operations |
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
146 |
|
|
|
124 |
|
|
|
1,562 |
|
Non-controlling interests |
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(44 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss)/income attributable to OP unitholders |
|
$ |
(8,571 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,371 |
) |
|
$ |
(17,252 |
) |
|
$ |
3,317 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table details the assets of the Operating Partnerships reportable segments as
of September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009 (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reportable apartment home segment assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same Store Communities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Western Region |
|
$ |
2,135,309 |
|
|
$ |
2,124,693 |
|
Mid-Atlantic Region |
|
|
718,725 |
|
|
|
714,417 |
|
Southeastern Region |
|
|
353,569 |
|
|
|
350,084 |
|
Southwestern Region |
|
|
253,902 |
|
|
|
251,778 |
|
Non-Mature communities/Other |
|
|
229,075 |
|
|
|
199,916 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total segment assets |
|
|
3,690,580 |
|
|
|
3,640,888 |
|
Accumulated depreciation |
|
|
(842,467 |
) |
|
|
(717,892 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total segment assets net book value |
|
|
2,848,113 |
|
|
|
2,922,996 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reconciling items: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
924 |
|
|
|
442 |
|
Restricted cash |
|
|
7,401 |
|
|
|
6,865 |
|
Deferred financing costs, net |
|
|
7,686 |
|
|
|
8,727 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
21,358 |
|
|
|
22,037 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total consolidated assets |
|
$ |
2,885,482 |
|
|
$ |
2,961,067 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
47
Capital expenditures related to the Operating Partnerships same communities totaled $5.8
million and $18.9 million and $7.4 million and $24.1 million for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively. Capital expenditures related to the Operating
Partnerships non-mature/other communities totaled $2,000 and $214,000 and $299,000 and $1.1
million for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
Markets included in the above geographic segments are as follows:
|
i. |
|
Western Orange County, San Francisco, Monterey Peninsula, Los Angeles, Seattle,
Sacramento, Inland Empire, Portland, and San Diego |
|
|
ii. |
|
Mid-Atlantic Metropolitan DC and Baltimore |
|
|
iii. |
|
Southeastern Nashville, Tampa, Jacksonville, and Other Florida |
|
|
iv. |
|
Southwestern Dallas and Phoenix |
48
Item 2. MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Forward-Looking Statements
This Report contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the
Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Such forward-looking
statements include, without limitation, statements concerning property acquisitions and
dispositions, development activity and capital expenditures, capital raising activities, rent
growth, occupancy, and rental expense growth. Words such as expects, anticipates, intends,
plans, believes, seeks, estimates, and variations of such words and similar expressions are
intended to identify such forward-looking statements. Such statements involve known and unknown
risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause our actual results, performance or
achievements to be materially different from the results of operations or plans expressed or
implied by such forward-looking statements. Such factors include, among other things, unanticipated
adverse business developments affecting us, or our properties, adverse changes in the real estate
markets and general and local economies and business conditions. Although we believe that the
assumptions underlying the forward-looking statements contained herein are reasonable, any of the
assumptions could be inaccurate, and therefore such statements included in this Report may not
prove to be accurate. In light of the significant uncertainties inherent in the forward-looking
statements included herein, the inclusion of such information should not be regarded as a
representation by us or any other person that the results or conditions described in such
statements or our objectives and plans will be achieved.
The following factors, among others, could cause our future results to differ materially from
those expressed in the forward-looking statements:
|
|
general economic conditions, |
|
|
|
unfavorable changes in the apartment market and economic conditions that could adversely affect occupancy
levels and rental rates, |
|
|
|
the failure of acquisitions to achieve anticipated results, |
|
|
|
possible difficulty in selling apartment communities, |
|
|
|
competitive factors that may limit our ability to lease apartment homes or increase or maintain rents, |
|
|
|
insufficient cash flow that could affect our debt financing and create refinancing risk, |
|
|
|
failure to generate sufficient revenue, which could impair our debt service payments and distributions to
stockholders, |
|
|
|
development and construction risks that may impact our profitability, |
|
|
|
potential damage from natural disasters, including hurricanes and other weather-related events, which
could result in substantial costs to us, |
|
|
|
risks from extraordinary losses for which we may not have insurance or adequate reserves, |
|
|
|
uninsured losses due to insurance deductibles, self-insurance retention, uninsured claims or casualties,
or losses in excess of applicable coverage, |
|
|
|
delays in completing developments and lease-ups on schedule, |
|
|
|
our failure to succeed in new markets, |
|
|
|
changing interest rates, which could increase interest costs and affect the market price of our securities, |
49
|
|
potential liability for environmental contamination, which could result in substantial costs to us, |
|
|
|
the imposition of federal taxes if we fail to qualify as a REIT under the Code in any taxable year, |
|
|
|
our internal control over financial reporting may not be considered effective which could result in a loss
of investor confidence in our financial reports, and in turn have an adverse effect on our stock
price, and |
|
|
|
changes in real estate laws, tax laws and other laws affecting our business. |
A discussion of these and other factors affecting our business and prospects is set forth
below in Part II, Item 1A. Risk Factors. We encourage investors to review these risk factors.
UDR, INC.:
Business Overview
UDR, Inc. is a real estate investment trust, or REIT, that owns, acquires, renovates,
develops, and manages apartment communities. We were formed in 1972 as a Virginia corporation. In
September 2003, we changed our state of incorporation from Virginia to Maryland. Our subsidiaries
include an operating partnership United Dominion Realty, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership.
Unless the context otherwise requires, all references in this Report to we, us, our, the
Company, or UDR refer collectively to UDR, Inc., its subsidiaries and its consolidated joint
ventures.
At September 30, 2010, our consolidated real estate portfolio included 172 communities with
48,409 apartment homes and our total real estate portfolio, inclusive of our unconsolidated
communities, included an additional 11 communities with 4,143 apartment homes.
50
The following table summarizes our market information by major geographic markets as of
September 30, 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
As of September 30, 2010 |
|
|
September 30, 2010 |
|
|
September 30, 2010 (a) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of |
|
|
Number of |
|
|
of Total |
|
|
Carrying |
|
|
Average |
|
|
Total Income |
|
|
Average |
|
|
Total Income |
|
|
|
Apartment |
|
|
Apartment |
|
|
Carrying |
|
|
Value |
|
|
Physical |
|
|
per Occupied |
|
|
Physical |
|
|
per Occupied |
|
Same Communities |
|
Communities |
|
|
Homes |
|
|
Value |
|
|
(in thousands) |
|
|
Occupancy |
|
|
Home (b) |
|
|
Occupancy |
|
|
Home (b) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Western Region |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Co, CA |
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
4,214 |
|
|
|
11.4 |
% |
|
$ |
784,131 |
|
|
|
95.1 |
% |
|
$ |
1,487 |
|
|
|
95.4 |
% |
|
$ |
1,481 |
|
San Francisco, CA |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
1,727 |
|
|
|
5.9 |
% |
|
|
404,228 |
|
|
|
96.9 |
% |
|
|
1,922 |
|
|
|
96.8 |
% |
|
|
1,903 |
|
Monterey Peninsula, CA |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
1,565 |
|
|
|
2.2 |
% |
|
|
152,398 |
|
|
|
94.8 |
% |
|
|
1,082 |
|
|
|
94.5 |
% |
|
|
1,063 |
|
Los Angeles, CA |
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
1,678 |
|
|
|
6.3 |
% |
|
|
432,514 |
|
|
|
95.6 |
% |
|
|
1,671 |
|
|
|
96.1 |
% |
|
|
1,532 |
|
San Diego, CA |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
1,123 |
|
|
|
2.5 |
% |
|
|
174,477 |
|
|
|
95.0 |
% |
|
|
1,340 |
|
|
|
95.4 |
% |
|
|
1,330 |
|
Seattle, WA |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
1,725 |
|
|
|
4.4 |
% |
|
|
304,044 |
|
|
|
95.9 |
% |
|
|
1,182 |
|
|
|
96.5 |
% |
|
|
1,172 |
|
Inland Empire, CA |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
1,074 |
|
|
|
2.2 |
% |
|
|
150,120 |
|
|
|
94.5 |
% |
|
|
1,231 |
|
|
|
94.9 |
% |
|
|
1,220 |
|
Sacramento, CA |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
914 |
|
|
|
1.0 |
% |
|
|
67,849 |
|
|
|
94.1 |
% |
|
|
868 |
|
|
|
93.6 |
% |
|
|
868 |
|
Portland, OR |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
716 |
|
|
|
1.0 |
% |
|
|
69,406 |
|
|
|
96.9 |
% |
|
|
947 |
|
|
|
96.0 |
% |
|
|
940 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mid-Atlantic Region |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Metropolitan DC |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
3,983 |
|
|
|
10.4 |
% |
|
|
709,644 |
|
|
|
96.9 |
% |
|
|
1,568 |
|
|
|
96.8 |
% |
|
|
1,531 |
|
Richmond, VA |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
2,211 |
|
|
|
2.7 |
% |
|
|
185,989 |
|
|
|
95.9 |
% |
|
|
1,017 |
|
|
|
95.7 |
% |
|
|
1,013 |
|
Baltimore, MD |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
2,121 |
|
|
|
3.7 |
% |
|
|
251,593 |
|
|
|
96.1 |
% |
|
|
1,292 |
|
|
|
96.8 |
% |
|
|
1,264 |
|
Norfolk VA |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
1,438 |
|
|
|
1.2 |
% |
|
|
84,122 |
|
|
|
95.2 |
% |
|
|
962 |
|
|
|
95.4 |
% |
|
|
957 |
|
Other Mid-Atlantic |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
1,132 |
|
|
|
1.1 |
% |
|
|
78,489 |
|
|
|
96.6 |
% |
|
|
1,029 |
|
|
|
96.4 |
% |
|
|
1,015 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Southeastern Region |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tampa, FL |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
3,555 |
|
|
|
4.1 |
% |
|
|
278,870 |
|
|
|
95.5 |
% |
|
|
929 |
|
|
|
95.6 |
% |
|
|
919 |
|
Orlando, FL |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
2,796 |
|
|
|
3.2 |
% |
|
|
220,089 |
|
|
|
95.1 |
% |
|
|
897 |
|
|
|
95.3 |
% |
|
|
897 |
|
Nashville, TN |
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
2,260 |
|
|
|
2.6 |
% |
|
|
179,732 |
|
|
|
96.6 |
% |
|
|
851 |
|
|
|
96.7 |
% |
|
|
843 |
|
Jacksonville, FL |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
1,857 |
|
|
|
2.3 |
% |
|
|
156,112 |
|
|
|
95.2 |
% |
|
|
824 |
|
|
|
95.1 |
% |
|
|
816 |
|
Other Florida |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
1,184 |
|
|
|
1.6 |
% |
|
|
111,816 |
|
|
|
93.3 |
% |
|
|
978 |
|
|
|
94.3 |
% |
|
|
976 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Southwestern Region |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dallas, TX |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
2,975 |
|
|
|
4.5 |
% |
|
|
308,304 |
|
|
|
96.1 |
% |
|
|
931 |
|
|
|
95.7 |
% |
|
|
949 |
|
Phoenix, AZ |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
1,162 |
|
|
|
1.4 |
% |
|
|
95,258 |
|
|
|
95.0 |
% |
|
|
865 |
|
|
|
95.3 |
% |
|
|
851 |
|
Austin, TX |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
390 |
|
|
|
0.9 |
% |
|
|
60,019 |
|
|
|
96.4 |
% |
|
|
1,137 |
|
|
|
96.1 |
% |
|
|
1,105 |
|
Houston, TX |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
320 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
% |
|
|
22,166 |
|
|
|
95.5 |
% |
|
|
896 |
|
|
|
92.7 |
% |
|
|
896 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total/Average Same Communities |
|
|
151 |
|
|
|
42,120 |
|
|
|
77.0 |
% |
|
|
5,281,370 |
|
|
|
95.7 |
% |
|
$ |
1,167 |
|
|
|
95.7 |
% |
|
$ |
1,153 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non Matures, Commercial Properties &
Other |
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
6,073 |
|
|
|
21.6 |
% |
|
|
1,477,088 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Real Estate Held for Investment |
|
|
171 |
|
|
|
48,193 |
|
|
|
98.6 |
% |
|
|
6,758,458 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real Estate Under Development (c) |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
216 |
|
|
|
1.4 |
% |
|
|
94,877 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Real Estate Owned |
|
|
172 |
|
|
|
48,409 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
6,853,335 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Accumulated Depreciation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,560,867 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Real Estate Owned, Net of
Accumulated Depreciation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
5,292,468 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
The same community population for the nine months ended September 30, 2010 includes 40,699
homes. |
|
(b) |
|
Total Income per Occupied Home represents total monthly revenues per weighted average number
of apartment homes occupied. |
|
(c) |
|
The Company is currently developing two wholly-owned communities with a total of 712
apartment homes of which 496 have not yet been completed. |
51
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Liquidity is the ability to meet present and future financial obligations either through
operating cash flows, the sale of properties, and the issuance of debt and equity. Both the
coordination of asset and liability maturities and effective capital management are important to
the maintenance of liquidity. Our primary source of liquidity is our cash flow from operations as
determined by rental rates, occupancy levels, and operating expenses related to our portfolio of
apartment homes and borrowings under credit agreements. We routinely use our unsecured credit
facility to temporarily fund certain investing and financing activities prior to arranging for
longer-term financing or the issuance of equity or debt securities. During the past several years,
proceeds from the sale of real estate have been used for both investing and financing activities as
we repositioned our portfolio.
We expect to meet our short-term liquidity requirements generally through net cash provided by
operations and borrowings under credit agreements. We expect to meet certain long-term liquidity
requirements such as scheduled debt maturities, the repayment of financing on development
activities, and potential property acquisitions, through secured and unsecured borrowings, the
issuance of debt or equity securities, and the disposition of properties. We believe that our net
cash provided by operations and borrowings under credit agreements will continue to be adequate to
meet both operating requirements and the payment of dividends by the Company in accordance with
REIT requirements. Likewise, the budgeted expenditures for improvements and renovations of certain
properties are expected to be funded from property operations, borrowings under credit agreements,
and the issuance of debt or equity securities.
We have a shelf registration statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or
SEC which provides for the issuance of an indeterminate amount of common stock, preferred stock,
guarantees of debt securities, warrants, subscription rights, purchase contracts and units to
facilitate future financing activities in the public capital markets. Access to capital markets is
dependent on market conditions at the time of issuance.
On September 13, 2010, the Company entered into an agreement to sell 16,000,000 shares of its
common stock at a price of $20.35 per share in an underwritten public offering. The Company granted
the underwriters a 30-day option to purchase up to an additional 2,400,000 shares of common stock
to cover overallotments, if any. We sold 18,400,000 shares of common stock in this offering, with
aggregate gross proceeds of approximately $374.4 million at a price per share of $20.35. Aggregate
net proceeds from the offering, after deducting related expenses were approximately $359.2 million.
On September 15, 2009, the Company entered into an equity distribution agreement under which
the Company may offer and sell up to 15.0 million shares of its common stock over time to or
through its sales agents. During the three months ended September 30, 2010, we sold 239,014 shares
of common stock through this program for aggregate gross proceeds of approximately $5.1 million at
a weighted average price per share of $21.47. Aggregate net proceeds from such sales, after
deducting related expenses, including commissions paid to the sales agents of approximately
$100,000, were approximately $5.0 million. During the nine months ended September 30, 2010, we sold
6,144,367 shares of common stock through this program for aggregate gross proceeds of approximately
$110.8 million at a weighted average price per share of $18.04. Aggregate net proceeds from such
sales, after deducting related expenses, including commissions paid to the sales agents of
approximately $2.2 million, were approximately $108.6 million.
On December 7, 2009, the Company entered into an Amended and Restated Distribution Agreement
with respect to the issue and sale by the Company from time to time of its Medium-Term Notes,
Series A Due Nine Months or More From Date of Issue. In February 2010, the Company issued $150
million of 5.25% senior unsecured medium-term notes under the Amended and Restated Distribution
Agreement. These notes were priced at 99.46% of the principal amount at issuance and had a discount
of $701,000 at September 30, 2010.
Future Capital Needs
Future development expenditures are expected to be funded with proceeds from construction
loans, through joint ventures, unsecured or secured credit facilities, proceeds from the issuance
of equity or debt securities, the sale of properties and to a lesser extent, with cash flows
provided by operating activities. Acquisition activity in strategic markets is expected to be
largely financed by the reinvestment of proceeds from the sale of properties, through the
issuance of equity or debt securities, the issuance of operating partnership units, and the
assumption or placement of secured and/or unsecured debt.
52
During the remainder of 2010, we have approximately $1.6 million of secured debt maturing,
including principal amortization, and no unsecured debt maturing. We anticipate repaying that debt
with cash flow from our operations, proceeds from the issuance of shares under our recent public
offering of common stock and from disposition proceeds.
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
Our critical accounting policies are those having the most impact on the reporting of our
financial condition and results and those requiring significant judgments and estimates. These
policies include those related to (1) capital expenditures, (2) impairment of long-lived assets,
(3) real estate investment properties, and (4) revenue recognition.
Our other critical accounting policies are described in more detail in the section entitled
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations in UDRs
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009, filed with the SEC on February 25,
2010. There have been no significant changes in our critical accounting policies from those
reported in our Form 10-K filed with the SEC on February 25, 2010. With respect to these critical
accounting policies, we believe that the application of judgments and assessments is consistently
applied and produces financial information that fairly depicts the results of operations for all
periods presented.
Statements of Cash Flow
The following discussion explains the changes in net cash provided by operating activities,
net cash used in investing activities, and net cash provided by/(used in) financing activities that
are presented in our Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows.
Operating Activities
For the nine months ended September 30, 2010, our net cash flow provided by operating
activities was $157.5 million compared to $189.7 million for the comparable period in 2009. The
decrease in cash flow from operating activities is primarily due to changes in operating assets and
liabilities.
Investing Activities
For the nine months ended September 30, 2010, net cash used in investing activities was $478.8
million compared to $95.7 million for the comparable period in 2009. Changes in the level of
investment activities from period to period reflects our strategy as it relates to acquisitions,
capital expenditures, development and disposition activities, as well as the impact of the capital
market environment on these activities, all of which are discussed in further detail throughout
this Report.
Acquisitions
During the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010, the Company acquired five apartment
communities located in Orange County, CA; Baltimore, MD; Los Angeles, CA; and Boston, MA for a
total gross purchase price of $412.0 million. During the same periods, the Company also acquired
land located in San Francisco, CA for a gross purchase price of $23.6 million.
Our long-term strategic plan is to continue achieving greater operating efficiencies by
investing in fewer, more concentrated markets. As a result, we have been seeking to expand our
interests in communities located in the California, Metropolitan D.C., Texas and Washington State
markets over the past years. Prospectively, we plan to channel new investments into those markets
we believe will provide the best investment returns. Markets will be targeted based upon defined
criteria including favorable job formation, low single-family home affordability and favorable
demand/supply ratio for multifamily housing.
53
Capital Expenditures
In conformity with GAAP, we capitalize those expenditures that materially enhance the value of
an existing asset or substantially extend the useful life of an existing asset. Expenditures
necessary to maintain an existing property in ordinary operating condition are expensed as
incurred.
During the nine months ended September 30, 2010, $35.6 million or $798 per home was spent on
recurring capital expenditures. These include revenue enhancing capital expenditures,
exterior/interior upgrades, turnover related expenditures for floor coverings and appliances, other
recurring capital expenditures such as exterior paint, roofs, siding, parking lots, and asset
preservation capital expenditures. In addition, major renovations totaled $21.2 million for the
nine months ended September 30, 2010. Total capital expenditures, which in aggregate include
recurring capital expenditures and major renovations, of $56.8 million or $1,274 per home was spent
on all of our communities, excluding development and commercial properties, for the nine months
ended September 30, 2010.
The following table outlines capital expenditures and repair and maintenance costs for all of
our communities, excluding real estate under development, condominium conversions and commercial
properties, for the periods presented:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine months ended September 30, |
|
|
Nine months ended September 30, |
|
|
|
(dollars in thousands) |
|
|
(per home) |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
% Change |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
% Change |
|
Revenue enhancing improvements |
|
$ |
12,536 |
|
|
$ |
19,342 |
|
|
|
-35.2 |
% |
|
$ |
281 |
|
|
$ |
445 |
|
|
|
-37.0 |
% |
Turnover capital expenditures |
|
|
6,902 |
|
|
|
7,163 |
|
|
|
-3.6 |
% |
|
|
155 |
|
|
|
165 |
|
|
|
-6.7 |
% |
Asset preservation expenditures |
|
|
16,151 |
|
|
|
15,027 |
|
|
|
7.5 |
% |
|
|
362 |
|
|
|
346 |
|
|
|
4.9 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total recurring capital expenditures |
|
|
35,589 |
|
|
|
41,532 |
|
|
|
-14.3 |
% |
|
|
798 |
|
|
|
956 |
|
|
|
-16.6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Major renovations |
|
|
21,248 |
|
|
|
23,639 |
|
|
|
-10.1 |
% |
|
|
476 |
|
|
|
544 |
|
|
|
-12.2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total capital expenditures |
|
$ |
56,837 |
|
|
$ |
65,171 |
|
|
|
-12.8 |
% |
|
$ |
1,274 |
|
|
$ |
1,500 |
|
|
|
-15.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repair and maintenance expense |
|
$ |
24,521 |
|
|
$ |
22,557 |
|
|
|
8.7 |
% |
|
$ |
550 |
|
|
$ |
519 |
|
|
|
5.6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average stabilized home count |
|
|
44,619 |
|
|
|
43,451 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We will continue to selectively add revenue enhancing improvements which we believe will
provide a return on investment substantially in excess of our cost of capital. Recurring capital
expenditures during 2010 are currently expected to be approximately $1,050 per home.
Development
At September 30, 2010, our development pipeline for wholly-owned communities totaled 712 homes
with a budget of $151.7 million in which we have a carrying value of $94.9 million. We anticipate
the completion of these communities through the first quarter of 2012.
For the nine months ended September 30, 2010, we invested approximately $79.7 million in
development projects, a decrease of $62.5 million from our 2009 level of $142.2 million. We also
completed development of three wholly-owned communities with 1,215 apartment homes with costs of
$180.7 million, and one community held by a consolidated joint venture with 274 apartment homes and
retail space with costs of $121.6 million as of September 30, 2010.
54
Consolidated Joint Ventures
UDR is a partner with an unaffiliated third party in a joint venture (989 Elements) which
owns and operates a 23-story, 166 home high-rise apartment community in the central business
district of Bellevue, Washington. On December 30, 2009, UDR entered into an agreement with our
partner to purchase its 49% interest in 989 Elements for $7.7 million. Concurrently, our partner
resigned as managing member and appointed UDR as managing member. In addition, our partner
relinquished its voting rights and approval rights and its ability to substantively participate in
the decision-making process of the joint venture resulting in the consolidation of the joint
venture. The joint venture assets and liabilities were recorded at fair value. The fair value of
the assets was $55.0 million ($54.8 million of real estate owned and $200,000 of current assets)
and the fair value of liabilities was $34.1 million ($33.4 million of a
construction loan, net of fair market value adjustment of $1.6 million and $700,000 of current
liabilities) at the consolidation date. On December 31, 2009, the Company repaid the outstanding
balance of $35.0 million on the construction loan held by 989 Elements. In March 2010, the Company
paid $7.7 million and acquired our partners 49% interest in the joint venture. At closing of the
agreement and at September 30, 2010, the Companys interest in 989 Elements was 98%.
UDR is a partner with an unaffiliated third party in a joint venture (Elements Too) which
owns and operates a 274 home apartment community in the central business district of Bellevue,
Washington. Construction began in the fourth quarter of 2006 and was completed in the first
quarter of 2010. On October 16, 2009, our partner resigned as managing member and appointed UDR as
managing member. In addition, our partner relinquished its voting rights and approval rights and
its ability to substantively participate in the decision-making process of the joint venture
resulting in the consolidation of the joint venture. The joint venture assets and liabilities were
recorded at fair value. Prior to consolidation, our equity investment in Elements Too was $24.4
million (net of an $11.0 million equity loss recorded as of December 31, 2009) at October 16, 2009.
The fair value of the assets was $100.3 million ($99.5 million of real estate owned and $814,000 of
current assets) and the fair value of liabilities was $75.6 million ($70.5 million of a
construction loan, $917,000 of a derivative instrument, and $4.2 million of current liabilities).
On December 30, 2009, UDR entered into an agreement with our partner to purchase its 49% interest
in Elements Too for $3.2 million. In March 2010, the Company paid the outstanding balance of $3.2
million and acquired our partners 49% interest in the joint venture. During the nine months ended
September 30, 2010, the Company repaid the outstanding balance of $70.5 million on the construction
loan held by Elements Too.
UDR is a partner with an unaffiliated third party in a joint venture (Bellevue) which owns
an operating retail site in Bellevue, Washington. The Company initially planned to develop a 430
home high rise apartment building with ground floor retail on an existing operating retail center.
However, during the year ended December 31, 2009, the joint venture decided to continue to operate
the retail property as opposed to developing a high rise apartment building on the site. On
December 30, 2009, UDR entered into an agreement with our partner to purchase its 49% interest in
Bellevue for $5.2 million. In addition, our partner resigned as managing member and appointed UDR
as managing member. Concurrent with its resignation, our partner relinquished its voting rights and
approval rights and its ability to substantively participate in the decision-making process of the
joint venture resulting in the consolidation of the joint venture at fair value. Prior to
consolidation, our equity investment in Bellevue was $5.0 million (net of a $5.0 million equity
loss recorded as of December 31, 2009). The fair value of the assets was $33.0 million ($32.8
million of real estate owned and $211,000 of current assets) and the fair value of liabilities was
$23.0 million ($22.3 million of a mortgage payable, $506,000 of a derivative instrument, and
$213,000 of current liabilities). In March 2010, the Company paid $5.2 million and acquired our
partners 49% interest in the joint venture. At closing of the agreement and at September 30, 2010,
the Companys interest in Bellevue was 98%.
Prior to their consolidation in 2009, we evaluated our investments in these joint ventures
when events or changes in circumstances indicate that there may be an other-than-temporary decline
in value. We considered various factors to determine if a decrease in value of each of these
investments is other-than-temporary. In 2009, we recognized a non-cash charge of $16.0 million
representing the other-than-temporary decline in fair values below the carrying values of two of
the Companys Bellevue, Washington joint ventures.
For additional information regarding these joint ventures, see Note 5, Joint Ventures, in
the Consolidated Financial Statements of UDR, Inc. included in this Report.
Unconsolidated Joint Ventures
In August 2009, UDR and an unaffiliated third party formed a joint venture for the investment
of up to $450.0 million in multifamily properties located in key, high barrier to entry markets.
The partners will contribute equity of $180.0 million of which the Companys maximum equity will be
30% or $54.0 million when fully invested. During the quarter ended June 30, 2010, the joint venture
acquired its first property (151 homes) located in Metropolitan Washington D.C. for $43.1 million.
At closing and at September 30, 2010, the Company owned 30%. Our investment at September 30, 2010
and December 31, 2009 was $5.3 million and $242,000, respectively.
55
In November 2007, UDR and an unaffiliated third party formed a joint venture which owns and
operates various properties located in Texas. UDR contributed cash and property equal to 20% of
the fair value of the properties.
The unaffiliated member contributed cash equal to 80% of the fair value of the properties
comprising the joint venture, which was then used to purchase the nine operating properties from
UDR. Our initial investment was $20.4 million. Our investment at September 30, 2010 and December
31, 2009 was $11.1 million and $13.9 million, respectively.
For additional information regarding these joint ventures, see Note 5, Joint Ventures, in
the Consolidated Financial Statements of UDR, Inc. included in this Report.
Disposition of Investments
UDR sold one 149 unit community during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010.
UDR recognized after-tax gains for financial reporting purposes of $3.9 million on this sale and is
included in discontinued operations. Proceeds from the sale were used primarily to reduce debt.
We plan to continue to pursue our strategy of exiting markets where long-term growth prospects
are limited and redeploying capital into markets we believe will provide the best investment
returns.
Financing Activities
For the nine months ended September 30, 2010, our net cash provided by/(used in) financing
activities was $325.5 million compared to ($81.7) million for the comparable period of 2009.
The following significant financing activities occurred during the nine months ended September
30, 2010:
|
|
|
repaid $99.7 million of secured debt and $50.0 million of maturing medium-term unsecured
notes. The $99.7 million of secured debt includes $70.5 million for a maturing
construction loan held by one of our consolidated joint ventures, repayment of $2.0 million
of credit facilities and $27.2 million of mortgage payments; |
|
|
|
repurchased unsecured debt with a notional amount of $29.2 million for $29.4 million
resulting in a loss on extinguishment of $1.0 million, which includes the write off of
related deferred finance charges. The unsecured debt repurchased by the Company matures in
2011. As a result of this repurchase, the loss is represented as an addition to interest
expense on the Consolidated Statement of Operations; |
|
|
|
net repayments of $76.7 million were applied toward the Companys $600 million revolving
credit facility; |
|
|
|
received proceeds of $64.7 million from secured debt financings. The $64.7 million
includes $33.8 million in variable rate mortgages, $19.6 million in fixed rate mortgages,
and $11.3 million in credit facilities; |
|
|
|
in December 2009, the Company entered into an Amended and Restated Distribution
Agreement with respect to the issue and sale by the Company from time to time of its
Medium-Term Notes, Series A Due Nine Months or More From Date of Issue. In February 2010,
the Company issued $150 million of 5.25% senior unsecured medium-term notes under the
Amended and Restated Distribution Agreement. These notes were priced at 99.46% of the
principal amount at issuance and had a discount of $701,000 at September 30, 2010; |
|
|
|
in September 2009, the Company initiated an At the Market equity distribution program
pursuant to which we may sell up to 15 million shares of common stock from time to time to
or through sales agents, by means of ordinary brokers transactions on the New York Stock
Exchange at prevailing market prices at the time of sale, or as otherwise agreed with the
applicable agent. During the nine months ended September 30, 2010, we sold 6,144,367
shares of common stock through this program for aggregate gross proceeds of approximately
$110.8 million at a weighted average price per share of $18.04. Aggregate net proceeds from
such sales, after deducting related expenses, including commissions paid to the sales
agents of approximately $2.2 million, were approximately $103.6 million; and |
56
|
|
|
in September 2010, the Company initiated an underwritten public offering to sell
16,000,000 shares of its common stock at a price of $20.35 per share. The Company granted
the underwriters a 30-day option to purchase up to an additional 2,400,000 shares of common
stock to cover overallotments, if any. We sold 18,400,000 shares of common stock in this
offering for aggregate gross proceeds of approximately $374.4 million at a price of $20.35
per share. Aggregate net proceeds from the offering, after deducting related expenses were
approximately $359.2 million. |
Credit Facilities
As of September 30, 2010, we have secured credit facilities with Fannie Mae with an aggregate
commitment of $1.4 billion with $1.2 billion outstanding. The Fannie Mae credit facilities are for
an initial term of 10 years, bear interest at floating and fixed rates, and certain variable rate
facilities can be extended for an additional five years at our option. We have $948.0 million of
the funded balance fixed at a weighted average interest rate of 5.4% and the remaining balance on
these facilities is currently at a weighted average variable rate of 1.7%.
We have a $600 million unsecured revolving credit facility that matures on July 26, 2012.
Under certain circumstances, we may increase the $600 million credit facility to $750 million.
Based on our current credit rating, the $600 million credit facility carries an interest rate equal
to LIBOR plus 47.5 basis points. In addition, the unsecured credit facility contains a provision
that allows us to bid up to 50% of the commitment and we can bid out the entire unsecured credit
facility once per quarter so long as we maintain an investment grade rating. As of September 30,
2010, we had $112.6 million of borrowings outstanding under the credit facility leaving $487.4
million of unused capacity (excluding $8.0 million of letters of credit at September 30, 2010).
The Fannie Mae credit facilities and the bank revolving credit facility are subject to
customary financial covenants and limitations.
Derivative Instruments
As part of UDRs overall interest rate risk management strategy, we use derivatives as a means
to fix the interest rates of variable rate debt obligations or to hedge anticipated financing
transactions. UDRs derivative transactions used for interest rate risk management include
interest rate swaps with indexes that relate to the pricing of specific financial instruments of
UDR. We believe that we have appropriately controlled our interest rate risk through the use of
derivative instruments to minimize any unintended effect on consolidated earnings. Derivative
contracts did not have a material impact on the results of operations during the nine months ended
September 30, 2010 (see Note 10, Derivatives and Hedging Activity in the Consolidated Financial
Statements of UDR, Inc. included in this Report).
Funds from Operations
Funds from operations, or FFO, is defined as net income (computed in accordance with GAAP),
excluding gains (or losses) from sales of depreciable property, plus real estate depreciation and
amortization, and after adjustments for unconsolidated partnerships and joint ventures. We compute
FFO for all periods presented in accordance with the recommendations set forth by the National
Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts (NAREIT) April 1, 2002 White Paper. We consider FFO
in evaluating property acquisitions and our operating performance, and believe that FFO should be
considered along with, but not as an alternative to, net income and cash flow as a measure of our
activities in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. FFO does not represent cash
generated from operating activities in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and
is not necessarily indicative of cash available to fund cash needs.
57
Historical cost accounting for real estate assets in accordance with GAAP implicitly assumes
that the value of real estate assets diminishes predictably over time. Since real estate values
instead have historically risen or fallen with market conditions, many industry investors and
analysts have considered the presentation of operating results for real estate companies that use
historical cost accounting to be insufficient by themselves. Thus, NAREIT created FFO as a
supplemental measure of REIT operating performance and defines FFO as net income (computed in
accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States), excluding gains (or
losses) from sales of depreciable property, plus depreciation and amortization, and after
adjustments for unconsolidated
partnerships and joint ventures. The use of FFO, combined with the required presentations, has
been fundamentally beneficial, improving the understanding of operating results of REITs among the
investing public and making comparisons of REIT operating results more meaningful. We generally
consider FFO to be a useful measure for reviewing our comparative operating and financial
performance (although FFO should be reviewed in conjunction with net income which remains the
primary measure of performance) because by excluding gains or losses related to sales of previously
depreciated operating real estate assets and excluding real estate asset depreciation and
amortization, FFO can help one compare the operating performance of a Companys real estate between
periods or as compared to different companies. We believe that FFO is the best measure of economic
profitability for real estate investment trusts.
The following table outlines our FFO calculation and reconciliation to GAAP for the three and
nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009 (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
Septebmer 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss attributable to UDR, Inc. |
|
$ |
(23,766 |
) |
|
$ |
(37,976 |
) |
|
$ |
(74,443 |
) |
|
$ |
(62,663 |
) |
Distributions to preferred stockholders |
|
|
(2,368 |
) |
|
|
(2,800 |
) |
|
|
(7,119 |
) |
|
|
(8,400 |
) |
Real estate depreciation and amortization, including discontinued operations |
|
|
75,591 |
|
|
|
69,695 |
|
|
|
221,524 |
|
|
|
207,747 |
|
Non-controlling interest |
|
|
(839 |
) |
|
|
(1,779 |
) |
|
|
(2,828 |
) |
|
|
(3,175 |
) |
Real estate depreciation and amortization on unconsolidated joint ventures |
|
|
1,215 |
|
|
|
1,276 |
|
|
|
3,375 |
|
|
|
3,584 |
|
Net gain on the sale of depreciable property in discontinued operations, excluding RE3 |
|
|
(3,878 |
) |
|
|
(555 |
) |
|
|
(3,999 |
) |
|
|
(2,440 |
) |
Discount on preferred stock repurchases, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funds from operations (FFO) basic |
|
$ |
45,955 |
|
|
$ |
27,861 |
|
|
$ |
136,535 |
|
|
$ |
134,653 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distribution to preferred stockholders Series E (Convertible) |
|
|
932 |
|
|
|
931 |
|
|
|
2,794 |
|
|
|
2,793 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funds from operations diluted |
|
$ |
46,887 |
|
|
$ |
28,792 |
|
|
$ |
139,329 |
|
|
$ |
137,446 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FFO per common share basic |
|
$ |
0.27 |
|
|
$ |
0.18 |
|
|
$ |
0.82 |
|
|
$ |
0.87 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FFO per common share diluted |
|
$ |
0.27 |
|
|
$ |
0.18 |
|
|
$ |
0.81 |
|
|
$ |
0.87 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average number of common shares and OP Units outstanding basic |
|
|
171,019 |
|
|
|
156,317 |
|
|
|
166,691 |
|
|
|
154,773 |
|
Weighted average number of common shares, OP Units, and common stock
equivalents outstanding diluted |
|
|
176,480 |
|
|
|
160,197 |
|
|
|
171,936 |
|
|
|
158,129 |
|
In the computation of diluted FFO, OP Units, unvested restricted stock, stock options, and the
shares of Series E Cumulative Convertible Preferred Stock are dilutive; therefore, they are
included in the diluted share count. The effect of the conversion of the Series E Out-Performance
Partnership Shares (the Series E Out-Performance Program terminated on December 31, 2009) are
anti-dilutive for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009 and are excluded from the
diluted share count.
RE3 is our subsidiary that focuses on development, land entitlement and short-term
hold investments. RE3 tax benefits and gain on sales, net of taxes, is defined as net
sales proceeds less a tax provision and the gross investment basis of the asset before accumulated
depreciation. We consider FFO with RE3 tax benefits and gain on sales, net of taxes, to
be a meaningful supplemental measure of performance because the short-term use of funds produce a
profit that differs from the traditional long-term investment in real estate for REITs.
58
The following table is our reconciliation of FFO share information to weighted average common
shares outstanding, basic and diluted, reflected on the Consolidated Statements of Operations for
the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009 (shares in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average number of common shares and OP units
outstanding basic |
|
|
171,019 |
|
|
|
156,317 |
|
|
|
166,691 |
|
|
|
154,773 |
|
Weighted average number of OP units outstanding |
|
|
(5,616 |
) |
|
|
(6,317 |
) |
|
|
(5,850 |
) |
|
|
(6,890 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding
basic per the Consolidated Statements of Operations |
|
|
165,403 |
|
|
|
150,000 |
|
|
|
160,841 |
|
|
|
147,883 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average number of common shares, OP units, and
common stock equivalents outstanding diluted |
|
|
176,480 |
|
|
|
160,197 |
|
|
|
171,936 |
|
|
|
158,129 |
|
Weighted average number of OP units outstanding |
|
|
(5,616 |
) |
|
|
(6,317 |
) |
|
|
(5,850 |
) |
|
|
(6,890 |
) |
Weighted average incremental shares from assumed conversion
of stock options |
|
|
(1,733 |
) |
|
|
(705 |
) |
|
|
(1,591 |
) |
|
|
(265 |
) |
Weighted average incremental shares from unvested restricted stock |
|
|
(692 |
) |
|
|
(139 |
) |
|
|
(618 |
) |
|
|
(55 |
) |
Weighted average number of Series E preferred shares outstanding |
|
|
(3,036 |
) |
|
|
(3,036 |
) |
|
|
(3,036 |
) |
|
|
(3,036 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding diluted
per the Consolidated Statements of Operations |
|
|
165,403 |
|
|
|
150,000 |
|
|
|
160,841 |
|
|
|
147,883 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FFO also does not represent cash generated from operating activities in accordance with GAAP,
and therefore should not be considered an alternative to net cash flows from operating activities,
as determined by generally accepted accounting principles, as a measure of liquidity. Additionally,
it is not necessarily indicative of cash availability to fund cash needs. A presentation of cash
flow metrics based on GAAP is as follows (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Net cash provided by operating activities |
|
$ |
157,489 |
|
|
$ |
189,650 |
|
Net cash used in investing activities |
|
|
(478,848 |
) |
|
|
(95,707 |
) |
Net cash provided by/(used in) financing
activities |
|
|
325,481 |
|
|
|
(81,729 |
) |
Results of Operations
The following discussion includes the results of both continuing and discontinued operations
for the periods presented.
Net Loss Attributable to Common Stockholders
Net loss attributable to common stockholders was $26.1 million ($0.16 per diluted share) for
the three months ended September 30, 2010 as compared to net loss attributable to common
stockholders of $40.8 million ($0.27 per diluted share) for the comparable period in the prior
year. The decrease in net loss attributable to common stockholders for the three months ended
September 30, 2010 resulted primarily from the following items, all of which are discussed in
further detail elsewhere within this Report:
|
|
|
an increase in our net operating income; |
|
|
|
a decrease in losses from our unconsolidated joint ventures due to the Companys
consolidation of certain joint ventures during the fourth quarter of 2009; |
|
|
|
recognition of a $16.0 million non-cash charge representing an other-than-temporary
decline in the fair value of equity investments in two of our unconsolidated joint ventures
during the quarter ended September 30, 2009; and |
|
|
|
an increase in net gain on the sale of depreciable property primarily related to the
disposition of one community in September 2010. |
59
These were partially offset by:
|
|
|
an increase in depreciation expense primarily due to the Companys consolidation of
certain joint venture assets in the fourth quarter of 2009 and the completion of
redevelopment and development communities in 2009 and 2010; |
|
|
|
an increase in acquisition related costs due to the acquisition of five apartment
communities and land during the quarter ended September 2010; and |
|
|
|
an increase in general and administrative costs. |
Net loss attributable to common stockholders was $81.5 million ($0.51 per diluted share) for
the nine months ended September 30, 2010 as compared to net loss attributable to common
stockholders of $71.1 million ($0.48 per diluted share) for the comparable period in the prior
year. The increase in net loss attributable to common stockholders for the nine months ended
September 30, 2010 resulted primarily from the following items, all of which are discussed in
further detail elsewhere within this Report:
|
|
|
an increase in depreciation expense primarily due to the Companys consolidation of
certain joint venture assets in the fourth quarter of 2009 and the completion of
redevelopment and development communities in 2009 and 2010; |
|
|
|
recognition of a $16.0 million non-cash charge representing an other-than-temporary
decline in the fair value of equity investments in two of our unconsolidated joint ventures
during the quarter ended September 30, 2009; |
|
|
|
an increase in interest expense, primarily due to a net gain on debt extinguishment
related to unsecured debt repurchase activity in 2009; and |
|
|
|
a decrease in other income primarily due to a decrease in interest income and increase
in losses due to changes in the fair value of derivatives partially offset by an increase
in recoveries from real estate tax accruals. |
These were partially offset by:
|
|
|
a slight increase in our net operating income; and |
|
|
|
a decrease in losses from our unconsolidated joint ventures due to the Companys
consolidation of certain joint ventures during the fourth quarter of 2009. |
Apartment Community Operations
Our net income is primarily generated from the operation of our apartment communities. The
following table summarizes the operating performance of our total apartment portfolio which
excludes commercial operating income and expense for each of the periods presented (dollars in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
% Change |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
% Change |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property rental income |
|
$ |
157,630 |
|
|
$ |
148,344 |
|
|
|
6.3 |
% |
|
$ |
459,915 |
|
|
$ |
446,823 |
|
|
|
2.9 |
% |
Property operating expense (a) |
|
|
(56,688 |
) |
|
|
(52,189 |
) |
|
|
8.6 |
% |
|
|
(162,762 |
) |
|
|
(152,553 |
) |
|
|
6.7 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property net operating income |
|
$ |
100,942 |
|
|
$ |
96,155 |
|
|
|
5.0 |
% |
|
$ |
297,153 |
|
|
$ |
294,270 |
|
|
|
1.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Excludes depreciation, amortization, and property management expenses. |
60
The following table is our reconciliation of property NOI to net loss attributable to UDR as
reflected, for both continuing and discontinued operations, for the periods presented (dollars in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property net operating income |
|
$ |
100,942 |
|
|
$ |
96,155 |
|
|
$ |
297,153 |
|
|
$ |
294,270 |
|
Other net operating income |
|
|
2,086 |
|
|
|
2,041 |
|
|
|
4,152 |
|
|
|
4,364 |
|
Non-property income, net |
|
|
2,195 |
|
|
|
1,627 |
|
|
|
7,571 |
|
|
|
10,609 |
|
Real estate depreciation and amortization |
|
|
(75,591 |
) |
|
|
(69,695 |
) |
|
|
(221,524 |
) |
|
|
(207,747 |
) |
Interest, net |
|
|
(38,257 |
) |
|
|
(38,640 |
) |
|
|
(113,068 |
) |
|
|
(103,025 |
) |
Storm related income/(expense) |
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(669 |
) |
|
|
(127 |
) |
General and administrative and property management |
|
|
(16,455 |
) |
|
|
(12,807 |
) |
|
|
(44,070 |
) |
|
|
(39,641 |
) |
Other operating expenses |
|
|
(1,396 |
) |
|
|
(1,437 |
) |
|
|
(4,338 |
) |
|
|
(5,110 |
) |
Other depreciation and amortization |
|
|
(1,224 |
) |
|
|
(858 |
) |
|
|
(3,755 |
) |
|
|
(3,730 |
) |
Loss from unconsolidated entities |
|
|
(835 |
) |
|
|
(16,742 |
) |
|
|
(2,757 |
) |
|
|
(18,187 |
) |
Income from discontinued operations |
|
|
3,878 |
|
|
|
601 |
|
|
|
4,034 |
|
|
|
2,486 |
|
Non-controlling interests |
|
|
839 |
|
|
|
1,779 |
|
|
|
2,828 |
|
|
|
3,175 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss attributable to UDR |
|
$ |
(23,766 |
) |
|
$ |
(37,976 |
) |
|
$ |
(74,443 |
) |
|
$ |
(62,663 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same Communities
Our same community properties (those acquired, developed, and stabilized prior to July 1, 2009
and held on September 30, 2010) consisted of 42,120 apartment homes and provided 92% of our total
property NOI for the three months ended September 30, 2010.
NOI for our same community properties increased 0.1% or $101,000 for the three months ended
September 30, 2010 compared to the same period in 2009. The increase in property NOI was
attributable to a 0.1% or $86,000
increase in property rental income and a $15,000 decrease in operating expenses. Physical
occupancy increased 0.1% to 95.7% and total monthly income per occupied home remained at $1,167.
As a result of the percentage changes in property rental income and property operating
expenses, the operating margin (property net operating income divided by property rental income)
increased to 65.7% for the three months ended September 30, 2010 as compared to 65.6% for the
comparable period in 2009.
Our same community properties (those acquired, developed, and stabilized prior to January 1,
2009 and held on September 30, 2010) consisted of 40,699 apartment homes and provided 90% of our
total property NOI for the nine months ended September 30, 2010.
NOI for our same community properties decreased 2.7% or $7.5 million for the nine months ended
September 30, 2010 compared to the same period in 2009. The decrease in property NOI was
attributable to a 1.7% or $7.1 million decrease in property rental income and a 0.3% or $375,000
increase in operating expenses. The decrease in revenues was primarily driven by a 3.4% or $13.9
million decrease in rental rates which was partially offset by a 58.8% or $2.1 million decrease in
rental concessions, a 12.5% or $2.1 million decrease in vacancy loss, a 32.9% or $814,000 decrease
in bad debt, and a 12.5% or $2.1 million increase in reimbursement income. Physical occupancy
increased 0.4% to 95.7% and total monthly income per occupied home decreased $25 to $1,153.
The increase in property operating expenses was primarily driven by a 3.5% or $750,000
increase in utilities, a 4.7% or $986,000 increase in repairs and maintenance, and a 3.4% or $1.1
million increase in personnel costs. These increases were partially offset by a 5.2% or $2.3
million decrease in real estate taxes and a 4.9% or $429,000 decrease in administrative and
marketing costs.
61
As a result of the percentage changes in property rental income and property operating
expenses, the operating margin (property net operating income divided by property rental income)
decreased to 66.2% for the nine months ended September 30, 2010 as compared to 66.8% for the
comparable period in 2009.
Non-Mature/Other Communities
The remaining $10.4 million or 10% and $33.9 million or 11% of our total NOI during the three
and nine months ended September 30, 2010, respectively, was generated from communities that we
classify as non-mature communities. UDRs non-mature communities consist of communities that do
not meet the criteria to be included in same communities, which includes communities developed or
acquired, redevelopment properties, sold properties, non-apartment components of mixed use
properties, properties classified as real estate held for disposition and condominium properties.
For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010, we recognized NOI for our developments of
$3.1 million and $9.8 million, respectively, acquired communities of $2.8 million and $5.8 million,
respectively, and redeveloped properties of $1.9 million and $9.4 million, respectively.
Other Income
For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009, significant amounts reflected
in other income include: interest income and discount amortization from an interest in a
convertible debt security of $957,000 and $2.9 million and $958,000 and $2.6 million, respectively,
and fees earned from the Companys joint ventures of $453,000 and $1.5 million and $466,000 and
$1.5 million, respectively. Other income for the nine months ended September 30, 2010 also
includes a recovery from real estate tax accruals of $2.1 million. Other income for the nine months
ended September 30, 2009 also includes $5.1 million of interest income on a note receivable.
Real Estate Depreciation and Amortization
For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010, real estate depreciation and
amortization in continuing operations increased 8.6% or $6.0 million and 6.7% or $13.9 million,
respectively, as compared to the comparable periods in 2009. The increase in depreciation and
amortization for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010 is primarily the result of the
consolidation of certain joint venture assets in the fourth quarter of 2009, development
completions during 2010 and 2009, acquisitions of five apartment communities during the third
quarter
of 2010, and additional capital expenditures. As part of the Companys acquisition activity a
portion of the purchase price is attributable to the fair value of intangible assets which are
typically amortized over a period of less than one year.
Interest Expense
For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010, interest expense in continuing
operations decreased 1.0% or $383,000 and increased 9.7% or $10.0 million, respectively, as
compared to the comparable periods in 2009. This decrease in interest expense during the three
months September 30, 2010 as compared to the comparable period in 2009 was primarily due to
expenses of $3.8 million related to the tender offer in 2009 partially offset by an increase of
$3.4 million in interest expense on debt. The increase in interest expense during the nine months
ended September 30, 2010 as compared to the comparable period in 2009 was primarily due to the
recognition of a loss of $1.1 million and a gain of $9.8 million during the nine months September
30, 2010 and 2009, respectively, from the repurchase of unsecured debt securities.
General and Administrative
For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010, general and administrative expenses
increased 38.9% or $3.4 million and 15.0% or $4.1 million, respectively, as compared to the same
periods in 2009. The increase in general and administrative expense during the three and nine
months ended September 30, 2010 as compared to the same period in 2009 was primarily due to
expenses related to an increase of $3.9 million and $5.7 million, respectively, in compensation
expense, which includes deferred compensation and bonuses and an increase of $2.7 million and $2.4
million, respectively, in acquisition costs related to the Companys acquisitions of five operating
communities and one parcel of land. These increases were partially offset by an increase of $2.7
million and $2.6 million in income tax benefit during the three and nine months ended September 30,
2010, respectively, from the write-off of income tax payable.
62
Inflation
We believe that the direct effects of inflation on our operations have been immaterial. While
the impact of inflation primarily impacts our results through wage pressures, utilities and
material costs, substantially all of our leases are for a term of one year or less, which generally
enables us to compensate for any inflationary effects by increasing rents on our apartment homes.
Although an extreme escalation in energy and food costs could have a negative impact on our
residents and their ability to absorb rent increases, we do not believe this has had a material
impact on our results for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
On
November 5, 2010, the Company acquired The Hanover Companys (Hanover) partnership interests in the Hanover/MetLife Master Limited
Partnership (the Partnership). The Partnership owns a portfolio of 26 operating communities containing 5,748 homes
and 11 land parcels with the potential to develop approximately 2,300 additional homes. Under the
terms of the Partnership, UDR will act as the general partner and earn fees for property and asset
management and financing transactions.
UDR
has agreed to indemnify Hanover for losses that may arise from
$506 million recourse loans which are secured by a security
interest in the operating community subject to the loan. The loans are to the sub-tier
partnerships which own the 26 operating communities. The Company
anticipates that these loans will be refinanced by the Partnership over the next twelve months.
We do not have any other off-balance sheet arrangements that have, or are reasonably likely to
have, a current or future effect on our financial condition, changes in financial condition,
revenue or expenses, results of operations, liquidity, capital expenditures or capital resources
that are material.
UNITED DOMINION REALTY, L.P.:
Business Overview
United Dominion Realty, L.P. (the Operating Partnership or UDR, L.P.), is a Delaware
limited partnership formed in February 2004 and organized pursuant to the provisions of the
Delaware Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act (as amended from time to time, or any successor to
such statute, the Act). The Operating Partnership is the successor-in-interest to United
Dominion Realty, L.P., a limited partnership formed under the laws of Virginia, which commenced
operations on November 4, 1995. Our sole general partner is UDR, Inc., a Maryland corporation
(UDR or the General Partner), which conducts a substantial amount of its business and holds a
substantial amount of its assets through the Operating Partnership. At September 30, 2010, the
Operating Partnerships real estate portfolio included 81 communities located in 8 states plus the
District of Columbia, with a total of 23,351 apartment homes.
As of September 30, 2010, UDR owned 110,883 units of our general limited partnership interests
and 174,369,059 units of our limited partnership interests (the OP Units), or approximately 96.9%
of our outstanding OP Units. By virtue of its ownership of our OP Units and being our sole general
partner, UDR has the ability to control all of the day-to-day operations of the Operating
Partnership. Unless otherwise indicated or unless the context requires otherwise, all references
in this Report to the Operating Partnership or we, us or our refer to UDR, L.P. together with
its consolidated subsidiaries. We refer to our General Partner together with its consolidated
subsidiaries (including us) and the General Partners consolidated joint ventures as UDR or the
General Partner.
63
UDR operates as a self administered real estate investment trust, or REIT, for federal income
tax purposes. UDR focuses on owning, acquiring, renovating, developing, and managing apartment
communities nationwide. The General Partner was formed in 1972 as a Virginia corporation and
changed its state of incorporation from Virginia to Maryland in September 2003. At September 30,
2010, the General Partners consolidated real estate portfolio included 172 communities located in
10 states and the District of Columbia, with a total of 48,409 apartment homes, and its total real
estate portfolio, inclusive of its unconsolidated communities, included an additional 11
communities with 4,143 apartment homes.
The following table summarizes our market information by major geographic markets as of
September 30, 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
As of September 30, 2010 |
|
|
September 30, 2010 |
|
|
September 30, 2010 (a) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of |
|
|
Number of |
|
|
of Total |
|
|
Carrying |
|
|
Average |
|
|
Total Income |
|
|
Average |
|
|
Total Income |
|
|
|
Apartment |
|
|
Apartment |
|
|
Carrying |
|
|
Value |
|
|
Physical |
|
|
per Occupied |
|
|
Physical |
|
|
per Occupied |
|
Same Communities |
|
Communities |
|
|
Homes |
|
|
Value |
|
|
(in thousands) |
|
|
Occupancy |
|
|
Home (b) |
|
|
Occupancy |
|
|
Home (b) |
|
Western Region |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Co, CA |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
4,124 |
|
|
|
20.7 |
% |
|
$ |
763,963 |
|
|
|
95.0 |
% |
|
$ |
1,483 |
|
|
|
95.4 |
% |
|
$ |
1,476 |
|
San Francisco, CA |
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
1,703 |
|
|
|
10.6 |
% |
|
|
391,739 |
|
|
|
96.9 |
% |
|
|
1,918 |
|
|
|
96.8 |
% |
|
|
1,899 |
|
Monterey Peninsula, CA |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
1,565 |
|
|
|
4.1 |
% |
|
|
152,398 |
|
|
|
94.8 |
% |
|
|
1,082 |
|
|
|
94.5 |
% |
|
|
1,063 |
|
Los Angeles, CA |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
1,222 |
|
|
|
7.2 |
% |
|
|
264,773 |
|
|
|
95.6 |
% |
|
|
1,543 |
|
|
|
96.1 |
% |
|
|
1,543 |
|
San Diego, CA |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
689 |
|
|
|
2.7 |
% |
|
|
99,435 |
|
|
|
94.7 |
% |
|
|
1,270 |
|
|
|
95.1 |
% |
|
|
1,257 |
|
Seattle, WA |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
932 |
|
|
|
5.6 |
% |
|
|
206,650 |
|
|
|
96.3 |
% |
|
|
1,197 |
|
|
|
96.8 |
% |
|
|
1,185 |
|
Inland Empire, CA |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
834 |
|
|
|
3.2 |
% |
|
|
119,096 |
|
|
|
94.7 |
% |
|
|
1,258 |
|
|
|
95.0 |
% |
|
|
1,244 |
|
Sacramento, CA |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
914 |
|
|
|
1.8 |
% |
|
|
67,849 |
|
|
|
94.1 |
% |
|
|
868 |
|
|
|
93.6 |
% |
|
|
868 |
|
Portland, OR |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
716 |
|
|
|
1.9 |
% |
|
|
69,406 |
|
|
|
96.9 |
% |
|
|
947 |
|
|
|
96.0 |
% |
|
|
940 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mid-Atlantic Region |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Metropolitan DC |
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
2,565 |
|
|
|
15.5 |
% |
|
|
573,090 |
|
|
|
96.4 |
% |
|
|
1,670 |
|
|
|
96.2 |
% |
|
|
1,633 |
|
Baltimore, MD |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
994 |
|
|
|
3.9 |
% |
|
|
145,635 |
|
|
|
95.3 |
% |
|
|
1,349 |
|
|
|
96.5 |
% |
|
|
1,313 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Southeastern Region |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tampa, FL |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
1,154 |
|
|
|
2.9 |
% |
|
|
108,641 |
|
|
|
95.7 |
% |
|
|
1,009 |
|
|
|
95.7 |
% |
|
|
1,001 |
|
Nashville, TN |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
1,612 |
|
|
|
3.4 |
% |
|
|
126,560 |
|
|
|
96.5 |
% |
|
|
828 |
|
|
|
96.6 |
% |
|
|
822 |
|
Jacksonville, FL |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
400 |
|
|
|
1.1 |
% |
|
|
42,202 |
|
|
|
94.5 |
% |
|
|
861 |
|
|
|
95.1 |
% |
|
|
848 |
|
Other Florida |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
636 |
|
|
|
2.1 |
% |
|
|
76,166 |
|
|
|
93.9 |
% |
|
|
1,144 |
|
|
|
95.2 |
% |
|
|
1,144 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Southwestern Region |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dallas, TX |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
1,348 |
|
|
|
5.0 |
% |
|
|
182,361 |
|
|
|
95.7 |
% |
|
|
1,135 |
|
|
|
95.7 |
% |
|
|
1,130 |
|
Phoenix, AZ |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
914 |
|
|
|
2.0 |
% |
|
|
71,541 |
|
|
|
94.9 |
% |
|
|
857 |
|
|
|
95.3 |
% |
|
|
851 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total/Average Same Communities |
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
22,322 |
|
|
|
93.7 |
% |
|
|
3,461,505 |
|
|
|
95.5 |
% |
|
|
1,300 |
|
|
|
95.7 |
% |
|
|
1,283 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non Matures, Commercial Properties &
Other |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
1,029 |
|
|
|
6.3 |
% |
|
|
229,075 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Real Estate Held for Investment |
|
|
81 |
|
|
|
23,351 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
3,690,580 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Accumulated Depreciation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(842,467 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Real Estate Owned, Net of
Accumulated Depreciation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
2,848,113 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
The same community population for the nine months ended September 30, 2010 includes
22,104 homes. |
|
(b) |
|
Total Income per Occupied Home represents total monthly revenues per weighted average
number of apartment homes occupied. |
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Liquidity is the ability to meet present and future financial obligations either through
operating cash flows, the sale of properties, and the issuance of debt. Both the coordination of
asset and liability maturities and effective capital management are important to the maintenance of
liquidity. The Operating Partnerships primary source of liquidity is cash flow from operations as
determined by rental rates, occupancy levels, and operating expenses related to our portfolio of
apartment homes and borrowings allocated to us under the General Partners credit agreements. The
General Partner will routinely use its unsecured credit facility to temporarily fund certain
investing and financing activities prior to arranging for longer-term financing or the issuance of
equity or debt securities. During the past several years, proceeds from the sale of real estate
have been used for both investing and financing activities as we repositioned our portfolio.
64
We expect to meet our short-term liquidity requirements generally through net cash provided by
operations and borrowings allocated to us under the General Partners credit agreements. We expect
to meet certain long-term liquidity requirements such as scheduled debt maturities and potential
property acquisitions through borrowings and the disposition of properties. We believe that our net
cash provided by operations and borrowings will continue to be adequate to meet both operating
requirements and the payment of distributions. Likewise, the budgeted expenditures for improvements
and renovations of certain properties are expected to be funded from property operations and
borrowings allocated to us under the General Partners credit agreements the Operating Partnership
is a party to.
Future Capital Needs
Future capital expenditures are expected to be funded with proceeds from the issuance of
secured debt, the sale of properties, the borrowings allocated to us under our General Partners
credit agreements, and to a lesser extent, with cash flows provided by operating activities.
Acquisition activity in strategic markets is expected to be largely financed by the reinvestment of
proceeds from the sale of properties, the issuance of OP units and the assumption or placement of
secured debt.
During the remainder of 2010, we have approximately $643,000 of secured debt maturing and we
anticipate that we will repay that debt with operating cash flows, proceeds from borrowings
allocated to us under our General Partners credit agreements, or by exercising extension rights on
such secured debt, as applicable. The repayment of debt will be recorded as an offset to the
Receivable due from General Partner.
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to use
judgment in the application of accounting policies, including making estimates and assumptions. A
critical accounting policy is one that is both important to our financial condition and results of
operations and that involves some degree of uncertainty. Estimates are prepared based on
managements assessment after considering all evidence available. Changes in estimates could affect
our financial position or results of operations. Below is a discussion of the accounting policies
that we consider critical to understanding our financial condition or results of operations where
there is uncertainty or where significant judgment is required.
Capital Expenditures
In conformity with GAAP, we capitalize those expenditures that materially enhance the value of
an existing asset or substantially extend the useful life of an existing asset. Expenditures
necessary to maintain an existing property in ordinary operating condition are expensed as
incurred.
During the nine months ended September 30, 2010, $43.8 million was spent on capital
expenditures for all of our communities as compared to $53.0 million for the nine months ended
September 30, 2009. These capital
improvements included turnover-related capital expenditures, revenue enhancing capital
expenditures, asset preservation expenditures, kitchen and bath upgrades, other extensive
interior/exterior upgrades and major renovations.
We will continue to selectively add revenue enhancing improvements which we believe will
provide a return on investment substantially in excess of our cost of capital.
Impairment of Long-Lived Assets
We record impairment losses on long-lived assets used in operations when events and
circumstances indicate that the assets might be impaired and the undiscounted cash flows estimated
to be generated by the future operation and disposition of those assets are less than the net book
value of those assets. Our cash flow estimates are based upon historical results adjusted to
reflect our best estimate of future market and operating conditions and our estimated holding
periods. The net book value of impaired assets is reduced to fair market value. Our estimates of
fair market value represent our best estimate based upon industry trends and reference to market
rates and transactions.
65
Real Estate Investment Properties
We purchase real estate investment properties from time to time and allocate the purchase
price to various components, such as land, buildings, and intangibles related to in-place leases in
accordance with FASB ASC 805, Business Combinations (formerly SFAS 141R, Business Combinations).
The purchase price is allocated based on the relative fair value of each component. The fair value
of buildings is determined as if the buildings were vacant upon acquisition and subsequently leased
at market rental rates. As such, the determination of fair value considers the present value of all
cash flows expected to be generated from the property including an initial lease-up period. We
determine the fair value of in-place leases by assessing the net effective rent and remaining term
of the lease relative to market terms for similar leases at acquisition. In addition, we consider
the cost of acquiring similar leases, the foregone rents associated with the lease-up period, and
the carrying costs associated with the lease-up period. The fair value of in-place leases is
recorded and amortized as amortization expense over the remaining contractual lease period.
Statements of Cash Flows for the Nine Months Ended September 30, 2010
The following discussion explains the changes in net cash provided by operating activities,
and net cash used in investing activities and financing activities that are presented in our
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009.
Operating Activities
For the nine months ended September 30, 2010, net cash flow provided by operating activities
was $121.9 million compared to $127.9 million for the comparable period in 2009. The decrease in
net cash flow from operating activities is primarily due to consolidated net loss of $17.2 million
during the nine months ended September 30, 2010 compared to consolidated net income of $3.3 million
during the comparable period in 2009, partially offset by the impact of changes in operating assets
and liabilities.
Investing Activities
For the nine months ended September 30, 2010, net cash used in investing activities was $43.8
million compared to $53.0 million for the comparable period in 2009, and consisted entirely of
capital expenditures.
Acquisitions
The Operating Partnership did not acquire any communities during the nine months ended
September 30, 2010 or during 2009. The Operating Partnerships long-term strategic plan is to
achieve greater operating efficiencies by investing in fewer, more concentrated markets. As a
result, we have been seeking to expand our interests in communities located in California,
Metropolitan Washington D.C. and the Washington State markets over the past
years. Prospectively, we plan to continue to channel new investments into those markets we
believe will continue to provide the best investment returns. Markets will be targeted based upon
defined criteria including favorable job formation, low single-family home affordability and
favorable demand/supply ratio for multifamily housing.
Dispositions
The Operating Partnership did not dispose of any communities during the nine months ended
September 30, 2010 or 2009.
Financing Activities
For the nine months ended September 30, 2010, our net cash used in financing activities was
$77.6 million compared to $74.8 million for the comparable period of 2009. The increase in cash
used in financing activities was primarily due to a decrease in the proceeds from secured debt,
partially offset by a net decrease in payments to the General Partner and a decrease in payments on
secured debt.
66
Credit Facilities
As of September 30, 2010, the General Partner had secured credit facilities with Fannie Mae
with an aggregate commitment of $1.4 billion with $1.2 billion outstanding. The Fannie Mae credit
facilities are for an initial term of 10 years, bear interest at floating and fixed rates, and
certain variable rate facilities can be extended for an additional five years at the General
Partners option. At September 30, 2010, $948.0 million of the funded balance was fixed at a
weighted average interest rate of 5.4% and the remaining balance on these facilities was at a
weighted average variable rate of 1.7%. At September 30, 2010, $761.8 million of these credit
facilities are allocated to the Operating Partnership based on the ownership of the assets securing
the debt.
The Operating Partnership is a guarantor on the General Partners unsecured credit facility,
with an aggregate borrowing capacity of $600 million, and a $100 million term loan. At September
30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, the outstanding balance under the unsecured credit facility was
$112.6 million and $189.3 million, respectively.
The credit facilities are subject to customary financial covenants and limitations.
Interest Rate Risk
We are exposed to interest rate risk associated with variable rate notes payable and maturing
debt that has to be refinanced. We do not hold financial instruments for trading or other
speculative purposes, but rather issue these financial instruments to finance our portfolio of real
estate assets. Interest rate sensitivity is the relationship between changes in market interest
rates and the fair value of market rate sensitive assets and liabilities. Our earnings are affected
as changes in short-term interest rates impact our cost of variable rate debt and maturing fixed
rate debt. We had $301.9 million in variable rate debt that is not subject to interest rate swap
contracts as of September 30, 2010. If market interest rates for variable rate debt increased by
100 basis points, our interest expense would increase by $3.0 million based on the balance at
September 30, 2010.
These amounts are determined by considering the impact of hypothetical interest rates on our
borrowing cost. These analyses do not consider the effects of the adjusted level of overall
economic activity that could exist in such an environment. Further, in the event of a change of
such magnitude, management would likely take actions to further mitigate our exposure to the
change. However, due to the uncertainty of the specific actions that would be taken and their
possible effects, the sensitivity analysis assumes no change in our financial structure.
A presentation of cash flow metrics based on GAAP is as follows (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended, |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities |
|
$ |
121,881 |
|
|
$ |
127,915 |
|
Net cash used by investing activities |
|
|
(43,809 |
) |
|
|
(53,007 |
) |
Net cash used in financing activities |
|
|
(77,590 |
) |
|
|
(74,826 |
) |
Results of Operations for the Three and Nine Months Ended September 30, 2010
The following discussion explains the changes in results of operations that are presented in
our Consolidated Statements of Operations for the nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009,
and includes the results of both continuing and discontinued operations for the periods presented.
67
Net (Loss)/Income Attributable to OP Unit holders
Net (loss)/income attributable to OP unit holders was ($8.6) million (($0.05) per OP unit) for
the three months ended September 30, 2010 as compared to net income attributable to OP unit holders
of ($3.4) million ($0.02 per OP unit) for the comparable period in the prior year. The decrease in
net income attributable to OP unit holders for the three months ended September 30, 2010 resulted
primarily from the following items, all of which are discussed in further detail elsewhere within
this Report:
|
|
|
a decrease in net operating income; and |
|
|
|
an increase in general and administrative expenses allocated to us by our General
Partner. |
These changes were partially offset by a decrease in interest expense due to a reduction in
the interest rate on the note payable to the General Partner.
Net (loss)/income attributable to OP unit holders was ($17.3) million (($0.10) per OP unit)
for the nine months ended September 30, 2010 as compared to net income attributable to OP unit
holders of $3.3 million ($0.02 per OP unit) for the comparable period in the prior year. The
decrease in net income attributable to OP unit holders for the nine months ended September 30, 2010
resulted primarily from the following items, all of which are discussed in further detail elsewhere
within this Report:
|
|
|
a decrease in net operating income; |
|
|
|
a decrease in other income primarily due to a decrease in interest income and increase
in losses due to changes in the fair value of derivatives; |
|
|
|
an increase in interest expense incurred on new debt; |
|
|
|
a reduction in disposition gains in 2010 as compared to 2009. The Company recognized net
gains of $124,000 and $1.6 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009,
respectively; and |
|
|
|
an increase in general and administrative expenses allocated to us by our General
Partner. |
These changes were partially offset by a decrease in interest expense due to a reduction in
the interest rate on the note payable to the General Partner.
Apartment Community Operations
Our net income is primarily generated from the operation of our apartment communities.
The following table summarizes the operating performance of our total portfolio for the three
months and nine months ended September 2010 and 2009 (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
Year Ended September 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
% Change |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
% Change |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property rental income |
|
$ |
88,222 |
|
|
$ |
87,745 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
% |
|
$ |
261,517 |
|
|
$ |
267,005 |
|
|
|
-2.1 |
% |
Property operating expense (a) |
|
|
(29,937 |
) |
|
|
(28,581 |
) |
|
|
4.7 |
% |
|
|
(86,478 |
) |
|
|
(84,443 |
) |
|
|
2.4 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property net operating income (NOI) |
|
$ |
58,285 |
|
|
$ |
59,164 |
|
|
|
-1.5 |
% |
|
$ |
175,039 |
|
|
$ |
182,562 |
|
|
|
-4.1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Excludes depreciation, amortization, and property management expenses. |
68
The following table is our reconciliation of property NOI to net income attributable to OP
unit holders as reflected, for both continuing and discontinued operations, for the three months
and nine months ended September 2010 and 2009 (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended, |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property net operating income |
|
$ |
58,285 |
|
|
$ |
59,164 |
|
|
$ |
175,039 |
|
|
$ |
182,562 |
|
Other income |
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
1,621 |
|
|
|
5,667 |
|
Real estate depreciation and amortization |
|
|
(41,674 |
) |
|
|
(41,606 |
) |
|
|
(124,797 |
) |
|
|
(125,077 |
) |
Interest expense |
|
|
(13,240 |
) |
|
|
(13,795 |
) |
|
|
(39,281 |
) |
|
|
(38,908 |
) |
General and administrative and property management |
|
|
(10,781 |
) |
|
|
(6,069 |
) |
|
|
(26,202 |
) |
|
|
(18,810 |
) |
Other operating expenses |
|
|
(1,244 |
) |
|
|
(1,222 |
) |
|
|
(3,712 |
) |
|
|
(3,679 |
) |
Income from discontinued operations |
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
146 |
|
|
|
124 |
|
|
|
1,562 |
|
Non-controlling interests |
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(44 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss)/income attributable to OP unitholders |
|
$ |
(8,571 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,371 |
) |
|
$ |
(17,252 |
) |
|
$ |
3,317 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same Store Communities
Three and Nine Months Ended September 30, 2010 vs. Three and Nine Months Ended September 30,
2009
Our same store communities (those acquired, developed, and stabilized prior to July 1, 2009
and held on September 30, 2010) consisted of 22,322 apartment homes and provided 94.8% of our total
NOI for the three months ended September 30, 2010.
NOI for our same store community properties decreased 1.2% or $698,000 for the three months
ended September 30, 2010 compared to the same period in 2009. The decrease in property NOI was
primarily attributable to a 0.3% or $231,000 decrease in property rental income and by a 1.7% or
$467,000 increase in operating expenses. The decrease in revenues was primarily driven by a 0.8%
or $639,000 decrease in rental rates which was partially offset by an 11.9% or $422,000 increase in
reimbursement income. Physical occupancy remained at 95.5% and total income per occupied home
decreased $3 to $1,300 for the three months ended September 30, 2010 compared to the same period in
2009.
The increase in property operating expenses was primarily driven by a 6.9% or $292,000
increase in utilities, a $409,000 or 9.7% increase in repairs and maintenance, and a 4.0% or
$260,000 increase in personnel costs which was partially offset by a 5.3% or $95,000 decrease in
administrative and marketing costs.
As a result of the percentage changes in property rental income and property operating
expenses, the operating margin (property net operating income divided by property rental income)
was 66.5% for the three months ended September 30, 2010 as compared to 67.2% for the comparable
period in 2009.
Our same store communities (those acquired, developed, and stabilized prior to January 1, 2009
and held on September 30, 2010) consisted of 22,104 apartment homes and provided 93.7% of our total
NOI for the nine months ended September 30, 2010.
NOI for our same store community properties decreased 4.1% or $7.0 million for the nine months
ended September 30, 2010 compared to the same period in 2009. The decrease in property NOI was
primarily attributable to a 2.4% or $5.9 million decrease in property rental income and a 1.4% or
$1.1 million increase in operating expenses. The decrease in revenues was primarily driven by a
3.6% or $8.8 million decrease in rental rates partially offset by a 12.5% or $1.3 million decrease
in vacancy loss and a 12.3% or $1.3 million increase in reimbursement income. Physical occupancy
increased 0.5% to 95.7% and total income per occupied home decreased $38 to $1,283 for the nine
months ended September 30, 2010 compared to the same period in 2009.
The increase in property operating expenses was primarily driven by a 5.9% or $695,000
increase in repairs and maintenance and a 3.5% or $661,000 increase in personnel costs which was
partially offset by a 1.8% or $497,000 decrease in real estate taxes and a 5.3% or $269,000
decrease in administrative and marketing costs.
69
As a result of the percentage changes in property rental income and property operating
expenses, the operating margin (property net operating income divided by property rental income)
was 67.2% for the nine months ended September 30, 2010 as compared to 68.4% for the comparable
period in 2009.
Non-Mature/Other Communities
Three and Nine Months Ended September 30, 2010
The remaining $3.0 million or 5.2% and $11.0 million or 6.3% of our total NOI during the three
and nine months ended September 30, 2010, respectively, was generated from communities that we
classify as non-mature communities. The Operating Partnerships non-mature communities consist of
communities that do not meet the criteria to be included in same store communities, which includes
communities developed or acquired, redevelopment properties, sold properties, non-apartment
components of mixed use properties, properties classified as real estate held for disposition and
condominium properties. For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010, a significant
portion of our NOI from non-mature communities was recognized from our redevelopment properties and
amounted to $1.9 million and $7.7 million, respectively.
Other Income
For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010, other income primarily includes a
recovery from real estate tax accruals partially offset by losses due to the change in the fair
value of derivatives. Other income for the nine months ended September 30, 2009 includes interest
income on a note receivable for $200 million that a subsidiary of the Operating Partnership
received related to the disposition of 55 properties during 2008. In May 2009, the $200 million
note was paid in full.
Real Estate Depreciation and Amortization
For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009, real estate depreciation and
amortization did not change significantly as the Operating Partnership did not have any
acquisitions during these respective periods.
Interest Expense
For the three months ended September 30, 2010, interest expense decreased 4.0% or $555,000 as
compared to the same period in 2009. This decrease is primarily due a decrease in the interest rate
charged on the note payable due to the General Partner partially offset by additional borrowings on
secured credit facilities. For the nine months ended September 30, 2010 interest expense increased
1.0% or $373,000 as compared to the same period in 2009. The increase is primarily due to
additional borrowings on secured credit facilities partially offset by a decrease in the interest
rate charged on the note payable due to the General Partner.
General and Administrative
The Operating Partnership is charged directly for general and administrative expenses it
incurs. The Operating Partnership is also charged for other general and administrative expenses
that have been allocated by UDR to each of its subsidiaries, including the Operating Partnership,
based on each subsidiarys pro-rata portion of UDRs total apartment homes.
For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010, general and administrative expenses
increased 128.5% or $4.7 million and 65.8% or $7.5 million, respectively, as compared to the
comparable period in 2009. The increases were consistent with the changes in UDRs general and
administrative expenses for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010.
Income from Discontinued Operations
For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009, we recognized gains for
financial reporting purposes of $27,000 and $124,000 and $146,000 and $1.6 million, respectively.
Changes in the level of gains recognized from period to period reflect the residual activities from
specific properties sold.
70
Inflation
We believe that the direct effects of inflation on our operations have been immaterial. While
the impact of inflation primarily impacts our results through wage pressures, utilities and
material costs, substantially all of our leases are for a term of one year or less, which generally
enables us to compensate for any inflationary effects by increasing rents on our apartment homes.
Although an extreme escalation in energy and food costs could have a negative impact on our
residents and their ability to absorb rent increases, we do not believe this has had a material
impact on our results for the three and nine month period ended September 30, 2010 and 2009.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
We do not have any other off-balance sheet arrangements that have, or are reasonably likely to
have, a current or future effect on our financial condition, changes in financial condition,
revenue or expenses, results of operations, liquidity, capital expenditures or capital resources
that are material.
Item 3. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
The Company and the Operating Partnership are exposed to interest rate changes associated with
our unsecured credit facility and other variable rate debt as well as refinancing risk on our fixed
rate debt. The Companys and the Operating Partnerships involvement with derivative financial
instruments is limited and we do not expect to use them for trading or other speculative purposes.
The Company and the Operating Partnership use derivative instruments solely to manage its exposure
to interest rates.
See our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009 under the heading
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk for a more complete
discussion of our interest rate sensitive assets and liabilities. As of September 30, 2010, our
market risk has not changed materially from the amounts reported in our Annual Report on Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2009.
Item 4. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
As of September 30, 2010, we carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the
participation of the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, of the
effectiveness of the design and operation of the disclosure controls and procedures of the Company
and the Operating Partnership. Our disclosure controls and procedures are designed with the
objective of ensuring that information required to be disclosed in our reports filed under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time
periods specified in the SECs rules and forms. Based on this evaluation, the Chief Executive
Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of the Company concluded that the disclosure controls and
procedures of the Company and the Operating Partnership are effective in timely alerting them to
material information required to be included in our periodic SEC reports. In addition, the Chief
Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of the Company concluded that during the quarter
ended September 30, 2010, there has been no change in internal control over financial reporting
that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the internal control
over financial reporting of the Company and the Operating Partnership. Our internal control over
financial reporting is designed with the objective of providing reasonable assurance regarding the
reliability of our financial reporting and preparation of financial statements for external
purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.
It should be noted that the design of any system of controls is based in part upon certain
assumptions about the likelihood of future events, and there can be no assurance that any design
will succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future conditions, regardless of how
remote. However, the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of the Company have
concluded that the disclosure controls and procedures of the Company and the Operating Partnership
are effective under circumstances where our disclosure controls and procedures should reasonably be
expected to operate effectively.
71
PART II OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
The Company is a party to various claims and routine litigation arising in the ordinary course
of business. We do not believe that the results of any such claims and litigation, individually or
in the aggregate, will have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position or
results of operations.
Item 1A. RISK FACTORS
There are many factors that affect our business and our results of operations, some of which
are beyond our control. The following is a description of important factors that may cause our
actual results of operations in future periods to differ materially from those currently expected
or discussed in forward-looking statements set forth in this report relating to our financial
results, operations and business prospects. Except as required by law, we undertake no obligation
to update any such forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date on
which it is made.
Risks Related to Our Real Estate Investments and Our Operations
Unfavorable Apartment Market and Economic Conditions Could Adversely Affect Occupancy Levels,
Rental Revenues and the Value of Our Real Estate Assets. Unfavorable market conditions in the areas
in which we operate and unfavorable economic conditions generally may significantly affect our
occupancy levels, our rental rates and collections, the value of the properties and our ability to
strategically acquire or dispose of apartment communities on economically favorable terms. Our
ability to lease our properties at favorable rates is adversely affected by the increase in supply
in the multifamily market and is dependent upon the overall level in the economy, which is
adversely affected by, among other things, job losses and unemployment levels, recession, personal
debt levels, the downturn in the housing market, stock market volatility and uncertainty about the
future. Some of our major expenses, including mortgage payments and real estate taxes, generally do
not decline when related rents decline. We would expect that declines in our occupancy levels,
rental revenues and/or the values of our apartment communities would cause us to have less cash
available to pay our indebtedness and to distribute to our stockholders, which could adversely
affect our financial condition and the market value of our securities. Factors
that may affect our occupancy levels, our rental revenues, and/or the value of our properties
include the following, among others:
|
|
|
downturns in the national, regional and local economic conditions, particularly increases in
unemployment; |
|
|
|
|
declines in mortgage interest rates, making alternative housing more affordable; |
|
|
|
|
government or builder incentives which enable first time homebuyers to put little or no money down,
making alternative housing options more attractive; |
|
|
|
|
local real estate market conditions, including oversupply of, or reduced demand for, apartment homes; |
|
|
|
|
declines in the financial condition of our tenants, which may make it more difficult for us to
collect rents from some tenants; |
|
|
|
|
changes in market rental rates; |
|
|
|
|
the timing and costs associated with property improvements, repairs or renovations; |
|
|
|
|
declines in household formation; and |
|
|
|
|
rent control or stabilization laws, or other laws regulating rental housing, which could prevent us
from raising rents to offset increases in operating costs. |
72
We Are Subject to Certain Risks Associated with Selling Apartment Communities, Which Could
Limit Our Operational and Financial Flexibility. We periodically dispose of apartment communities
that no longer meet our strategic objectives, but adverse market conditions may make it difficult
to sell apartment communities like the ones we own. We cannot predict whether we will be able to
sell any property for the price or on the terms we set, or whether any price or other terms offered
by a prospective purchaser would be acceptable to us. We also cannot predict the length of time
needed to find a willing purchaser and to close the sale of a property. These conditions may limit
our ability to dispose of properties and to change our portfolio promptly in order to meet our
strategic objectives, which may in turn have a materially adverse effect on our financial condition
and the market value of our securities. We are also subject to the following risks in connection
with sales of our apartment communities:
|
|
|
a significant portion of the proceeds from our overall property sales
may be held by intermediaries in order for some sales to qualify as
like-kind exchanges under Section 1031 of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986, as amended, or the Code, so that any related capital gain can
be deferred for federal income tax purposes. As a result, we may not
have immediate access to all of the cash proceeds generated from our
property sales; |
|
|
|
|
federal tax laws limit our ability to profit on the sale of
communities that we have owned for less than two years, and this
limitation may prevent us from selling communities when market
conditions are favorable. |
Competition Could Limit Our Ability to Lease Apartment Homes or Increase or Maintain Rents.
Our apartment communities compete with numerous housing alternatives in attracting residents,
including other apartment communities, condominiums and single-family rental homes, as well as
owner occupied single-and multi-family homes. Competitive housing in a particular area could
adversely affect our ability to lease apartment homes and increase or maintain rents.
We May Not Realize the Anticipated Benefits of Past or Future Acquisitions, and the Failure to
Integrate Acquired Communities and New Personnel Successfully Could Create Inefficiencies. We have
selectively acquired in the past, and if presented with attractive opportunities we intend to
selectively acquire in the future, apartment communities that meet our investment criteria. Our
acquisition activities and their success are subject to the following risks:
|
|
|
we may be unable to obtain financing for acquisitions on favorable terms or at all; |
|
|
|
|
even if we enter into an acquisition agreement for an apartment community, we may
be unable to complete the acquisition after incurring certain acquisition-related
costs; |
|
|
|
|
an acquired apartment community may fail to perform as we expected in analyzing
our investment, or a significant exposure related to the acquired property may go
undetected during our due diligence procedures; |
|
|
|
|
when we acquire an apartment community, we may invest additional amounts in it
with the intention of increasing profitability, and these additional investments
may not produce the anticipated improvements in profitability; and |
|
|
|
|
we may be unable to quickly and efficiently integrate acquired apartment
communities and new personnel into our existing operations, and the failure to
successfully integrate such apartment communities or personnel will result in
inefficiencies that could adversely affect our expected return on our investments
and our overall profitability. |
We do not expect to acquire apartment communities at the rate we have in prior years, which
may limit our growth and have a material adverse effect on our business and the market value of our
securities. In the past, other real estate investors, including insurance companies, pension and
investment funds, developer partnerships, investment companies and other public and private
apartment REITs, have competed with us to acquire existing properties and to develop new
properties, and such competition in the future may make it more difficult for us to pursue
attractive investment opportunities on favorable terms, which could adversely affect growth.
73
Development and Construction Risks Could Impact Our Profitability. In the past we have
selectively pursued the development and construction of apartment communities, and we intend to do
so in the future as appropriate opportunities arise. Development activities have been, and in the
future may be, conducted through wholly owned affiliated companies or through joint ventures with
unaffiliated parties. Our development and construction activities are subject to the following
risks:
|
|
|
we may be unable to
obtain construction
financing for
development
activities under
favorable terms,
including but not
limited to interest
rates, maturity dates
and/or loan to value
ratios, or at all
which could cause us
to delay or even
abandon potential
developments; |
|
|
|
|
we may be unable to
obtain, or face
delays in obtaining,
necessary zoning,
land-use, building,
occupancy and other
required governmental
permits and
authorizations, which
could result in
increased development
costs, could delay
initial occupancy
dates for all or a
portion of a
development
community, and could
require us to abandon
our activities
entirely with respect
to a project for
which we are unable
to obtain permits or
authorizations; |
|
|
|
|
yields may be less than anticipated as a result of delays in
completing projects, costs that exceed budget and/or higher
than expected concessions for lease up and lower rents than
pro forma; |
|
|
|
|
if we are unable to find joint venture partners to
help fund the development of a community or
otherwise obtain acceptable financing for the
developments, our development capacity may be
limited; |
|
|
|
|
we may abandon development
opportunities that we have already
begun to explore, and we may fail to
recover expenses already incurred in
connection with exploring such
opportunities; |
|
|
|
|
we may be unable to complete
construction and lease-up of a
community on schedule, or incur
development or construction costs
that exceed our original estimates,
and we may be unable to charge rents
that would compensate for any
increase in such costs; |
|
|
|
|
occupancy rates and rents at a newly
developed community may fluctuate
depending on a number of factors,
including market and economic
conditions, preventing us from
meeting our profitability goals for
that community; and |
|
|
|
|
when we sell to third parties
communities or properties that we
developed or renovated, we may be
subject to warranty or construction
defect claims that are uninsured or
exceed the limits of our insurance. |
In some cases in the past, the costs of upgrading acquired communities exceeded our original
estimates. We may experience similar cost increases in the future. Our inability to charge rents
that will be sufficient to offset the effects of any increases in these costs may impair our
profitability.
Some Potential Losses May Not Be Adequately Covered by Insurance. We have a comprehensive
insurance program covering our property and operating activities. We believe the policy
specifications and insured limits of these policies are adequate and appropriate. There are,
however, certain types of extraordinary losses which may not be adequately covered under our
insurance program. In addition, we will sustain losses due to insurance deductibles, self-insured
retention, uninsured claims or casualties, or losses in excess of applicable coverage.
If an uninsured loss or a loss in excess of insured limits occur, we could lose all or a
portion of the capital we have invested in a property, as well as the anticipated future revenue
from the property. In such an event, we might nevertheless remain obligated for any mortgage debt
or other financial obligations related to the property. Material losses in excess of insurance
proceeds may occur in the future. If one or more of our significant properties were to experience a
catastrophic loss, it could seriously disrupt our operations, delay revenue and result in large
expenses to repair or rebuild the property. Such events could adversely affect our cash flow and
ability to make distributions to our stockholders.
74
Failure to Succeed in New Markets May Limit Our Growth. We have acquired in the past, and we
may acquire in the future if appropriate opportunities arise, apartment communities that are
outside of our existing markets. Entering into new markets may expose us to a variety of risks, and
we may not be able to operate successfully in new markets. These risks include, among others:
|
|
|
inability to accurately evaluate local apartment market conditions and local economies; |
|
|
|
|
inability to hire and retain key personnel; |
|
|
|
|
lack of familiarity with local governmental and permitting procedures; and |
|
|
|
|
inability to achieve budgeted financial results. |
Risk of Inflation/Deflation. Substantial inflationary or deflationary pressures could have a
negative effect on rental rates and property operating expenses. Neither inflation nor deflation
has materially impacted our operations in the recent past. The general risk of inflation is that
our debt interest and general and administrative expenses increase at a rate higher than our rental
rates. The predominate effects of deflation include high unemployment and credit contraction.
Restricted lending practices could impact our ability to obtain financing or refinancing for our
properties. High unemployment may have a negative effect on our occupancy levels and our rental
revenues.
Potential Liability for Environmental Contamination Could Result in Substantial Costs. Under
various federal, state and local environmental laws, as a current or former owner or operator of
real estate, we could be required to investigate and remediate the effects of contamination of
currently or formerly owned real estate by hazardous or toxic substances, often regardless of our
knowledge of or responsibility for the contamination and solely by virtue of our current or former
ownership or operation of the real estate. In addition, we could be held liable to a governmental
authority or to third parties for property damage and for investigation and clean-up costs incurred
in connection with the contamination. These costs could be substantial, and in many cases
environmental laws create liens in favor of governmental authorities to secure their payment. The
presence of such substances or a failure to
properly remediate any resulting contamination could materially and adversely affect our
ability to borrow against, sell or rent an affected property.
Property Ownership Through Joint Ventures May Limit Our Ability to Act Exclusively in Our
Interest. We have in the past and may in the future develop and acquire properties in joint
ventures with other persons or entities when we believe circumstances warrant the use of such
structures. If we use such a structure, we could become engaged in a dispute with one or more of
our joint venture partners that might affect our ability to operate a jointly-owned property.
Moreover, joint venture partners may have business, economic or other objectives that are
inconsistent with our objectives, including objectives that relate to the appropriate timing and
terms of any sale or refinancing of a property. In some instances, joint venture partners may have
competing interests in our markets that could create conflicts of interest.
Compliance or Failure to Comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 or Other
Safety Regulations and Requirements Could Result in Substantial Costs. The Americans with
Disabilities Act generally requires that public buildings, including our properties, be made
accessible to disabled persons. Noncompliance could result in the imposition of fines by the
federal government or the award of damages to private litigants. From time to time claims may be
asserted against us with respect to some of our properties under this Act. If, under the Americans
with Disabilities Act, we are required to make substantial alterations and capital expenditures in
one or more of our properties, including the removal of access barriers, it could adversely affect
our financial condition and results of operations.
Our properties are subject to various federal, state and local regulatory requirements, such
as state and local fire and life safety requirements. If we fail to comply with these requirements,
we could incur fines or private damage awards. We do not know whether existing requirements will
change or whether compliance with future requirements will require significant unanticipated
expenditures that will affect our cash flow and results of operations.
75
Real Estate Tax and Other Laws. Generally we do not directly pass through costs resulting from
compliance with or changes in real estate tax laws to residential property tenants. We also do not
generally pass through increases in income, service or other taxes, to tenants under leases. These
costs may adversely affect net operating income and the ability to make distributions to
stockholders. Similarly, compliance with or changes in (i) laws increasing the potential liability
for environmental conditions existing on properties or the restrictions on discharges or other
conditions or (ii) rent control or rent stabilization laws or other laws regulating housing, such
as the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, may result in
significant unanticipated expenditures, which would adversely affect funds from operations and the
ability to make distributions to stockholders.
Risk of Damage from Catastrophic Weather Events. Certain of our communities are located in the
general vicinity of active earthquake faults, mudslides and fires, and others where there are
hurricanes, tornadoes or risks of other inclement weather. The adverse weather events could cause
damage or losses that may be greater than insured levels. In the event of a loss in excess of
insured limits, we could lose our capital invested in the affected community, as well as
anticipated future revenue from that community. We would also continue to be obligated to repay any
mortgage indebtedness or other obligations related to the community. Any such loss could materially
and adversely affect our business and our financial condition and results of operations.
Actual or Threatened Terrorist Attacks May Have an Adverse Effect on Our Business and
Operating Results and Could Decrease the Value of Our Assets. Actual or threatened terrorist
attacks and other acts of violence or war could have a material adverse effect on our business and
operating results. Attacks that directly impact one or more of our apartment communities could
significantly affect our ability to operate those communities and thereby impair our ability to
achieve our expected results. Further, our insurance coverage may not cover all losses caused by a
terrorist attack. In addition, the adverse effects that such violent acts and threats of future
attacks could have on the U.S. economy could similarly have a material adverse effect on our
business and results of operations.
Any Weaknesses Identified in Our Internal Control Over Financial Reporting Could Have an
Adverse Effect on Our Stock Price. Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 requires us to
evaluate and report on our internal control over financial reporting. If we identify one or more
material weaknesses in our internal control over
financial reporting, we could lose investor confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our
financial reports, which in turn could have an adverse effect on our stock price.
Our Success Depends on Our Senior Management. Our success depends upon the retention of our
senior management, whose continued service in not guaranteed. We may not be able to find qualified
replacements for the individuals who make up our senior management if their services should no
longer be available to us. The loss of services of one or more members of our senior management
team could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of
operations.
We May be Adversely Affected by New Laws and Regulations. The current United States
administration and Congress have enacted, or called for consideration of, proposals relating to a
variety of issues, including with respect to health care, financial regulation reform, climate
control, executive compensation and others. We believe that these and other potential proposals
could have varying degrees of impact on us ranging from minimal to material. At this time, we are
unable to predict with certainty what level of impact specific proposals could have on us.
Certain rulemaking and administrative efforts that may have an impact on us focus principally
on the areas perceived as contributing to the global financial crisis and the continuing economic
downturn. These initiatives have created a degree of uncertainty regarding the basic rules
governing the real estate industry and many other businesses that is unprecedented in the United
States at least since the wave of lawmaking and regulatory reform that followed in the wake of the
Great Depression. The federal legislative response in this area has culminated most recently in
the enactment on July 21, 2010 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act
(Dodd-Frank Act). Many of the provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act have extended implementation
periods and delayed effective dates and will require extensive rulemaking by regulatory
authorities; thus, the impact on us may not be known for an extended period of time. The
Dodd-Frank Act, including future rules implementing its provisions and the interpretation of those
rules, along with other legislative and regulatory proposals that are proposed or pending in the
United States Congress, may limit our revenues, impose fees or taxes on us, and/or intensify the
regulatory framework in which we operate in ways that are not currently identifiable.
76
Changing laws, regulations and standards relating to corporate governance and public
disclosure in particular, including certain provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act and the rules and
regulations promulgated thereunder, have created uncertainty for public companies like ours and
have significantly increased the costs and risks associated with accessing the U.S. public markets.
Because we are committed to maintaining high standards of internal control over financial
reporting, corporate governance and public disclosure, our management team will need to devote
significant time and financial resources to comply with these evolving standards for public
companies. We intend to continue to invest appropriate resources to comply with both existing and
evolving standards, and this investment has resulted and will likely continue to result in
increased general and administrative expenses and a diversion of management time and attention from
revenue generating activities to compliance activities.
Changes in the System for Establishing U.S. Accounting Standards May Materially and Adversely
Affect Our Reported Results of Operations. Accounting for public companies in the United States
has historically been conducted in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles as in
effect in the United States (GAAP). GAAP is established by the Financial Accounting Standards
Board (the FASB), an independent body whose standards are recognized by the SEC as authoritative
for publicly held companies. The International Accounting Standards Board (the IASB) is a
London-based independent board established in 2001 and charged with the development of
International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). IFRS generally reflects accounting practices
that prevail in Europe and in developed nations around the world.
IFRS differs in material respects from GAAP. Among other things, IFRS has historically relied
more on fair value models of accounting for assets and liabilities than GAAP. Fair value
models are based on periodic revaluation of assets and liabilities, often resulting in fluctuations
in such values as compared to GAAP, which relies more frequently on historical cost as the basis
for asset and liability valuation.
The SEC has proposed the mandatory adoption of IFRS by United States public companies starting
in 2015, with early adoption permitted before that date. It is unclear at this time how the SEC
will propose that GAAP and IFRS be harmonized if the proposed change is adopted. In addition,
switching to a new method of accounting and adopting IFRS will be a complex undertaking. We may
need to develop new systems and controls based on the
principles of IFRS. Since these are new endeavors, and the precise requirements of the
pronouncements ultimately adopted are not now known, the magnitude of costs associated with this
conversion are uncertain.
We are currently evaluating the impact of the adoption of IFRS on our financial position and
results of operations. Such evaluation cannot be completed, however, without more clarity
regarding the specific IFRS standards that will be adopted. Until there is more certainty with
respect to the IFRS standards to be adopted, prospective investors should consider that our
conversion to IFRS could have a material adverse impact on our reported results of operations.
Risks Related to Our Indebtedness and Financings
Insufficient Cash Flow Could Affect Our Debt Financing and Create Refinancing Risk. We are
subject to the risks normally associated with debt financing, including the risk that our operating
income and cash flow will be insufficient to make required payments of principal and interest, or
could restrict our borrowing capacity under our line of credit due to debt covenant restraints.
Sufficient cash flow may not be available to make all required principal payments and still satisfy
our distribution requirements to maintain our status as a REIT for federal income tax purposes, and
the full limits of our line of credit may not be available to us if our operating performance falls
outside the constraints of our debt covenants. Additionally, we are likely to need to refinance
substantially all of our outstanding debt as it matures. We may not be able to refinance existing
debt, or the terms of any refinancing may not be as favorable as the terms of the existing debt,
which could create pressures to sell assets or to issue additional equity when we would otherwise
not choose to do so. In addition, our failure to comply with our debt covenants could result in a
requirement to repay our indebtedness prior to its maturity, which could have an adverse effect on
our cash flow and increase our financing costs.
77
Failure to Generate Sufficient Revenue Could Impair Debt Service Payments and Distributions to
Stockholders. If our apartment communities do not generate sufficient net rental income to meet
rental expenses, our ability to make required payments of interest and principal on our debt
securities and to pay distributions to our stockholders will be adversely affected. The following
factors, among others, may affect the net rental income generated by our apartment communities:
|
|
|
the national and local economies; |
|
|
|
|
local real estate market conditions, such as an oversupply of apartment homes; |
|
|
|
|
tenants perceptions of the safety, convenience, and attractiveness of our
communities and the neighborhoods where they are located; |
|
|
|
|
our ability to provide adequate management, maintenance and insurance; |
|
|
|
|
rental expenses, including real estate taxes and utilities; |
|
|
|
|
competition from other apartment communities; |
|
|
|
|
changes in interest rates and the availability of financing; |
|
|
|
|
changes in governmental regulations and the related costs of compliance; and |
|
|
|
|
changes in tax and housing laws, including the enactment of rent control laws
or other laws regulating multi-family housing. |
Expenses associated with our investment in an apartment community, such as debt service, real
estate taxes, insurance and maintenance costs, are generally not reduced when circumstances cause a
reduction in rental income from that community. If a community is mortgaged to secure payment of
debt and we are unable to make the
mortgage payments, we could sustain a loss as a result of foreclosure on the community or the
exercise of other remedies by the mortgage holder.
Debt Level May Be Increased. Our current debt policy does not contain any limitations on the
level of debt that we may incur, although our ability to incur debt is limited by covenants in our
bank and other credit agreements. We manage our debt to be in compliance with these debt covenants,
but subject to compliance with these covenants, we may increase the amount of our debt at any time
without a concurrent improvement in our ability to service the additional debt.
Financing May Not Be Available and Could Be Dilutive. Our ability to execute our business
strategy depends on our access to an appropriate blend of debt financing, including unsecured lines
of credit and other forms of secured and unsecured debt, and equity financing, including common and
preferred equity. We and other companies in the real estate industry have experienced limited
availability of financing from time to time. If we issue additional equity securities to finance
developments and acquisitions instead of incurring debt, the interests of our existing stockholders
could be diluted.
Financing Could be Impacted by Negative Capital Market Conditions. Recently, domestic
financial markets have experienced unusual volatility and uncertainty. While this condition has
occurred most visibly within the subprime mortgage lending sector of the credit market, liquidity
has tightened in overall domestic financial markets, including the investment grade debt and equity
capital markets. Consequently, there is greater risk that the financial institutions we do business
with could experience disruptions that would negatively affect our ability to obtain financing.
Disruptions in Financial Markets May Adversely Impact Availability and Cost of Credit and Have
Other Adverse Effects on Us and the Market Price of Our Stock. Our ability to make scheduled
payments or to refinance debt obligations will depend on our operating and financial performance,
which in turn is subject to prevailing economic conditions and to financial, business and other
factors beyond our control. The United States stock and credit markets have recently experienced
significant price volatility, dislocations and liquidity disruptions, which have caused market
prices of many stocks to fluctuate substantially and the spreads on prospective debt financings to
widen considerably. These circumstances have materially impacted liquidity in the financial
markets, making terms for certain financings less attractive, and in some cases have resulted in
the unavailability of financing. Continued uncertainty in the stock and credit markets may
negatively impact our ability to access additional financing for acquisitions, development of our
properties and other purposes at reasonable terms, which may negatively affect our business.
Additionally, due to this uncertainty, we may be unable to refinance our existing indebtedness or
the terms of any refinancing may not be as favorable as the terms of our existing indebtedness. If
we are not successful in refinancing this debt when it becomes due, we may be forced to dispose of
properties on disadvantageous terms, which might adversely affect our ability to service other debt
and to meet our other obligations. A prolonged downturn in the financial markets may cause us to
seek alternative sources of potentially less attractive financing, and may require us to adjust our
business plan accordingly. These events also may make it more difficult or costly for us to raise
capital through the issuance of our common or preferred stock. The disruptions in the financial
markets have had and may continue to have a material adverse effect on the market value of our
common shares and other adverse effects on us and our business.
78
Prospective buyers of our properties may also experience difficulty in obtaining debt
financing which might make it more difficult for us to sell properties at acceptable pricing
levels. Current tightening of credit in financial markets and increasing unemployment may also
adversely affect the ability of tenants to meet their lease obligations and for us to continue
increasing rents on a prospective basis. Disruptions in the credit and financial markets may also
have other adverse effects on us and the overall economy.
A Change in U.S. Government Policy Regarding Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac Could Have a Material
Adverse Impact on Our Business. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are a major source of financing for
secured multifamily rental real estate. We and other multifamily companies depend heavily on Fannie
Mae and Freddie Mac to finance growth by purchasing or guaranteeing apartment loans. In September
2008, the U.S. government assumed control of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and placed both companies
into a government conservatorship under the Federal Housing Finance Agency. While we believe Fannie
Mae and Freddie Mac will continue to provide liquidity to our sector, should they discontinue doing
so, have their mandates changed or reduced or be disbanded or reorganized by
the government, it would significantly reduce our access to debt capital and adversely affect
our ability to finance or refinance existing indebtedness at competitive rates and it may adversely
affect our ability to sale assets. Uncertainty in the future activity and involvement of Fannie Mae
and Freddie Mac as a source of financing could negatively impact our ability to make acquisitions
and make it more difficult or not possible for us to sell properties or may adversely affect the
price we receive for properties that we do sell, as prospective buyers may experience increased
costs of debt financing or difficulties in obtaining debt financing.
The Soundness of Financial Institutions Could Adversely Affect Us. We have relationships with
many financial institutions, including lenders under our credit facilities, and, from time to time,
we execute transactions with counterparties in the financial services industry. As a result,
defaults by, or even rumors or questions about, financial institutions or the financial services
industry generally, could result in losses or defaults by these institutions. In the event that the
volatility of the financial markets adversely affects these financial institutions or
counterparties, we or other parties to the transactions with us may be unable to complete
transactions as intended, which could adversely affect our business and results of operations.
Changing Interest Rates Could Increase Interest Costs and Adversely Affect Our Cash Flow and
the Market Price of Our Securities. We currently have, and expect to incur in the future,
interest-bearing debt at rates that vary with market interest rates. As of September 30, 2010, UDR,
Inc. had approximately $953.0 million of variable rate indebtedness outstanding, which constitutes
approximately 27.4% of total outstanding indebtedness as of such date. As of September 30, 2010,
the Operating Partnership had approximately $301.9 million of variable rate indebtedness
outstanding, which constitutes approximately 26.7% of total outstanding indebtedness as of such
date. An increase in interest rates would increase our interest expenses and increase the costs of
refinancing existing indebtedness and of issuing new debt. Accordingly, higher interest rates could
adversely affect cash flow and our ability to service our debt and to make distributions to
security holders. The effect of prolonged interest rate increases could negatively impact our
ability to make acquisitions and develop properties. In addition, an increase in market interest
rates may lead our security holders to demand a higher annual yield, which could adversely affect
the market price of our common and preferred stock and debt securities.
79
Interest Rate Hedging Contracts May Be Ineffective and May Result in Material Charges. From
time to time when we anticipate issuing debt securities, we may seek to limit our exposure to
fluctuations in interest rates during the period prior to the pricing of the securities by entering
into interest rate hedging contracts. We may do this to increase the predictability of our
financing costs. Also, from time to time we may rely on interest rate hedging contracts to limit
our exposure under variable rate debt to unfavorable changes in market interest rates. If the terms
of new debt securities are not within the parameters of, or market interest rates fall below that
which we incur under a particular interest rate hedging contract, the contract is ineffective.
Furthermore, the settlement of interest rate hedging contracts has involved and may in the future
involve material charges. In addition, our use of interest rate hedging arrangements may expose us
to additional risks, including a risk that a counterparty to a hedging arrangement may fail to
honor its obligations. Developing an effective interest rate risk strategy is complex and no
strategy can completely insulate us from risks associated with interest rate fluctuations. There
can be no assurance that our hedging activities will have desired beneficial impact on our results
of operations or financial condition. Termination of these hedging agreements typically involves
costs, such as transaction fees or breakage costs.
Risks Related to Tax Laws
We Would Incur Adverse Tax Consequences if We Fail to Qualify as a REIT. We have elected to be
taxed as a REIT under the Code. Our qualification as a REIT requires us to satisfy numerous
requirements, some on an annual and quarterly basis, established under highly technical and complex
Code provisions for which there are only limited judicial or administrative interpretations, and
involves the determination of various factual matters and circumstances not entirely within our
control. We intend that our current organization and method of operation enable us to continue to
qualify as a REIT, but we may not so qualify or we may not be able to remain so qualified in the
future. In addition, U.S. federal income tax laws governing REITs and other corporations and the
administrative interpretations of those laws may be amended at any time, potentially with
retroactive effect. Future legislation, new regulations, administrative interpretations or court
decisions could adversely affect our ability to qualify as a REIT or adversely affect our
stockholders.
If we fail to qualify as a REIT in any taxable year, we would be subject to federal income tax
(including any applicable alternative minimum tax) on our taxable income at regular corporate
rates, and would not be allowed to deduct dividends paid to our stockholders in computing our
taxable income. Also, unless the Internal Revenue Service granted us relief under certain statutory
provisions, we would be disqualified from treatment as a REIT for the two taxable years following
the year in which we first failed to qualify. The additional tax liability from the failure to
qualify as a REIT would reduce or eliminate the amount of cash available for investment or
distribution to our stockholders. This would likely have a significant adverse effect on the value
of our securities and our ability to raise additional capital. In addition, we would no longer be
required to make distributions to our stockholders. Even if we continue to qualify as a REIT, we
will continue to be subject to certain federal, state and local taxes on our income and property.
REITs May Pay a Portion of Dividends in Common Stock. In December 2009, the Internal Revenue
Service issued Revenue Procedure 2010-12, which expanded previously issued temporary guidance
relating to certain stock distributions made by publicly traded REITs to satisfy their tax-related
distribution requirements. This expanded temporary guidance is intended to permit REITs to limit
cash distributions in order to maintain liquidity during the current downturn in economic
conditions. Under this expanded guidance, for stock dividends declared on or after January 1, 2008
and before December 31, 2012, with respect to a taxable year ending on or before December 31, 2011,
the Internal Revenue Service will treat a distribution of stock by a publicly traded REIT, pursuant
to certain stockholder elections to receive either stock or cash, as a taxable distribution of
property, provided that, among other conditions, (i) the total amount of cash available for
distribution is not less than 10% of the aggregate declared distribution, and (ii) if too many
stockholders elect to receive cash, each stockholder electing to receive cash will receive a pro
rata amount of cash corresponding to its respective entitlement under the declaration, but in no
event will any such electing stockholder receive less than 10% of the stockholders entire
entitlement in money. The amount of such stock distribution will generally be treated as equal to
the amount of cash that could have been received instead. If we pay a portion of our dividends in
shares of our common stock pursuant to this temporary guidance, our stockholders may receive less
cash than they received in distributions in prior years and the market value of our securities may
decline.
80
We May Conduct a Portion of Our Business Through Taxable REIT Subsidiaries, Which are Subject
to Certain Tax Risks. We have established several taxable REIT subsidiaries. Despite our
qualification as a REIT, our taxable REIT subsidiaries must pay income tax on their taxable income.
In addition, we must comply with various tests to continue to qualify as a REIT for federal income
tax purposes, and our income from and investments in our taxable REIT subsidiaries generally do not
constitute permissible income and investments for these tests. While we will attempt to ensure that
our dealings with our taxable REIT subsidiaries will not adversely affect our REIT qualification,
we cannot provide assurance that we will successfully achieve that result. Furthermore, we may be
subject to a 100% penalty tax, we may jeopardize our ability to retain future gains on real
property sales, or our taxable REIT subsidiaries may be denied deductions, to the extent our
dealings with our taxable REIT subsidiaries are not deemed to be arms length in nature or are
otherwise not respected.
REIT Distribution Requirements Limit Our Available Cash. As a REIT, we are subject to annual
distribution requirements, which limit the amount of cash we retain for other business purposes,
including amounts to fund our growth. We generally must distribute annually at least 90% of our net
REIT taxable income, excluding any net capital gain, in order for our distributed earnings not to
be subject to corporate income tax. We intend to make distributions to our stockholders to comply
with the requirements of the Code. However, differences in timing between the recognition of
taxable income and the actual receipt of cash could require us to sell assets or borrow funds on a
short-term or long-term basis to meet the 90% distribution requirement of the Code.
Certain Property Transfers May Generate Prohibited Transaction Income, Resulting in a Penalty
Tax on Gain Attributable to the Transaction. From time to time, we may transfer or otherwise
dispose of some of our properties. Under the Code, any gain resulting from transfers of properties
that we hold as inventory or primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of business
would be treated as income from a prohibited transaction and subject to a 100% penalty tax. Since
we acquire properties for investment purposes, we do not believe that our occasional transfers or
disposals of property are prohibited transactions. However, whether property is held for investment
purposes is a question of fact that depends on all the facts and circumstances surrounding the
particular transaction. The Internal Revenue Service may contend that certain transfers or
disposals of properties by us are prohibited transactions. If the Internal Revenue Service were to
argue successfully that a transfer or disposition of
property constituted a prohibited transaction, then we would be required to pay a 100% penalty
tax on any gain allocable to us from the prohibited transaction and we may jeopardize our ability
to retain future gains on real property sales. In addition, income from a prohibited transaction
might adversely affect our ability to satisfy the income tests for qualification as a REIT for
federal income tax purposes.
We Could Face Possible State and Local Tax Audits and Adverse Changes in State and Local Tax
Laws. As discussed in the risk factors above, because we are organized and qualify as a REIT we are
generally not subject to federal income taxes, but we are subject to certain state and local taxes.
From time to time, changes in state and local tax laws or regulations are enacted, which may result
in an increase in our tax liability. A shortfall in tax revenues for states and municipalities in
which we own apartment communities may lead to an increase in the frequency and size of such
changes. If such changes occur, we may be required to pay additional state and local taxes. These
increased tax costs could adversely affect our financial condition and the amount of cash available
for the payment of distributions to our stockholders. In the normal course of business, entities
through which we own real estate may also become subject to tax audits. If such entities become
subject to state or local tax audits, the ultimate result of such audits could have an adverse
effect on our financial condition.
The Operating Partnership Intends to Qualify as a Partnership, But Cannot Guarantee That It
Will Qualify. The Operating Partnership intends to qualify as a partnership for federal income tax
purposes at such time, if any, that the Operating Partnership admit limited partners other than
UDR, Inc.. If classified as a partnership, the Operating Partnership generally will not be a
taxable entity and will not incur federal income tax liability. However, the Operating Partnership
would be treated as a corporation for federal income tax purposes if it were a publicly traded
partnership, unless at least 90% of the Operating Partnerships income were qualifying income as
defined in the tax code. A publicly traded partnership is a partnership whose partnership
interests are traded on an established securities market or are readily tradable on a secondary
market (or the substantial equivalent thereof). Although the Operating Partnerships partnership
units will not be traded on an established securities market, because of the redemption right, the
Operating Partnerships units held by limited partners could be viewed as readily tradable on a
secondary market (or the substantial equivalent thereof), and there could be no assurance that the
Operating Partnership would qualify for one of the safe harbors under the applicable tax
regulations. Qualifying income for the 90% test generally includes passive income, such as real
property rents, dividends and interest. The income requirements applicable to REITs and the
definition of qualifying income for purposes of this 90% test are similar in most respects. The
Operating Partnership cannot guarantee that it would meet this qualifying income test. If the
Operating Partnership were to be taxed as a corporation, it would incur substantial tax
liabilities. UDR, Inc. would then fail to qualify as a REIT for tax purposes, unless it qualified
for relief under certain statutory savings provisions, and our ability to raise additional capital
would be impaired.
81
Risks Related to Our Organization and Our Shares
Changes in Market Conditions and Volatility of Stock Prices Could Adversely Affect the Market
Price of Our Common Stock. The stock markets, including the New York Stock Exchange, on which we
list our common shares, have experienced significant price and volume fluctuations. As a result,
the market price of our common stock could be similarly volatile, and investors in our common stock
may experience a decrease in the value of their shares, including decreases unrelated to our
operating performance or prospects.
The market price per share of our common stock may decline or fluctuate significantly in
response to many factors, including:
|
|
general market and economic conditions, |
|
|
|
actual or anticipated variations in our quarterly operating results or dividends
or our payment of dividends in shares of our stock, |
|
|
|
changes in our funds from operations or earnings estimates, |
|
|
|
difficulties or inability to access capital or extend or refinance existing debt, |
|
|
|
decreasing (or uncertainty in) real estate valuations, |
|
|
|
publication of research reports about us or the real estate industry, |
|
|
|
the general reputation of real estate investment trusts and the attractiveness
of their equity securities in comparison to other equity securities (including
securities issued by other real estate companies), |
|
|
|
general stock and bond market conditions, including changes in interest rates on
fixed income securities, that may lead prospective purchasers of our stock to
demand a higher annual yield from future dividends, |
|
|
|
a change in analyst ratings, |
|
|
|
adverse market reaction to any additional debt we incur in the future, |
|
|
|
speculation in the press or investment community, |
|
|
|
terrorist activity which may adversely affect the markets in which our
securities trade, possibly increasing market volatility and causing the further
erosion of business and consumer confidence and spending, |
|
|
|
governmental regulatory action and changes in tax laws, and |
|
|
|
the issuance of additional shares of our common stock, or the perception that
such sales might occur, including under our at-the-market equity distribution
program. |
Many of the factors listed above are beyond our control. These factors may cause the market
price of shares of our common stock to decline, regardless of our financial condition, results of
operations, business or our prospects.
We May Change the Dividend Policy for Our Common Stock in the Future. The decision to declare
and pay dividends on our common stock in the future, as well as the timing, amount and composition
of any such future dividends, will be at the sole discretion of our board of directors and will
depend on our earnings, funds from operations, liquidity, financial condition, capital
requirements, contractual prohibitions or other limitations under our indebtedness, the annual
distribution requirements under the REIT provisions of the Code, state law and such other factors
as our board of directors considers relevant. Any change in our dividend policy could have a
material adverse effect on the market price of our common stock.
82
Maryland Law May Limit the Ability of a Third Party to Acquire Control of Us, Which May Not be
in Our Stockholders Best Interests. Maryland business statutes may limit the ability of a third
party to acquire control of us. As a Maryland corporation, we are subject to various Maryland laws
which may have the effect of discouraging offers to acquire our Company and of increasing the
difficulty of consummating any such offers, even if our acquisition would be in our stockholders
best interests. The Maryland General Corporation Law restricts mergers and other business
combination transactions between us and any person who acquires beneficial ownership of shares of
our stock representing 10% or more of the voting power without our board of directors prior
approval. Any such business combination transaction could not be completed until five years after
the person acquired such voting power, and generally only with the approval of stockholders
representing 80% of all votes entitled to be cast and 66-2/3% of the votes entitled to be cast,
excluding the interested stockholder, or upon payment of a fair price. Maryland law also provides
generally that a person who acquires shares of our equity stock that represents 10% (and certain
higher levels) of the voting power in electing directors will have no voting rights unless approved
by a vote of two-thirds of the shares eligible to vote.
Limitations on Share Ownership and Limitations on the Ability of Our Stockholders to Effect a
Change in Control of Our Company Restricts the Transferability of Our Stock and May Prevent
Takeovers That are Beneficial to Our Stockholders. One of the requirements for maintenance of our
qualification as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes is that no more than 50% in value of
our outstanding capital stock may be owned by five or fewer individuals, including entities
specified in the Code, during the last half of any taxable year. Our charter contains ownership and
transfer restrictions relating to our stock primarily to assist us in complying with this and other
REIT ownership requirements; however, the restrictions may have the effect of preventing a change
of control, which does not threaten REIT status. These restrictions include a provision that
generally limits ownership by any
person of more than 9.9% of the value of our outstanding equity stock, unless our board of
directors exempts the person from such ownership limitation, provided that any such exemption shall
not allow the person to exceed 13% of the value of our outstanding equity stock. Absent such an
exemption from our board of directors, the transfer of our stock to any person in excess of the
applicable ownership limit, or any transfer of shares of such stock in violation of the ownership
requirements of the Code for REITs, will be considered null and void, and the intended transferee
of such stock will acquire no rights in such shares. These provisions of our charter may have the
effect of delaying, deferring or preventing someone from taking control of us, even though a change
of control might involve a premium price for our stockholders or might otherwise be in our
stockholders best interests.
Item 2. UNREGISTERED SALES OF EQUITY SECURITIES AND USE OF PROCEEDS
Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities
From time to time we issue shares of our common stock in exchange for operating partnership
units (OP Units) tendered to the Operating Partnership, for redemption in accordance with the
provisions of the Operating Partnerships limited partnership agreement. Under the terms of the
Operating Partnerships limited partnership agreement, the holders of OP Units have the right to
require the Operating Partnership to redeem all or a portion of the OP Units held by the holder in
exchange for a cash payment based on the market value of our common stock at the time of
redemption. However, the Operating Partnerships obligation to pay the cash amount is subject to
the prior right of the Company to acquire such OP Units in exchange for either the cash amount or
the number of shares of our common stock equal to the number of OP Units being redeemed.
During the quarter ended September 30, 2010, we issued 405,922 shares of our common stock upon
redemption of OP Units. Because these shares of common stock were issued to accredited investors in
transactions not involving a public offering, the transaction is exempt from registration under the
Securities Act of 1933 in accordance with Section 4(2) of the Securities Act. We did not issue any
other shares of our common stock upon redemption of OP Units during the three months ended
September 30, 2010.
83
Repurchase of Equity Securities
In February 2006, our Board of Directors authorized a 10 million share repurchase program. In
January 2008, our Board of Directors authorized a new 15 million share repurchase program. Under
the two share repurchase programs, UDR may repurchase shares of our common stock in open market
purchases, block purchases, privately negotiated transactions or otherwise. As reflected in the
table below, no shares of common stock were repurchased under these programs during the quarter
ended September 30, 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Number |
|
|
Maximum Number |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of Shares |
|
|
of Shares |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchased as |
|
|
that May Yet |
|
|
|
Total Number |
|
|
Average |
|
|
Part of Publicly |
|
|
Be Purchased |
|
|
|
of Shares |
|
|
Price |
|
|
Announced Plans |
|
|
Under the Plans |
|
Period |
|
Purchased |
|
|
Per Share |
|
|
or Programs |
|
|
or Programs (1) |
|
Beginning Balance |
|
|
9,967,490 |
|
|
$ |
22.00 |
|
|
|
9,967,490 |
|
|
|
15,032,510 |
|
June 1, 2010 through July 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,032,510 |
|
July 1, 2010 through August 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,032,510 |
|
August 1, 2010 through September 30, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,032,510 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance as of September 30, 2010 |
|
|
9,967,490 |
|
|
$ |
22.00 |
|
|
|
9,967,490 |
|
|
|
15,032,510 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
This number reflects the amount of shares that were available for purchase under our 10
million share repurchase program authorized in February 2006 and our 15 million share
repurchase program authorized in January 2008. |
Item 3. DEFAULTS UPON SENIOR SECURITIES
None.
Item 4. (REMOVED AND RESERVED)
Item 5. OTHER INFORMATION
There is no other information required to be disclosed in a report on Form 8-K during the
quarter ended September 30, 2010, that was not previously disclosed in a Form 8-K.
Item 6. EXHIBITS
The exhibits filed or furnished with this Report are set forth in the Exhibit Index.
84
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, each of the registrants
has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly
authorized.
|
|
|
|
|
|
UDR, Inc.
|
|
|
(registrant)
|
|
Date: November 9, 2010 |
/s/ David L. Messenger
|
|
|
David L. Messenger |
|
|
Chief Financial Officer and Senior
Vice President
(duly authorized officer, principal financial
officer and chief accounting officer) |
|
|
|
United Dominion Realty, L.P.
|
|
|
(registrant)
|
|
|
By: |
UDR, Inc., its general partner
|
|
|
|
|
Date: November 9, 2010 |
/s/ David L. Messenger
|
|
|
David L. Messenger |
|
|
Chief Financial Officer and Senior
Vice President
(duly authorized officer, principal financial
officer and chief accounting officer) |
|
85
EXHIBIT INDEX
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit No. |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.1 |
|
|
Certificate of Limited Partnership of United Dominion Realty, L.P. dated February 19,
2004 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.4 to United Dominion Realty, L.P.s
Post-Effective Amendment No. 1 to Registration Statement on Form S-3 dated and filed with
the SEC on October 15, 2010). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.2 |
|
|
Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of United Dominion Realty, L.P.
dated as of February 23, 2004 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.23 to UDR, Inc.s
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.3 |
|
|
First Amendment to the Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of United
Dominion Realty, L.P. dated June 24, 2005 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.06 to
UDR, Inc.s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2005). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.4 |
|
|
Second Amendment to the Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of United
Dominion Realty, L.P. dated February 23, 2006 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.6 to
UDR, Inc.s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2006). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.5 |
|
|
Third Amendment to the Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of United
Dominion Realty, L.P. dated February 2, 2007 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.1 to
UDR, Inc.s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.6 |
|
|
Fourth Amendment to the Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of United
Dominion Realty, L.P. dated December 27, 2007 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.25
to UDR, Inc.s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.7 |
|
|
Fifth Amendment to the Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of United
Dominion Realty, L.P. dated March 7, 2008 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.53 to
UDR, Inc.s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.8 |
|
|
Sixth Amendment to the Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of United
Dominion Realty, L.P. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to UDR, Inc.s Current
Report on Form 8-K dated December 9, 2008 and filed with the SEC on December 10, 2008). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.9 |
|
|
Seventh Amendment to the Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of
United Dominion Realty, L.P., dated as of March 13, 2009 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to UDR, Inc.s Current Report on Form 8-K dated March 18, 2009 and filed with
the SEC on March 19, 2009). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.1 |
|
|
Guaranty of United Dominion Realty, L.P. with respect to UDR, Inc.s Indenture dated
November 1, 1995 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.1 to UDR, Inc.s Current Report
on Form 8-K dated and filed with the SEC on September 30, 2010, Commission File
No. 1-10524). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.2 |
|
|
Guaranty of United Dominion Realty, L.P. with respect to UDR, Inc.s Indenture dated
October 12, 2006 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.2 to UDR, Inc.s Current Report
on Form 8-K dated and filed with the SEC on September 30, 2010, Commission File
No. 1-10524). |
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit No. |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.1 |
|
|
Underwriting Agreement dated September 8, 2010 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 1.1 to UDR, Inc.s Current Report on Form 8-K dated September 8, 2010 and filed
with the SEC on September 9, 2010, Commission File No. 1-10524). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.2 |
|
|
Letter Agreement, dated October 7, 2010, between UDR, Inc. and W. Mark Wallis
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to UDR, Inc.s Current Report on Form 8-K dated
and filed with the SEC on October 12, 2010, Commission File No. 1-10524). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
12.1 |
|
|
Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Combined Fixed Charges and Preferred Stock
Dividends of UDR, Inc. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
12.2 |
|
|
Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges of United Dominion Realty, L.P. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
31.1 |
|
|
Rule 13a-14(a) Certification of the Chief Executive Officer of UDR, Inc. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
31.2 |
|
|
Rule 13a-14(a) Certification of the Chief Financial Officer of UDR, Inc. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
31.3 |
|
|
Rule 13a-14(a) Certification of the Chief Executive Officer of United Dominion Realty,
L.P. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
31.4 |
|
|
Rule 13a-14(a) Certification of the Chief Financial Officer of United Dominion Realty, L.P. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
32.1 |
|
|
Section 1350 Certification of the Chief Executive Officer of UDR, Inc. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
32.2 |
|
|
Section 1350 Certification of the Chief Financial Officer of UDR, Inc. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
32.3 |
|
|
Section 1350 Certification of the Chief Executive Officer of United Dominion Realty, L.P. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
32.4 |
|
|
Section 1350 Certification of the Chief Financial Officer of United Dominion Realty, L.P. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
XBRL (Extensible Business Reporting Language). The following materials from
UDR, Inc.s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2010,
formatted in XBRL: (i) consolidated balance sheets of UDR, Inc., (ii) consolidated
statements of operations of UDR, Inc., (iii) consolidated statements of cash flows
of UDR, Inc., (iv) consolidated statements of stockholders equity and comprehensive
income/(loss) of UDR, Inc., and (v) notes to consolidated financial statements of
UDR, Inc. |