AMB PROPERTY LP - 10-Q Quarterly Report

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes þ No o.

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Exchange Act Rule 12b-2). Yes þ No o.

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

AMB Property Corporation, a Maryland corporation (the “Company”), commenced operations as a fully integrated real estate company effective with the completion of its initial public offering on November 26, 1997. The Company elected to be taxed as a real estate investment trust (“REIT”) under Sections 856 through 860 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the “Code”), commencing with its taxable year ended December 31, 1997, and believes its current organization and method of operation will enable it to maintain its status as a real estate investment trust. The Company, through its controlling interest in its subsidiary, AMB Property, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership (the “Operating Partnership”), is engaged in the acquisition, ownership, operation, management, renovation, expansion and development of industrial buildings primarily within key distribution markets worldwide. Unless the context otherwise requires, the “Company” means AMB Property Corporation, the Operating Partnership and their other controlled subsidiaries and the “Operating Partnership” means AMB Property, L.P. and its controlled subsidiaries.

As of March 31, 2003, the Company owned an approximate 94.4% general partner interest in the Operating Partnership, excluding preferred units. The remaining 5.6% limited partner interest is owned by non-affiliated investors and certain current and former directors and officers of the Company. For local law purposes, certain properties are owned through limited partnerships and limited liability companies. The ownership of such properties through such entities does not materially affect the Operating Partnership’s overall ownership interests in the properties. As the sole general partner of the Operating Partnership, the Company has full, exclusive and complete responsibility and discretion in the day-to-day management and control of the Operating Partnership. Net operating results of the Operating Partnership are allocated after preferred unit distributions based on the respective partners’ ownership interests.

The Operating Partnership enters into co-investment joint ventures with institutional investors. These co-investment joint ventures provide the Operating Partnership with an additional source of capital and income. As of March 31, 2003, the Operating Partnership had investments in five co-investment joint ventures, which are consolidated for financial reporting purposes.

AMB Capital Partners, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (“AMB Capital Partners”), provides real estate investment services to clients on a fee basis. Headlands Realty Corporation, a Maryland corporation, conducts a variety of businesses that include incremental income programs and development projects available for sale to third parties. IMD Holding Corporation, a Delaware corporation, also conducts a variety of businesses that include development projects available for sale to third parties.

As of March 31, 2003, the Operating Partnership owned 873 industrial buildings and nine retail and other properties, located in 27 markets throughout North America and France. The Operating Partnership’s strategy is to become a leading provider of distribution properties in supply-constrained, infill submarkets located near key international passenger and cargo airports, highway systems and seaports in major metropolitan areas of North America, Europe and Asia. As of March 31, 2003, the industrial buildings, principally warehouse distribution buildings, encompassed approximately 80.4 million rentable square feet and were 92.5% leased. As of March 31, 2003, the retail centers, principally grocer-anchored community shopping centers, encompassed approximately 1.0 million rentable square feet and were 87.9% leased to 113 customers.

As of December 31, 2002, through AMB Capital Partners, the Operating Partnership also managed, but did not have an ownership interest in, industrial, retail and other properties, totaling approximately 1.7 million rentable square feet. In addition, the Operating Partnership has investments in industrial operating and development properties, totaling approximately 8.2 million rentable square feet, through unconsolidated joint ventures.

The consolidated financial statements included herein have been prepared pursuant to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission. Accordingly, certain information and note disclosures normally included in the annual financial statements prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the Unites States of America have been condensed or omitted.

In the opinion of management, the accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements contain all adjustments, of a normal recurring nature, necessary for a fair presentation of the Operating Partnership’s consolidated financial position and results of operations for the interim periods. The interim results for the three months ended March 31, 2003, are not necessarily indicative of future results. These financial statements should be read in conjunction with the financial statements and the notes thereto included in the Operating Partnership’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002.

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Reclassifications. Certain items in the consolidated financial statements for prior periods have been reclassified to conform to current classifications.

Comprehensive Income. The Operating Partnership reports comprehensive income in its Statement of Partners’ Capital. Comprehensive income was $65.6 million and $34.4 million for the three months ended March 31, 2003 and 2002, respectively.

Financial Instruments. For its lease denominated in Mexican pesos, the Operating Partnership used derivative financial instruments to manage foreign currency exchange rate risk. The Operating Partnership adopted Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (“SFAS”) No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and for Hedging Activities, as amended, on January 1, 2001. SFAS No. 133 provides comprehensive guidelines for the recognition and measurement of derivatives and hedging activities and, specifically, requires all derivatives to be recorded on the balance sheet at fair value as an asset or liability, with an offset to accumulated other comprehensive income or income. The Operating Partnership’s only derivative financial instruments in effect at December 31, 2002, were a combination of foreign currency option contracts. These derivative instruments were closed-out when the Operating Partnership sold its property holding the lease denominated in Mexican pesos. The Operating Partnership had no derivative financial instruments in effect at March 31, 2003.

Foreign Operations. The U.S. dollar is the functional currency for the Operating Partnership’s subsidiaries operating in the United States and Mexico. The functional currency for the Operating Partnership’s subsidiaries operating outside North America is generally the local currency of the country in which the entity is located. The Operating Partnership’s subsidiaries whose functional currency is not the U.S. dollar translate their financial statements into U.S. dollars. Assets and liabilities are translated at the exchange rate in effect as of the financial statement date. The Operating Partnership translates income statement accounts using the average exchange rate for the period and significant nonrecurring transactions using the rate on the transaction date. Gains and losses resulting from the translation are included in accumulated other comprehensive income as a separate component of partners’ capital.

The Operating Partnership’s foreign subsidiaries may have transactions denominated in currencies other than their functional currency. In these instances, nonmonetary assets and liabilities are reflected at the historical exchange rate, monetary assets and liabilities are remeasured at the exchange rate in effect at the end of the period and income statement accounts are remeasured at the average exchange rate for the period.

Gains and losses from remeasurement are generally included in the Operating Partnership’s results of operations.

The Operating Partnership also records gains or losses in the income statement when a transaction with a third party, denominated in a currency other than the entity’s functional currency, is settled and the functional currency cash flows realized are more or less than expected based upon the exchange rate in effect when the transaction was initiated.

New Accounting Pronouncements. In January 2003, Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Interpretation No. 46, Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities (“FIN 46”). FIN 46 requires a variable interest entity to be consolidated by a company if that company is subject to a majority of the risk of loss from the variable interest entity’s activities or entitled to receive a majority of the entity’s residual returns or both. FIN 46 requires disclosures about variable interest entities that a company is not required to consolidate, but in which it has a significant variable interest. The consolidation requirements of FIN 46 apply immediately to variable interest entities created after January 31, 2003. The consolidation requirements apply to existing entities in the first fiscal year or interim period beginning after June 15, 2003. Certain of the disclosure requirements apply to all financial statements issued after January 31, 2003, regardless of when the variable interest entity was established. The Operating Partnership will adopt the consolidation requirements of this statement in the third quarter of 2003, and it does not expect the adoption of this statement to have a material impact on its financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

In November 2002, the FASB issued Interpretation No. 45, Guarantor’s Accounting and Disclosure Requirements for Guarantees, Including Indirect Guarantees of Indebtedness of Others (“FIN 45”). FIN 45 requires disclosure of obligations under guarantee contracts be disclosed. The Operating Partnership has no off-balance sheet transactions, arrangements, obligations, guarantees or other relationships with unconsolidated entities or other persons that have, or are reasonably likely to have, a material effect on its financial condition, revenues or expenses, results of operations, liquidity, capital expenditures or capital resources.

During the three months ended March 31, 2003, the Operating Partnership invested $10.9 million in two industrial buildings, aggregating approximately 0.2 million square feet, through two of the Operating Partnership’s co-investment joint ventures. During the quarter ended March 31, 2002, the Operating Partnership invested $35.0 million in eight industrial buildings, aggregating approximately 0.7 million square feet, through two of the Operating Partnership’s co-investment joint ventures.

During the three months ended March 31, 2003, the Operating Partnership completed two industrial buildings valued at $12.6 million, aggregating approximately 0.2 million square feet. The Operating Partnership also initiated four new industrial projects valued at $36.4 million, aggregating approximately 0.6 million square feet. The Operating Partnership acquired 438 acres of land for development in Miami’s Airport West submarket for $29.7 million. The master planned park, called Beacon Lakes, is fully entitled for 6.8 million square feet of properties for lease or sale. During the quarter, the Operating Partnership and its partner began development of the first two buildings at Beacon Lakes, which will aggregate approximately 0.4 million square feet and have an estimated investment of $20.3 million. New development projects during the quarter include the two Beacon Lakes buildings as well as two additional projects.

As of March 31, 2003, the Operating Partnership had in its development pipeline: (1) 13 industrial projects, which will total approximately 2.2 million square feet and will have an aggregate estimated investment of $133.2 million upon completion and (2) three development projects available for sale, which will total approximately 0.6 million square feet and will have an aggregate estimated investment of $47.3 million upon completion. As of March 31, 2003, the Operating Partnership and its Development Alliance Partners had funded an aggregate of $102.1 million and needed to fund an estimated additional

$78.4 million in order to complete current and planned projects. The Operating Partnership’s development pipeline includes projects to be completed through June 2005.

Property Divestitures. During the three months ended March 31, 2003, the Operating Partnership divested itself of ten industrial buildings, aggregating approximately 1.6 million square feet, for an aggregate price of $127.0 million, with a resulting net gain of $29.6 million. The Operating Partnership reported the divestitures as discontinued operations separately as prescribed under the provisions of SFAS No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets. On February 19, 2003, the Operating Partnership also contributed $94.0 million in operating properties, consisting of 24 industrial buildings, aggregating approximately 2.4 million square feet, to its newly formed unconsolidated joint venture, Industrial Fund I, LLC. The Operating Partnership recognized a gain of $7.4 million on the contribution, representing the gain on the contributed properties acquired by the third-party investors.

Properties Held for Divestiture. As of March 31, 2003, the Operating Partnership had decided to divest itself of one industrial building and two retail centers with a net book value of $59.7 million. The properties either are not in the Operating Partnership’s core markets or do not meet its current strategic objectives. The divestitures of the properties are subject to negotiation of acceptable terms and other customary conditions. Properties held for divestiture are stated at the lower of cost or estimated fair value less costs to sell. The following summarizes the condensed results of operations of the properties held for divestiture and sold under SFAS No. 144 for the three months ended March 31, (dollars in thousands):

As of March 31, 2003 and December 31, 2002, assets and liabilities of properties held for divestiture under the provisions of SFAS No. 144 consisted of the following (dollars in thousands):

Through a wholly-owned subsidiary, the Operating Partnership holds a mortgage loan receivable on AMB Pier One, LLC, an unconsolidated joint venture. The note bears interest at 13.0% and matures in May 2026. As of March 31, 2003, the outstanding balance on the note was $13.1 million.

As of March 31, 2003, and December 31, 2002, debt consisted of the following (dollars in thousands):

Secured debt generally requires monthly principal and interest payments. The secured debt is secured by deeds of trust on certain properties and is generally non-recourse. As of March 31, 2003 and December 31, 2002, the total gross investment book value of those properties securing the debt was $2.5 billion and $2.6 billion, respectively, including $1.6 billion and $1.6 billion, respectively, in consolidated joint ventures. All of the secured debt bears interest at fixed rates, except for seven loans with an aggregate principal amount of $65.6 million as of March 31, 2003, which bear interest at variable rates (weighted average interest rate of 3.5% as of March 31, 2003). The secured debt has various covenants. Management believes that the Operating Partnership was in compliance with its financial covenants as of March 31, 2003. As of March 31, 2003, the Operating Partnership had 28 non-recourse secured loans, which are cross-collateralized by 62 properties, totaling $719.5 million (not including unamortized debt premiums).

In June 1998, the Operating Partnership issued $400.0 million of unsecured senior debt securities. Interest on the unsecured senior debt securities is payable semi-annually. The 2015 notes are putable and callable in September 2005. The senior debt securities are subject to various covenants. Management believes that the Operating Partnership was in compliance with its financial covenants as of March 31, 2003. In August 2000, the Operating Partnership commenced a medium-term note program and subsequently issued $400.0 million of medium-term notes, which are guaranteed by the Company.

In May 2002, the Operating Partnership commenced a new medium-term note program for the issuance of up to $400.0 million in principal amount of medium-term notes (unsecured senior debt securities), which will be guaranteed by the Company. As of March 31, 2003, the Operating Partnership had issued no medium-term notes under this program.

In December 2002, the Operating Partnership renewed its $500.0 million unsecured revolving line of credit. The Company guarantees the Operating Partnership’s obligations under the credit facility. The credit facility matures in December 2005, has a one-year extension option and currently is subject to a 20 basis point annual facility fee. Borrowings under the credit facility currently bear interest at LIBOR plus 60 basis points. Euro borrowings under the credit facility currently bear interest at EURIBOR plus 60 basis points. Both the facility fee and the interest rate are based on the Operating Partnership’s credit rating, which is currently investment grade. The credit facility includes a multi-currency component under which up to $150.0 million may be drawn in either British pounds sterling, euros or yen (provided that such currency is readily available and freely transferable and convertible to U.S. dollars, the Reuters Monitor Money Rates Service reports LIBOR for such currency in interest periods of 1, 2, 3 or 6 months and the Operating Partnership has an investment grade credit rating). The Operating Partnership has the ability to increase available borrowings to $700.0 million by adding additional banks to the facility or obtaining the agreement of existing banks to increase their commitments. The Operating Partnership uses its unsecured credit facility principally for acquisitions and for general working capital requirements. Monthly debt service payments on the credit facility are interest only. The total amount available under the credit facility fluctuates based upon the borrowing base, as defined in the agreement governing the credit facility, generally the value of the Operating Partnership’s unencumbered properties. As of March 31, 2003, the outstanding balance on the credit facility was $17.5 million and the remaining amount available was $459.2 million, net of outstanding letters of credit (excluding the additional $200.0 million of potential additional capacity). The outstanding balance was denominated in Euros and converted to U.S. dollars at March 31, 2003. The credit facility has various covenants. Management believes that the Operating Partnership was in compliance with its financial covenants at March 31, 2003.

In July 2001, AMB Institutional Alliance Fund II, L.P. (“Alliance Fund II”) obtained a $150.0 million credit facility secured by the unfunded capital commitments of the investors in AMB Institutional Alliance REIT II, Inc. (“Alliance REIT II”) and the Alliance Fund II. Borrowings currently bear interest at LIBOR plus 87.5 basis points (2.2% at March 31, 2003). As of March 31, 2003, the outstanding balance was $51.5 million and the remaining amount available was $25.2 million, net of outstanding letters of credit and the previously funded capital contributions from third-party investors. The Operating Partnership repaid the credit facility in April with capital contributions and secured debt proceeds. The credit facility has various covenants. Management believes that the Alliance Fund II and the Alliance REIT II were in compliance with their financial covenants as of March 31, 2003.

As of March 31, 2003, the scheduled maturities of the Operating Partnership’s total debt, excluding unamortized debt premiums, were as follows (dollars in thousands):

Minority interests in the Operating Partnership represent interests held by certain third parties in several real estate joint ventures, aggregating approximately 33.8 million square feet, which are consolidated for financial reporting purposes. Such investments are consolidated because the Operating Partnership owns a majority interest or exercises significant control over major operating decisions such as approval of budgets, selection of property managers, investment activity and changes in financing.

The Operating Partnership enters into co-investment joint ventures with institutional investors. The Operating Partnership’s five co-investment joint ventures are engaged in the acquisition, ownership, operation, management and, in some cases, the renovation, expansion and development, of industrial buildings in target markets nationwide.

The Operating Partnership’s co-investment joint ventures at March 31, 2003 (dollars in thousands) were:


(1)	Includes total equity and debt.

(2)	Included 15 institutional investors as stockholders as of March 31, 2003.

(3)	A subsidiary of the real estate investment subsidiary of the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation.

(4)	Included 13 institutional investors as stockholders and one third-party limited partner as of March 31, 2003.

The following table distinguishes the minority interest liability as of March 31, 2003 and December 31, 2002 (dollars in thousands):

The following table distinguishes the minority interests’ share of income, excluding minority interests share of gains from dispositions of real estate (dollars in thousands):

The Operating Partnership’s unconsolidated joint ventures at March 31, 2003 (dollars in thousands) were:

On February 19, 2003, the Operating Partnership formed Industrial Fund I, LLC, a joint venture with Citigroup Global Investments Real Estate LP, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, and certain of its private investor clients. The Operating Partnership contributed $94.0 million in operating properties, consisting of 24 industrial buildings, aggregating approximately 2.4 million square feet, to Industrial Fund I, LLC in which it retained a 15% interest. The Operating Partnership recognized a gain of $7.4 million on the contribution, representing the gain on the contributed properties acquired by the third-party investors.

Under the agreements governing the joint ventures, the Operating Partnership and the other parties to the joint venture may be required to make additional capital contributions and, subject to certain limitations, the joint ventures may incur additional debt. As of March 31, 2003, the Operating Partnership’s share of unconsolidated joint venture debt was $49.1 million.

The Operating Partnership also has a 0.1% unconsolidated equity interest (with an approximate 33% economic interest) in AMB Pier One, LLC, a joint venture to redevelop the Operating Partnership’s office space in San Francisco. The investment is not consolidated because the Operating Partnership does not own a majority interest and does not exercise significant control over major operating decisions such as approval of budgets, selection of property managers, investment activity and changes in financing. The Operating Partnership has an option to purchase the remaining equity interest beginning January 1, 2007, and expiring December 31, 2009, based on the fair market value as stipulated in the operating agreement.

Holders of common limited partnership units of the Operating Partnership have the right, commencing generally on or after the first anniversary of the holder becoming a limited partner of the Operating Partnership (or such other date agreed to by the Operating Partnership and the applicable unit holders), to require the Operating Partnership to redeem part or all of their common units for cash (based upon the fair market value, as defined in the partnership agreement, of an equivalent number of shares of common stock at the time of redemption) or the Operating Partnership may, in its sole and absolute discretion (subject to the limits on ownership and transfer of common stock set forth in the Company’s charter), elect to have the Company exchange those common units for shares of the Company’s common stock on a one-for-one basis, subject to adjustment in the event of stock splits, stock dividends, issuance of certain rights, certain extraordinary distributions and similar events. The Operating Partnership presently anticipates that it will

generally elect to have the Company issue shares of its common stock in exchange for common units in connection with a redemption request; however, the Operating Partnership has paid cash, and may in the future pay cash, for a redemption of common units. With each redemption or exchange, the Company’s percentage ownership in the Operating Partnership will increase. Common limited partners may exercise this redemption right from time to time, in whole or in part, subject to the limitations that limited partners may not exercise this right if such exercise would result in any person actually or constructively owning shares of common stock in excess of the ownership limit or any other amount specified by the Company’s board of directors, assuming common stock was issued in the exchange. During the three months ended March 31, 2003, the Operating Partnership did not redeem any of its common limited partnership units for shares of the Company’s common stock.

In December 2001, the Company’s board of directors approved a new stock repurchase program for the repurchase of up to $100.0 million worth of common and preferred stock. In December 2002, the Company’s board of directors increased the repurchase program to $200.0 million. The new stock repurchase program expires in December 2003 and, as of March 31, 2003, $110.0 million of repurchase capacity remained under the Company’s stock repurchase program. In January 2003, the Company repurchased and retired 787,800 shares of its common stock for an aggregate purchase price of $20.6 million, including commissions, and the Operating Partnership retired the same number of common general partnership units.

As of March 31, 2003, the Operating Partnership had outstanding 81,304,915 common general partnership units, 4,846,387 common limited partnership units, 3,995,800 8 1/2% Series A Cumulative Redeemable Partnership Units, 1,300,000 8 5/8% Series B Cumulative Redeemable Partnership Units, 800,000 7.95% Series J Cumulative Redeemable Partnership Units, and 800,000 7.95% Series K Cumulative Redeemable Partnership Units.

The Operating Partnership’s only dilutive securities outstanding for the three months ended March 31, 2003 and 2002, were stock options and restricted stock granted under the Company’s stock incentive plans. The effect on income per unit was to increase weighted average units outstanding. Such dilution was computed using the treasury stock method.

The Operating Partnership operates industrial and retail properties in North America and France and manages its business both by property type and by market. Industrial properties represent more than 98% of the Operating Partnership’s portfolio by rentable square feet and consist primarily of warehouse distribution facilities suitable for single or multiple customers and are typically comprised of multiple buildings that are leased to customers engaged in various types of businesses. The Operating Partnership’s geographic markets for industrial properties are managed separately because each market requires different operating, pricing and leasing strategies. As of March 31, 2003, the Operating Partnership operated retail properties in Southeast Florida, Atlanta, Chicago, the San Francisco Bay Area, Boston and Baltimore. The Operating Partnership does not separately manage its retail operations by market. Retail properties are generally leased to one or more anchor customers, such as grocery and drug stores, and various retail businesses. The accounting policies of the segments are the same as those described in the summary of significant accounting policies. The Operating Partnership evaluates performance based upon property net operating income of the combined properties in each segment.

The industrial domestic target markets category includes Austin, Baltimore/ Washington D.C. and Boston. The industrial domestic non-target markets category captures all of the Operating Partnership’s other

U.S. markets, except for those markets listed individually in the table. Summary information for the reportable segments is as follows (dollars in thousands):


(1)	Property net operating income (NOI) is defined as rental revenue, including reimbursements, less property operating expenses, which excludes depreciation, amortization, general and administrative expenses and interest expense.


(1)	Includes construction in progress of $180.6 million and $132.5 million as of March 31, 2003, and December 31, 2002, respectively.

Lease Commitments. The Operating Partnership holds operating ground leases on certain land parcels, primarily on-tarmac facilities, and leases on office spaces in San Francisco and Boston. The Operating Partnership also holds a lease on office space in New York City, which it holds for investment purposes. The remaining lease terms are from one to 38 years. Future minimum rental payments required under non-cancelable operating leases in effect as of March 31, 2003, were as follows (dollars in thousands):

These operating lease payments are being amortized ratably over the terms of the related leases.

Litigation. In the normal course of business, from time to time, the Operating Partnership may be involved in legal actions relating to the ownership and operations of its properties. Management does not expect that the liabilities, if any, that may ultimately result from such legal actions will have a material adverse effect on the consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows of the Operating Partnership.

Environmental Matters. The Operating Partnership monitors its properties for the presence of hazardous or toxic substances. The Operating Partnership is not aware of any environmental liability with respect to the properties that would have a material adverse effect on the Operating Partnership’s business, assets or results of operations. However, there can be no assurance that such a material environmental liability does not exist. The existence of any such material environmental liability would have an adverse effect on the Operating Partnership’s results of operations and cash flow.

General Uninsured Losses. The Operating Partnership carries property and rental loss, liability, flood, environmental and terrorism insurance. The Operating Partnership believes that the policy terms and conditions, limits and deductibles are adequate and appropriate under the circumstances, given the relative risk of loss, the cost of such coverage and industry practice. In addition, certain of the Operating Partnership’s properties are located in areas that are subject to earthquake activity; therefore, the Operating Partnership has obtained limited earthquake insurance on those properties. There are, however, certain types of extraordinary losses, such as those due to acts of war that may be either uninsurable or not economically insurable. Although the Operating Partnership has obtained coverage for certain acts of terrorism, with policy specifications and insured limits that we believe are commercially reasonable, it is not certain that we will be able to collect under such policies. Should an uninsured loss occur, the Operating Partnership could lose its investment in, and anticipated profits and cash flows from, a property.

Captive Insurance Company. The Operating Partnership has responded to increasing costs and decreasing coverage availability in the insurance markets by obtaining higher-deductible property insurance from third-party insurers and by forming a wholly-owned captive insurance company, Arcata National Insurance Ltd. (“Arcata”) in December 2001. Arcata provides insurance coverage for all or a portion of losses below the increased deductible under the Operating Partnership’s third-party policies. The Operating Partnership capitalized Arcata in accordance with regulatory requirements. Arcata established annual premiums based on projections derived from the past loss experience at the Operating Partnership’s properties. Annually, the Operating Partnership engages an independent third party to perform an actuarial estimate of future projected claims, related deductibles and projected expenses necessary to fund associated risk management programs. Premiums paid to Arcata may be adjusted based on this estimate. Premiums paid to Arcata have a retrospective component, so that if expenses, including losses and deductibles, are less than premiums collected, the excess may be returned to the property owners (and, in turn, as appropriate, to the customers) and conversely, subject to certain limitations, if expenses, including losses, are greater than premiums collected, an additional premium will be charged. As with all recoverable expenses, differences between estimated and actual insurance premiums will be recognized in the subsequent year. Through this structure, the Operating Partnership believes that it has more comprehensive insurance coverage at an overall lower cost than would otherwise be available in the market.

You should read the following discussion and analysis of our consolidated financial condition and results of operations in conjunction with the notes to consolidated financial statements. Statements contained in this discussion that are not historical facts may be forward-looking statements. Such statements relate to our future performance and plans, results of operations, capital expenditures, acquisitions, and operating improvements and costs. You can identify forward-looking statements by the use of forward-looking terminology such as “believes,” “expects,” “may,” “will,” “should,” “seeks,” “approximately,” “intends,” “plans,” “pro forma,” “estimates” or “anticipates,” or the negative of these words and phrases, or similar words or phrases. You can also identify forward-looking statements by discussions of strategy, plans or intentions. Forward-looking statements involve numerous risks and uncertainties and you should not rely upon them as predictions of future events. There is no assurance that the events or circumstances reflected in forward-looking statements will occur or be achieved. Forward-looking statements are necessarily dependent on assumptions, data or methods that may be incorrect or imprecise and we may not be able to realize them.

The following factors, among others, could cause actual results and future events to differ materially from those set forth or contemplated in the forward-looking statements:


	•	defaults or non-renewal of leases by customers;

	•	increased interest rates and operating costs;

	•	our failure to obtain necessary outside financing;

	•	difficulties in identifying properties to acquire and in effecting acquisitions;

	•	our failure to successfully integrate acquired properties and operations;

	•	our failure to divest of properties that we have contracted to sell or to timely reinvest proceeds from any such divestitures;

	•	risks and uncertainties affecting property development and construction (including construction delays, cost overruns, our inability to obtain necessary permits and public opposition to these activities);

	•	environmental uncertainties;

	•	risks related to natural disasters;

	•	financial market fluctuations;

	•	changes in real estate and zoning laws;

	•	increases in real property tax rates; and

	•	risks of doing business internationally, including currency risks.

Our success also depends upon economic trends generally, including interest rates, income tax laws, governmental regulation, legislation, population changes and those other risk factors discussed in the section entitled “Business Risks” in this report. We caution you not to place undue reliance on forward-looking statements, which reflect our analysis only and speak as of the date of this report or as of the dates indicated in the statements.

Unless the context otherwise requires, the terms “we,” “us” and “our” refer to AMB Property, L.P. The following marks are the registered trademarks of AMB Property Corporation, our general partner: AMB®; Broker Alliance Partners®; Broker Alliance Program®; Customer Alliance Partners®; Customer Alliance Program®; Development Alliance Partners®; Development Alliance Program®; HTD®; High Throughput Distribution®; Institutional Alliance Partners®; Institutional Alliance Program®; Management Alliance Partners®; Management Alliance Program®; Strategic Alliance Partners®; Strategic Alliance Programs®; UPREIT Alliance Partners®; and UPREIT Alliance Program®.

We commenced operations on November 26, 1997, shortly before the consummation of AMB Property Corporation’s initial public offering.

We generate revenue primarily from rent received from customers under long-term operating leases at our properties, including reimbursements from customers for certain operating costs, and our private capital business. In addition, our growth is, dependent on our ability to increase occupancy rates or increase rental rates at our properties and our ability to continue to acquire and develop additional properties. Our income would be adversely affected if a significant number of customers were unable to pay rent or if we were unable to rent our industrial space on favorable terms. Certain significant expenditures associated with an investment in real estate (such as mortgage payments, real estate taxes and maintenance costs) generally do not decline when circumstances cause a reduction in income from the property. Although the weak economy has decreased customer demand for new space and has limited or in some cases lowered rent growth, many types of investors are acquiring industrial real estate. We have capitalized on this opportunity by accelerating our portfolio repositioning program through the disposition of properties. While property dispositions result in reinvestment capacity and trigger gain/loss recognition, they also create near-term earnings dilution. However, we believe that, in the long-term, the repositioning of our portfolio will benefit our unitholders. As the general partner of the co-investment joint ventures, we generally will be liable for all of the joint venture’s unsatisfied obligations other than non-recourse obligations. Any such liabilities could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to make distributions to our unitholders and payments to our noteholders.

Our discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations is based on our consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”). The preparation of these financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities and contingencies as of the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting periods. We evaluate our assumptions and estimates on an on-going basis. We base our estimates on historical experience and on various other assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions. We believe the following critical accounting policies affect our more significant judgments and estimates used in the preparation of our consolidated financial statements.

Investments in Real Estate. Investments in real estate are stated at cost unless circumstances indicate that cost cannot be recovered, in which case, the carrying value of the property is reduced to estimated fair value. Carrying values for financial reporting purposes are reviewed for impairment on a property-by-property basis whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of a property may not be recoverable. Impairment is recognized when estimated expected future cash flows (undiscounted and without interest charges) are less than the carrying amount of the property. The estimation of expected future net cash flows is inherently uncertain and relies on assumptions regarding current and future market conditions and the availability of capital. If impairment analysis assumptions change, then an adjustment to the carrying amount of our long-lived assets could occur in the future period in which the assumptions change. To the extent that a property is impaired, the excess of the carrying amount of the property over its estimated fair value is charged to earnings.

Rental Revenues. We record rental revenue from operating leases on a straight-line basis over the term of the leases and maintain an allowance for estimated losses that may result from the inability of our customers to make required payments. If customers fail to make contractual lease payments that are greater than our bad-debt reserves, security deposits and letters of credit, then we may have to recognize additional bad debt charges in future periods. Each period we review our outstanding accounts receivable, including

straight-line rents, for doubtful accounts and provide allowances as needed. Historically, our bad debt expense has been between 50 and 150 basis points of total revenues.

Consolidated Joint Ventures. Minority interests represent the limited partnership interests in the operating partnership and interests held by certain third parties in several real estate joint ventures, aggregating approximately 33.8 million square feet, which are consolidated for financial reporting purposes. Such investments are consolidated because we own a majority interest or we exercise significant control over major operating decisions such as approval of budgets, selection of property managers, investment activity and changes in financing. When we contribute properties to our joint ventures, we recognize a gain on the contributed properties acquired by the third-party co-investors.

Investments in Unconsolidated Joint Ventures. We have non-controlling limited partnership interests in five separate unconsolidated joint ventures. These investments are not consolidated because we do not exercise significant control over major operating decisions such as approval of budgets, selection of property managers, investment activity and changes in financing. We account for the joint ventures using the equity method of accounting. When we contribute properties to our joint ventures, we recognize a gain on the contributed properties acquired by the third-party investors.

Stock-based Compensation Expense. In 2002, we adopted the expense recognition provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (“SFAS”) No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation. We value stock options issued by AMB Property Corporation, our general partner, using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model and recognize this value as an expense over the period in which the options vest. Under this standard, recognition of expense for stock options is retroactively applied to all options granted after the beginning of the year of adoption. Prior to 2002, we followed the intrinsic method set forth in APB Opinion 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees. The expense is included in general and administrative expenses in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations.

AMB Property, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership, acquires, develops and operates industrial property in key distribution markets throughout North America, Europe and Asia. We commenced operations as a fully integrated real estate company effective with the completion of AMB Property Corporation’s initial public offering on November 26, 1997. Increasingly, our properties are designed for customers who value the efficient movement of goods in the world’s busiest distribution markets: large, supply-constrained locations with close proximity to airports, seaports and major freeway systems. We currently serve 2,546 customers in a portfolio (owned, managed or under development) totaling 987 buildings, encompassing approximately 93.7 million square feet (8.7 million square meters), in 29 global markets.

We are engaged in the acquisition, ownership, operation, management, renovation, expansion and development of primarily industrial properties in target markets in North America, Europe and Asia. As of March 31, 2003, AMB Property Corporation owned an approximate 94.4% general partnership interest in us, excluding preferred units. As our sole general partner, AMB Property Corporation has the full, exclusive and complete responsibility and discretion in our day-to-day management and control.

Our investment strategy targets customers whose businesses are growing at a faster rate than world gross domestic product (GDP) — specifically, participants in global trade. To serve the facilities needs of these customers, we invest in major markets: transportation hubs and gateways in the U.S., and targeted distribution and airport markets internationally. Our target markets are characterized by large population densities and typically offer substantial consumer bases, proximity to large clusters of distribution-facility users and significant labor pools. When measured by annual base rents, approximately 70% of our assets are concentrated in eight domestic hub distribution markets: Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas/ Fort Worth, Los Angeles, Northern New Jersey/ New York City, San Francisco Bay Area, Miami and Seattle.

By focusing on an investment strategy that benefits from high customer demand and limited competition from new supply, we believe that over time our net operating income will grow and our property values will increase. We work to implement this strategy by investing in locations that have geographic or regulatory

Our portfolio is comprised of strategically located industrial buildings in in-fill submarkets; in-fill locations are characterized by supply constraints on the availability of land for competing projects as well as physical, political or economic barriers to new development. A majority of our owned or managed buildings function as High Throughput Distribution®, or HTD® facilities; buildings designed to quickly distribute our customers’ products, rather than store them. Our investment focus on HTD assets is based on the secular change toward lower inventory levels and expedited supply chains.

HTD facilities have a variety of characteristics that allow the rapid transport of goods from point-to-point; examples include numerous dock doors, shallower building depths, fewer columns, large truck courts and more space for trailer parking. These facilities function best when located in convenient proximity to transportation infrastructure such as major airports and seaports. We believe that these building characteristics represent an important success factor for time-sensitive tenants such as air express, logistics and freight forwarding companies.

As of March 31, 2003, we owned and operated (exclusive of properties that we managed for third parties) 873 industrial buildings and nine retail and other properties, totaling approximately 81.4 million rentable square feet, located in 27 markets throughout North America and in France. As of March 31, 2003, our industrial and retail properties were 92.5% and 87.9% leased, respectively. As of March 31, 2003, through our subsidiary, AMB Capital Partners, LLC, we also managed, but did not have an ownership interest in, industrial buildings and retail centers, totaling approximately 1.7 million rentable square feet. In addition, as of March 31, 2003, we had investments in 67 operating industrial buildings, totaling approximately 7.9 million rentable square feet, through unconsolidated joint ventures.

As of March 31, 2003, we had two retail centers and one industrial building held for divestiture. Over the next few years, we intend to dispose of non-strategic assets and redeploy the resulting capital into industrial properties in supply-constrained markets in the U.S. and internationally that better fit our current investment focus.

Our principal executive office is located at Pier 1, Bay 1, San Francisco, California 94111; our telephone number is (415) 394-9000. We also maintain regional offices in Boston, Massachusetts and Amsterdam, the Netherlands. As of March 31, 2003, we employed 175 individuals, 131 at our San Francisco headquarters, 43 in our Boston office and one in our Amsterdam office. Our website address is www.amb.com. Our annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and any amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act are available on our website free of charge as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with, or furnish it to, the Securities and Exchange Commission. We have adopted a code of business conduct that applies to our principal executive officer, principal financial officer, principal accounting officer or controller, and persons performing similar functions, which is available free of charge on our website. We will promptly disclose on our website any amendments to, and waivers from, our code of business conduct relating to any of these specified officers.

We enter into co-investment joint ventures with institutional investors. These co-investment joint ventures provide us with an additional source of capital to fund certain acquisitions, development projects and renovation projects, as well as private capital income, which enhances our returns. As of March 31, 2003, we had investments in five co-investment joint ventures with a gross book value of $1.6 billion, which are consolidated for financial reporting purposes.

During the three months ended March 31, 2003, we invested $10.9 million in two operating properties, aggregating approximately 0.2 million square feet, through two of our co-investment joint ventures.

During the three months ended March 31, 2003, we stabilized two industrial buildings valued at $12.6 million, aggregating approximately 0.2 million square feet. We also initiated four new industrial development projects valued at $36.4 million, aggregating approximately 0.6 million square feet. We acquired 438 acres of land for development in Miami’s Airport West submarket for $29.7 million. The master planned park, called Beacon Lakes, is fully entitled for 6.8 million square feet of properties for lease or sale. During the quarter, we began development of the first two buildings at Beacon Lakes, which will aggregate approximately 0.4 million square feet and have an estimated investment of $20.3 million. New development projects during the quarter include the two Beacon Lakes buildings as well as two additional projects.

As of March 31, 2003, we had in our development pipeline 13 industrial projects, which will total approximately 2.2 million square feet and have an aggregate estimated investment of $133.2 million upon completion and three development projects available for sale, which will total approximately 0.6 million square feet and have an aggregate estimated investment of $47.3 million upon completion. As of March 31, 2003, we and our partners had funded an aggregate of $102.1 million and needed to fund an estimated additional $78.4 million in order to complete current and planned projects.

During the three months ended March 31, 2003, we disposed of ten industrial buildings, aggregating approximately 1.6 million rentable square feet, for an aggregate price of $127.0 million. On February 19, 2003, we also contributed $94.0 million in operating properties, consisting of 24 industrial buildings aggregating approximately 2.4 million square feet, to our newly formed co-investment joint venture with Citigroup Global Investments Real Estate LP, LLC, Industrial Fund I, LLC, in which we retained an unconsolidated 15% ownership interest.

We base our operating strategy on extensive operational and service offerings, including in-house acquisitions, development, redevelopment, asset management, leasing, finance, accounting and market research. We leverage our expertise across a large customer base and have long-standing relationships with entrepreneurial real estate management and development firms in our target markets, which we refer to as our Strategic Alliance Partners®.

We believe that real estate is fundamentally a local business and best operated by forging alliances with service providers in each target market. We believe that this strategy results in a mutually beneficial relationship as these alliance partners provide us with high-quality, local market expertise and intelligence. We, in turn, contribute value to the alliance relationship through national and global customer relationship development, industry knowledge, perspective and financial strength.

While our alliance relationships give us local market benefits, we retain flexibility to focus on our core competencies: developing and executing our strategic approach to real estate investment and management and raising private capital to finance growth and enhance returns.

We seek to generate internal growth through rent increases on existing space and renewals on rollover space. We do this by seeking to maintain a high occupancy rate at our properties and by seeking to control expenses by capitalizing on the economies of owning, operating and growing a large global portfolio. As of March 31, 2003, our industrial properties and retail centers were 92.5% leased and 87.9% leased, respectively. During the three months ended March 31, 2003, average industrial base rental rates decreased by 6.6% from the expiring rent for that space, on leases entered into or renewed during the period. This amount excludes expense reimbursements, rental abatements, percentage rents and straight-line rents. During the three months ended March 31, 2003, we increased cash-basis same-store net operating income by 3.8% (1.6% including straight-line rents) on our industrial properties. Since AMB Property Corporation’s initial public offering in November 1997, we have experienced average annual increases in industrial base rental rates of 11.0%. While

We believe that our significant acquisition experience, our alliance-based operating strategy and our extensive network of property acquisition sources will continue to provide opportunities for external growth. We have forged relationships with third-party local property management firms through our Management Alliance Program®. We believe that these alliances will create acquisition opportunities, as such managers frequently market properties on behalf of sellers. Our operating structure also enables us to acquire properties through our UPREIT Alliance Program® in exchange for our limited partnership units, thereby enhancing our attractiveness to owners and developers seeking to transfer properties on a tax-deferred basis. In addition to acquisitions, we seek to redeploy capital from non-strategic assets into properties that better fit our current investment focus.

We are generally in various stages of negotiations for a number of acquisitions and dispositions that may include acquisitions and dispositions of individual properties, acquisitions of large multi-property portfolios and acquisitions of other real estate companies. There can be no assurance that we will consummate any of these transactions. Such transactions, if we consummate them, may be material individually or in the aggregate. Sources of capital for acquisitions may include undistributed cash flow from operations, borrowings under our unsecured credit facility, other forms of secured or unsecured debt financing, issuances of debt or limited partnership unit offerings (including issuances of limited partnership units by our subsidiaries), proceeds from divestitures of properties, assumption of debt related to the acquired properties and private capital from our co-investment partners.

We believe that renovation and expansion of properties and development of well-located, high-quality industrial properties should continue to provide us with attractive opportunities for increased cash flow and a higher rate of return than we may obtain from the purchase of fully-leased, renovated properties. Value-added properties are typically characterized as properties with available space or near-term leasing exposure, undeveloped land acquired in connection with another property that provides an opportunity for development or properties that are well-located but require redevelopment or renovation. Value-added properties require significant management attention or capital investment to maximize their return. We believe that we have developed the in-house expertise to create value through acquiring and managing value-added properties and believe that our global market presence and expertise will enable us to continue to generate and capitalize on these opportunities. In addition to our in-house development staff, we have established strategic alliances with global and regional developers to enhance our development capabilities.

The multidisciplinary backgrounds of our employees should provide us with the skills and experience to capitalize on strategic renovation, expansion and development opportunities. Several of our general partner’s officers have specific experience in real estate development, both with us and with national development firms. We generally pursue development projects in joint ventures with our Development Alliance Partners®; however, if a Development Alliance Partner® is not available for a project, then we will pursue the opportunity with our in-house development staff. This way, we leverage the development skill, access to opportunities and capital of such developers, and we eliminate the need and expense of an extensive in-house development staff. Under a typical joint venture agreement with a Development Alliance Partner, we would fund 95% of the construction costs and our partner would fund 5%; however, in certain cases we may own as little as 50% or as much as 98% of the joint venture. Upon completion, we generally would purchase our partner’s interest in the joint venture. We may also structure developments where we would own 100% of the asset with an incentive development fee to be paid upon completion to our development partner.

We co-invest with third-party partners (some of whom may be clients of AMB Capital Partners, LLC, to the extent such partners commit new investment capital) through partnerships, limited liability companies or joint ventures. We currently use a co-investment formula with each third party whereby we will own at least a 20% interest in all ventures. In general, we control all significant operating and investment decisions of our co-investment entities. We believe that our co-investment program will continue to serve as a source of capital for acquisitions and developments and private capital income; however, there can be no assurance that it will continue to do so.

We, through our taxable REIT subsidiaries, conduct a variety of businesses that include incremental income programs, such as our development projects available for sale to third parties. Such development properties include value-added conversion projects and build-to-sell projects. As of March 31, 2003, we were developing three projects for sale to third parties.

Over the next three-to-five years, we expect to have from 12% to 15% of our assets invested in international markets. Our Mexican target markets currently include Mexico City, Guadalajara and Monterrey. Our European target markets currently include Paris, Amsterdam, London, Frankfurt and Madrid. Our Asian target markets currently include Singapore, Hong Kong, and Tokyo. During the three months ended March 31, 2003, we earned $1.1 million in rental revenues from our Guadalajara and Paris properties and recognized a gain of $4.9 million from the sale of a property in Mexico City. There are many factors that could cause our entry into target markets and future capital allocation to differ from our current expectations, which are discussed under the subheading “Our International Growth is Subject to Special Political and Monetary Risks” and elsewhere under the heading “Business Risks” in this report.

We believe that expansion into target international markets represents a natural extension of our well-established strategy to invest in industrial markets with high population densities, close proximity to large customer clusters and available labor pools, and major distribution centers serving the global supply chain. Our expansion strategy mirrors our domestic focus on in-fill locations, which are supply-constrained submarkets with political, economic or physical constraints to new development; and, land, as a high percentage of total asset value, becoming more valuable for higher and better use over time. Our international investments will extend our offering of High Throughput Distribution facilities for customers who value speed-to-market over storage. Specifically, we are focused on customers whose business is derived from world air-cargo flows, a sector expected to grow significantly faster than world GDP growth. In addition, our investments target major consumer distribution markets and customers.

We believe that our established customer relationships, our contacts in the air cargo and logistics industries, diligent underwriting of markets and investment considerations and our strategic alliance partnerships with knowledgeable, local-market property brokers, developers and managers will assist us in competing internationally.

The analysis below includes changes attributable to acquisitions, development activity and divestitures and the changes resulting from properties that we owned during both the current and prior year reporting periods, excluding development properties prior to being stabilized (generally defined as 90% leased or 12 months after we receive a certificate of occupancy for the building). We refer to these properties as the same store properties. For the comparison between the three months ended March 31, 2003 and 2002, the same store industrial properties consisted of properties aggregating approximately 73.0 million square feet. The properties acquired during the three months ended March 31, 2003, consisted of two buildings, aggregating approximately 0.2 million square feet. The properties acquired during 2002 consisted of 43 buildings,

aggregating approximately 5.4 million square feet. During the three months ended March 31, 2003, property divestitures and contributions consisted of 34 industrial buildings, aggregating approximately 4.0 million square feet. In 2002, property divestitures consisted of 58 industrial and two retail buildings, aggregating approximately 5.7 million square feet. Our future financial condition and results of operations, including rental revenues, may be impacted by the acquisition of additional properties and dispositions. Our future revenues and expenses may vary materially from historical rates.

Occupancy levels in our industrial portfolio and rents on lease renewals and rollovers were lower in 2003 as the general contraction in business activity nationwide reduced demand for industrial warehouse facilities. This reduction in demand was evidenced by decreases in national industrial occupancy levels and negative net absorption of industrial facility space. According to Torto Wheaton Research, these factors combined to reduce market rents for industrial properties by approximately 15% to 20% nationally from peak levels at the beginning of 2001. While the level of rental rate reduction varied by market, we strove to maintain high occupancy by pricing lease renewals and new leases with sensitivity to local market conditions. Occupancy in our operating industrial portfolio decreased 2.1% from December 31, 2002, to 92.5% at March 31, 2003.

The growth in rental revenues in same store properties resulted primarily from increased lease termination fees, fixed rent increases on existing leases and reimbursement of expenses, partially offset by lower average occupancies and bad debt expense. Industrial same store occupancy was 92.6% at March 31, 2003, and 94.9% at March 31, 2002. For the three months ended March 31, 2003, the same store rents declined 7.3% on industrial renewals and rollovers (cash basis) on 4.7 million square feet leased. The decrease in straight-line rents was partially due to write-offs associated with lease terminations.

The decrease in interest and other income was primarily due to the repayment of the $74.0 million mortgage note in July 2002. We carried a 9.5% mortgage note secured by the retail center that we sold in September 2000 in the principal amount of $74.0 million.

The $3.0 million increase in same store properties’ operating expenses was primarily due to increases in common area maintenance expenses, including snow removal, of $1.8 million, real estate taxes of $0.6 million and insurance expenses of $0.4 million.

The increase in interest expense was primarily due to the issuance of additional unsecured senior debt securities and an increase in secured debt balances, partially offset by decreased borrowings on our unsecured credit facility. The secured debt issuances were primarily for our co-investment joint ventures’ properties and were partially offset by debt repayments on our wholly-owned properties. The increase in depreciation expense was due to the increase in our net investment in real estate. The increase in general and administrative expenses was due to increased stock-based compensation expense, additional staffing and expenses for new initiatives, including our international expansion.

We currently expect that our principal sources of working capital and funding for acquisitions, development, expansion and renovation of properties will include:


	•	cash flow from operations;

	•	borrowings under our unsecured credit facility;

	•	other forms of secured or unsecured financing;

	•	proceeds from debt or limited partnership unit offerings (including issuances of limited partnership units by our subsidiaries);

	•	net proceeds from divestitures of properties; and

	•	private capital from co-investment partners.

We believe that our sources of working capital, specifically our cash flow from operations, borrowings available under our unsecured credit facility and our ability to access private and public debt and equity capital, are adequate for us to meet our liquidity requirements for the foreseeable future.

Property Divestitures. During the three months ended March 31, 2003, we divested ourselves of ten industrial buildings for an aggregate price of $127.0 million, with a resulting net gain of $29.6 million. On February 19, 2003, we also contributed $94.0 million in operating properties, consisting of 24 industrial buildings, aggregating approximately 2.4 million square feet, to our newly formed unconsolidated joint venture with Citigroup Global Investments Real Estate LP, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, Industrial Fund I, LLC, and recognized a gain of $7.4 million on the contribution, representing the gain on the contributed properties acquired by the third-party co-investors.

Properties Held for Divestiture. We have decided to divest ourselves of two retail centers and one industrial building, which are not in our core markets or which do not meet our current strategic objectives. The divestitures of the properties are subject to negotiation of acceptable terms and other customary conditions. As of March 31, 2003, the net carrying value of the properties held for divestiture was $59.7 million.

Co-investment Joint Ventures. We consolidate the financial position, results of operations and cash flows of our five co-investment joint ventures. Our five co-investment joint ventures are engaged in the acquisition, ownership, operation, management and, in some cases, the renovation, expansion and development of industrial buildings in target markets nationwide. We consolidate these joint ventures for financial reporting purposes because we are the sole managing general partner and, as a result, control all major operating decisions. Third-party equity interests in the joint ventures are reflected as minority interests in the consolidated financial statements. As of March 31, 2003, we owned approximately 28.5 million square feet of our properties through these five co-investment joint ventures and 5.3 million square feet of our properties through our other consolidated joint ventures. We may make additional investments through these joint ventures or new joint ventures in the future and presently plan to do so.


(1)	Planned capitalization is based on anticipated debt and both partners’ expected equity contributions.

(2)	Included 15 institutional investors as stockholders as of March 31, 2003.

(3)	A subsidiary of the real estate investment subsidiary of the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation.

(4)	Included 13 institutional investors as stockholders and one third-party limited partner as of March 31, 2003.

Partners’ Capital. As of March 31, 2003, we had outstanding 81,304,915 common general partnership units, 4,846,387 common limited partnership units, 3,995,800 8 1/2% Series A Cumulative Redeemable Partnership Units, 1,300,000 8 5/8% Series B Cumulative Redeemable Partnership Units, 800,000 7.95% Series J Cumulative Redeemable Partnership Units and 800,000 7.95% Series K Cumulative Redeemable Partnership Units.

In December 2001, AMB Property Corporation’s board of directors approved a new stock repurchase program for the repurchase of up to $100.0 million worth of its common and preferred stock. In December 2002, AMB Property Corporation’s board of directors increased the repurchase program to $200.0 million. The current stock repurchase program expires in December 2003 and, as of March 31, 2003, $110.0 million of repurchase capacity remained under the program. During the three months ended March 31, 2003, AMB Property Corporation repurchased 787,800 shares of its common stock for $20.6 million, including commissions, and we retired the same number of common general partnership units.

Debt. In order to maintain financial flexibility and facilitate the deployment of capital through market cycles, we presently intend to operate with a debt-to-total market capitalization ratio (our share) of approximately 45% or less. As of March 31, 2003, our share of total debt-to-total market capitalization ratio was 35.6%. Additionally, we currently intend to manage our capitalization in order to maintain an investment grade rating on our senior unsecured debt. In spite of these policies, our organizational documents do not contain any limitation on the amount of indebtedness that we may incur. Accordingly, our general partner’s board of directors could alter or eliminate these policies without unitholder or noteholder approval or circumstances could arise that could render us unable to comply with these policies.

As of March 31, 2003, the aggregate principal amount of our secured debt was $1.2 billion, excluding unamortized debt premiums of $8.4 million. Of the $1.2 billion of secured debt, $0.9 billion is secured by properties in our joint ventures. The secured debt is generally non-recourse and bears interest at rates varying from 2.9% to 12.0% per annum (with a weighted average rate of 7.3%) and final maturity dates ranging from June 2003 to April 2023. All of the secured debt bears interest at fixed rates, except for seven loans with an aggregate principal amount of $65.6 million as of March 31, 2003, which bear interest at variable rates (with a weighted average interest rate of 3.5% as of March 31, 2003). Over time, we intend to repay the secured debt on our 100%-owned assets and may prepay if market conditions warrant.

In June 1998, we issued $400.0 million of unsecured senior debt securities. Interest on the unsecured senior debt securities is payable semi-annually. The 2015 notes are putable and callable in September 2005. In August 2000, we commenced a medium-term note program and subsequently issued $400.0 million of medium-term notes with an average interest rate of 7.3%. These notes are guaranteed by AMB Property Corporation. In May 2002, we commenced a new medium-term note program for the issuance of up to $400.0 million in principal amount of medium-term notes, which will be guaranteed by AMB Property Corporation. As of March 31, 2003, we had issued no medium-term notes under this program.

If we are unable to refinance or extend principal payments due at maturity or pay them with proceeds from other capital transactions, then our cash flow may be insufficient to pay distributions to our unitholders in all years, to make payments to our noteholders and to repay debt upon maturity. Furthermore, if prevailing interest rates or other factors at the time of refinancing (such as the reluctance of lenders to make commercial real estate loans) result in higher interest rates upon refinancing, then the interest expense relating to that refinanced indebtedness would increase. This increased interest expense would adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to make distributions to our unitholders and payments to our noteholders

Credit Facilities. In December 2002, we renewed our $500.0 million unsecured revolving line of credit. AMB Property Corporation guarantees our obligations under the credit facility. The credit facility matures in December 2005, has a one-year extension option and currently is subject to a 20 basis point annual facility fee. Borrowings under our credit facility currently bear interest at LIBOR plus 60 basis points. Euro borrowings under the credit facility currently bear interest at EURIBOR plus 60 basis points. Both the facility fee and the interest rate are based on our credit rating, which is currently investment grade. However, if our credit rating falls below investment grade, then our facility fee and interest rate may increase. The credit facility includes a multi-currency component under which up to $150.0 million may be drawn in either British pounds sterling, euros or yen (provided that such currency is readily available and freely transferable and convertible to U.S. dollars, the Reuters Monitor Money Rates Service reports LIBOR for such currency in interest periods of 1, 2, 3 or 6 months and the we have an investment grade credit rating). We have the ability to increase available borrowings to $700.0 million by adding additional banks to the facility or obtaining the agreement of existing

banks to increase their commitments. We use our unsecured credit facility principally for acquisitions and for general working capital requirements. Monthly debt service payments on our credit facility are interest only. The total amount available under our credit facility fluctuates based upon the borrowing base, as defined in the agreement governing the credit facility, generally the value of our unencumbered properties. As of March 31, 2003, the outstanding balance on our unsecured credit facility was $17.5 million and the remaining amount available was $459.2 million, net of outstanding letters of credit (excluding the $200.0 million of potential additional capacity). The outstanding balance was denominated in Euros and converted to U.S. dollars at March 31, 2003.

In July 2001, AMB Institutional Alliance Fund II, L.P. obtained a $150.0 million credit facility secured by the unfunded capital commitments of the investors in AMB Institutional Alliance REIT II, Inc. and AMB Institutional Alliance Fund II, L.P. Borrowings currently bear interest at LIBOR plus 87.5 basis points. As of March 31, 2003, the outstanding balance was $51.5 million and the remaining amount available was $25.2 million, net of outstanding letters of credit and the funded capital contributions from third-party investors. We repaid the credit facility in April with capital contributions and secured debt proceeds.

Mortgage Receivable. Through a wholly-owned subsidiary, we hold a mortgage loan receivable on AMB Pier One, LLC, an unconsolidated joint venture. The note bears interest at 13.0% and matures in May 2026. As of March 31, 2003, the outstanding balance on the note was $13.1 million.

The tables below summarize our debt maturities and capitalization as of March 31, 2003 (dollars in thousands):


(1)	The weighted average interest and maturity for the unconsolidated joint venture debt were 5.6% and 5.3 years, respectively.


(1)	Assumes that the general partnership units are exchanged for AMB Property Corporation’s common stock because there is no public market for the units.

As of March 31, 2003, we had $149.9 million in cash, restricted cash and cash equivalents, and $459.2 million of additional available borrowings under our credit facility. To fund acquisitions, development activities and capital expenditures, and to provide for general working capital requirements, we intend to use:


	•	cash flow from operations;

	•	borrowings under our unsecured credit facility;

	•	other forms of secured and unsecured financing;

	•	proceeds from any future debt or limited partnership unit offerings (including issuances of limited partnership units by our subsidiaries);

	•	net proceeds from divestitures of properties; and

	•	private capital from our co-investment partners.

The unavailability of capital would adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to make distributions to our unitholders and payments to our noteholders.

We declared a regular cash distribution for the quarter ended March 31, 2003, of $0.415 per common unit. The distribution was payable on April 15, 2003, to common unitholders of record on April 4, 2003. The Series A, B, E, F, J and K preferred unit distributions were payable on April 15, 2003, . The Series D, H and I preferred unit distributions were payable on March 25, 2003. The following table sets forth the distributions paid or payable per unit for the three months ended March 31, 2003 and 2002:

The anticipated size of our distributions, using only cash from operations, will not allow us to retire all of our debt as it comes due. Therefore, we intend to also repay maturing debt with net proceeds from future debt or limited partnership unit offerings, as well as property divestitures. However, we may not be able to obtain future financings on favorable terms or at all. Our inability to obtain future financings on favorable terms or at all would adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to make distributions to our unitholders and payments to our noteholders.

Developments. In addition to recurring capital expenditures, which consist of building improvements and leasing costs incurred to renew or re-tenant space, as of March 31, 2003, were developing 13 projects representing a total estimated investment of $133.2 million upon completion and three development projects available for sale representing a total estimated investment of $47.3 million upon completion. Of this total, $102.1 million had been funded as of March 31, 2003, and an estimated $78.4 million is required to complete current and planned projects. We expect to fund these expenditures with cash from operations, borrowings

under our credit facility, debt or limited partnership unit issuances, net proceeds from property divestitures, and private capital from co-investment partners, which could have an adverse effect on our cash flow.

Acquisitions. During the three months ended March 31, 2003, we invested $10.9 million in two operating industrial buildings, aggregating approximately 0.2 million rentable square feet. We generally fund our acquisitions and development and renovation projects through private capital contributions, borrowings under our credit facility, cash, debt issuances and net proceeds from property divestitures.

Co-investment Joint Ventures. We enter into co-investment joint ventures with institutional investors. These co-investment joint ventures provide us with an additional source of capital to fund certain acquisitions, development projects and renovation projects, as well as private capital income, which enhances our returns. As of March 31, 2003, we may make additional capital contributions to current and planned co-investment joint ventures up to $72.0 million.

Lease Commitments. We hold operating ground leases on certain land parcels, primarily on-tarmac facilities, and leases on office space in San Francisco and Boston. We also hold a lease on office space in New York City, which we hold for investment purposes. The remaining lease terms are from one to 38 years. Future minimum rental payments required under non-cancelable operating leases in effect as of March 31, 2003, were as follows (dollars in thousands):

These operating lease payments are being amortized ratably over the terms of the related leases.

Captive Insurance Company. We have responded to increasing costs and decreasing coverage availability in the insurance markets by obtaining higher-deductible property insurance from third-party insurers and by forming a wholly-owned captive insurance company, Arcata National Insurance Ltd., in December 2001. Arcata National Insurance Ltd. provides insurance coverage for all or a portion of losses below the increased deductible under our third-party policies. We capitalized Arcata National Insurance Ltd. in accordance with regulatory requirements. Arcata National Insurance Ltd. established annual premiums based on projections derived from the past loss experience of our properties. Annually, we engage an independent third party to perform an actuarial estimate of future projected claims, related deductibles and projected expenses necessary to fund associated risk management programs. Premiums paid to Arcata National Insurance Ltd. may be adjusted based on this estimate. Premiums paid to Arcata National Insurance Ltd. have a retrospective component, so that if expenses, including losses and deductibles, are less than premiums collected, the excess may be returned to the property owners (and, in turn, as appropriate, to the customers) and conversely, subject to certain limitations, if expenses, including losses, are greater than premiums collected, an additional premium will be charged. As with all recoverable expenses, differences between estimated and actual insurance premiums will be recognized in the subsequent year. Through this structure, we believe that we have more comprehensive insurance coverage at an overall lower cost than would otherwise be available in the market.


	•	liabilities for clean-up or remediation of undisclosed environmental conditions;

	•	claims of customers, vendors or other persons dealing with our predecessors prior to our formation transactions that had not been asserted prior to our formation transactions;

	•	accrued but unpaid liabilities incurred in the ordinary course of business;


	•	tax liabilities; and

	•	claims for indemnification by the officers and directors of our general partner’s predecessors and others indemnified by these entities.

We have no off-balance sheet transactions, arrangements, obligations, guarantees or other relationships with unconsolidated entities or other persons that have, or are reasonably likely to have, a material effect on our financial condition, revenues or expenses, results of operations, liquidity, capital expenditures or capital resources.

We believe that net income, as defined by GAAP, is the most appropriate earnings measure. However, the real estate industry has adopted a supplemental earnings measure, funds from operations, or FFO, as defined by the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts (“NAREIT”), that is widely used by investors and analysts. While FFO is a relevant and widely used measure of operating performance of real estate investment trusts, such as AMB Property Corporation, our general partner, it does not represent cash flow from operations or net income as defined by GAAP and it should not be considered as an alternative to those indicators in evaluating liquidity or operating performance. Further, FFO as disclosed by other real estate investment trusts may not be comparable.

FFO is income available to common unitholders less gains from dispositions of real estate held for investment purposes and real estate-related depreciation, and adjustments to derive our pro rata share of FFO of consolidated and unconsolidated joint ventures. In accordance with the NAREIT White Paper on FFO, we include the effects of straight-line rents in FFO. Further, we do not adjust FFO to eliminate the effects of non-recurring charges.

The following table reflects the calculation of FFO for the three months ended March 31, (dollars in thousands):


(1)	Ground lease amortization represents the amortization of our investments in ground lease properties, for which we do not have a purchase option.

We believe that earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortization, or EBITDA, is also an appropriate supplemental earnings measure that is widely used by investors and analysts. While EBITDA is a relevant and widely used measure of operating performance, it does not represent cash flow from operations or net income as defined by GAAP and it should not be considered as an alternative to those indicators in evaluating liquidity or operating performance. Further, EBITDA as disclosed by other companies not be comparable.

EBITDA is income before minority interests and gains plus interest, depreciation, stock-based compensation amortization and adjustments to derive our pro rata share of EBITDA from unconsolidated joint ventures.

The following table reflects the calculation of EBITDA for the three months ended March 31, (dollars in thousands):

The following table reflects supplemental cash flow information and recurring capital expenditures for the three months ended March 31, (dollars in thousands):

The following table summarizes key operating and leasing statistics for all of our industrial properties as of and for the three month period ended March 31, 2003 (dollars in thousands):


(1)	Includes all industrial consolidated operating properties and excludes development and renovation projects. Excludes retail and other properties’ square feet of 1,003,638, occupancy of 87.9%, and annualized base rent of $12.0 million.

(2)	In addition to owned square feet as of March 31, 2003, we managed, through our subsidiary, AMB Capital Partners, LLC, approximately 1.7 million additional square feet of industrial, retail, and other properties. We also have investments in approximately 7.9 million square feet of industrial operating properties through our investments in the unconsolidated joint ventures.

(3)	Consists of all second-generation leases renewing or re-tenanting with current and prior lease terms greater than one year.

The following summarizes key same store properties’ operating statistics for our industrial properties as of and for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2003:


(1)	The same store pool excludes properties purchased and developments stabilized after December 31, 2001.

Market risk is the risk of loss from adverse changes in market prices and interest rates. Our future earnings and cash flows are dependent upon prevailing market rates. Accordingly, we manage our market risk by matching projected cash inflows from operating, investing and financing activities with projected cash outflows for debt service, acquisitions, capital expenditures, distributions to unitholders and payments to noteholders, and other cash requirements. The majority of our outstanding debt has fixed interest rates, which minimizes the risk of fluctuating interest rates. Our exposure to market risk includes interest rate fluctuations in connection with our credit facilities and other variable rate borrowings and our ability to incur more debt without unitholder or noteholder approval, thereby increasing our debt service obligations, which could adversely affect our cash flows. As of March 31, 2003, we had no interest rate caps or swaps. See “Item 2: Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources — Capital Resources — Market Capitalization.”

The table below summarizes the market risks associated with our fixed and variable rated debt outstanding before unamortized debt premiums of $8.4 million as of March 31, 2003 (dollars in thousands):


(1)	Represents 93.9% of all outstanding debt.

(2)	Represents 6.1% of all outstanding debt.

If market rates of interest on our variable rate debt increased by 10% (or approximately 30 basis points), then the increase in interest expense on the variable rate debt would be $0.4 million annually. As of March 31, 2003, the estimated fair value of our fixed rate debt was $2,156.0 million based on our estimate of current market interest rates.

We maintain disclosure controls and procedures that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed in our reports filed under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the Securities and Exchange Commission’s rules and forms, and that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our general partner’s chief executive officer, president and chief financial officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. In designing and evaluating the disclosure controls and procedures, our management recognized that any controls and procedures, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving the desired control objectives, and our management necessarily was required to apply its judgment in evaluating the cost-benefit relationship of possible controls and procedures. Also, we have investments in certain unconsolidated entities, which are

accounted for using the equity method of accounting. As we do not control or manage these entities, our disclosure controls and procedures with respect to such entities are necessarily substantially more limited than those we maintain with respect to our consolidated subsidiaries.

Within 90 days prior to the date of this report filing, we carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our general partner’s chief executive officer, president and chief financial officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures. Based on the foregoing, our general partner’s chief executive officer, president and chief financial officer each concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective.

There have been no significant changes in our internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect the internal controls subsequent to the date we completed our evaluation.

As of March 31, 2003, there were no pending legal proceedings to which we are a party or of which any of our properties is the subject, the adverse determination of which we anticipate would have a material adverse effect upon our financial condition and results of operations.

In January 2003, we repurchased 787,800 shares of our common general partnership units in connection with AMB Property Corporation’s stock repurchase program.

Our operations involve various risks that could have adverse consequences to us. These risks include, among others:

Real property investments are subject to varying degrees of risk. The yields available from equity investments in real estate depend on the amount of income earned and capital appreciation generated by the related properties as well as the expenses incurred in connection with the properties. If our properties do not generate income sufficient to meet operating expenses, including debt service and capital expenditures, then our ability to make distributions to our unitholders and payments to our noteholders could be adversely affected. Income from, and the value of, our properties may be adversely affected by the general economic climate, local conditions, such as oversupply of industrial space or a reduction in demand for industrial space, the attractiveness of our properties to potential customers, competition from other properties, our ability to provide adequate maintenance and insurance and an increase in operating costs. Periods of economic slowdown or recession in the United States and in other countries, rising interest rates or declining demand for real estate, or public perception that any of these events may occur, would result in a general decrease in rents

Our properties are currently concentrated predominantly in the industrial real estate sector. Our concentration in a certain property type exposes us to the risk of economic downturns in this sector to a greater extent than if our portfolio also included other property types. As a result of such concentration, economic downturns in the industrial real estate sector could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to make distributions to our unitholders and payments to our noteholders. In addition, revenues from properties and real estate values are also affected by factors such as the cost of compliance with regulations, the potential for liability under applicable laws (including changes in tax laws), interest rate levels and the availability of financing. Our income would be adversely affected if a significant number of customers were unable to pay rent or if we were unable to rent our industrial space on favorable terms. Certain significant expenditures associated with an investment in real estate (such as mortgage payments, real estate taxes, and maintenance costs) generally do not decline when circumstances cause a reduction in income from the property. Future terrorist attacks in the United States may result in declining economic activity, which could harm the demand for and the value of our properties. To the extent that our customers are impacted by future attacks, their businesses similarly could be adversely affected, including their ability to continue to honor their existing leases.

We are subject to the risks that leases may not be renewed, space may not be relet, or the terms of renewal or reletting (including the cost of required renovations) may be less favorable than current lease terms. Leases on a total of 11.9% of our industrial properties (based on annualized base rent) as of March 31, 2003, will expire on or prior to December 31, 2003. In addition, numerous properties compete with our properties in attracting customers to lease space, particularly with respect to retail centers. The number of competitive commercial properties in a particular area could have a material adverse effect on our ability to lease space in our properties and on the rents that we are able to charge. Our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and our ability to make distributions to our unitholders and payments to our noteholders could be adversely affected if we are unable to promptly relet or renew the leases for all or a substantial portion of expiring leases, if the rental rates upon renewal or reletting is significantly lower than expected, or if our reserves for these purposes prove inadequate.

Because real estate investments are relatively illiquid, our ability to vary our portfolio promptly in response to economic or other conditions is limited. The limitations in the Internal Revenue Code and related regulations on a real estate investment trust holding property for sale, which limitations are applicable to us as a subsidiary of AMB Property Corporation, may affect our ability to sell properties without adversely affecting distributions to our unitholders and payments to our noteholders. The relative illiquidity of our holdings and Internal Revenue Code prohibitions and related regulations could impede our ability to respond to adverse changes in the performance of our investments and could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and our ability to make distributions to our unitholders and payments to our noteholders.

Our industrial properties located in California as of March 31, 2003, represented 29.3% of the aggregate square footage of our industrial operating properties as of March 31, 2003, and 33.6% of our industrial annualized base rent. Annualized base rent means the monthly contractual amount under existing leases as of March 31, 2003, multiplied by 12. This amount excludes expense reimbursements and rental abatements. Our revenue from, and the value of, our properties located in California may be affected by a number of factors, including local real estate conditions (such as oversupply of or reduced demand for industrial properties) and the local economic climate. Business layoffs, downsizing, industry slowdowns, changing demographics, and other factors may adversely impact the local economic climate. A downturn in California’s economy, fiscal situation or real estate conditions could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow

and ability to make distributions to our unitholders and payments to our noteholders. Certain of our properties are also subject to possible loss from seismic activity. See “Some Potential Losses are not Covered by Insurance.”

We carry commercial liability, property and rental loss insurance covering all properties owned and managed by us, with policy specifications and insured limits that we believe are adequate and appropriate under the circumstances given relative risks, the cost of such coverage and industry practice. Certain losses such as losses due to terrorism, windstorms, floods or seismic activity may be insured subject to certain limitations, including large deductibles or co-payments and policy limits. Although we have obtained coverage for certain acts of terrorism, with policy specifications and insured limits that we believe are commercially reasonable, it is not certain that we will be able to renew coverage or collect under such policies. From time to time, we evaluate the amount of earthquake coverage that we carry for all properties owned and managed by us, to assess whether, in our good faith discretion, the coverage is adequate. We may incur material losses in excess of insurance proceeds and we may not be able to continue to obtain insurance at commercially reasonable rates. In addition, there are certain losses that are not generally insured because it is not economically feasible to insure against them, including losses due to riots or acts of war. If an uninsured loss or a loss in excess of insured limits occurs with respect to one or more of our properties, then we could lose the capital we invested in the properties, as well as the anticipated future revenue from the properties and, in the case of debt, which is with recourse to us, we would remain obligated for any mortgage debt or other financial obligations related to the properties. Moreover, as the general partner of the joint ventures, we generally will be liable for all of the joint ventures’ unsatisfied obligations other than non-recourse obligations. Any such liabilities could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to make distributions to our unitholders and payments to our noteholders.

A number of our properties are located in areas that are known to be subject to earthquake activity, including California where, as of March 31, 2003, 290 industrial buildings, aggregating approximately 23.6 million square feet (representing 29.3% of our industrial operating properties based on aggregate square footage and 33.6% based on industrial annualized base rent), are located. We carry replacement-cost earthquake insurance on all of our properties located in areas historically subject to seismic activity, subject to coverage limitations and deductibles that we believe are commercially reasonable. This insurance coverage also applies to the properties managed by AMB Capital Partners, LLC, with a single aggregate policy limit and deductible applicable to those properties and our properties. Through an annual analysis prepared by outside consultants, we evaluate our earthquake insurance coverage in light of current industry practice and determine the appropriate amount of earthquake insurance to carry, which we believe is commercially reasonable. We may incur material losses in excess of insurance proceeds and we may not be able to continue to obtain insurance at commercially reasonable rates.

We are Subject to Risks and Liabilities In Connection With Properties Owned Through Joint Ventures, Limited Liability Companies and Partnerships.

As of March 31, 2003, we had ownership interests in several joint ventures, limited liability companies or partnerships with third parties, as well as interests in three unconsolidated entities. As of March 31, 2003, we owned approximately 33.8 million square feet (excluding five unconsolidated joint ventures) of our properties through these entities. We may make additional investments through these ventures in the future and presently plan to do so. Such partners may share certain approval rights over major decisions. Partnership, limited liability company or joint venture investments may involve risks such as the following:


	•	our partners, co-members or joint venturers might become bankrupt (in which event we and any other remaining general partners, members, or joint venturers would generally remain liable for the liabilities of the partnership, limited liability company, or joint venture);

	•	our partners, co-members or joint venturers might at any time have economic or other business interests or goals that are inconsistent with our business interests or goals;


	•	our partners, co-members or joint venturers may be in a position to take action contrary to our instructions, requests, policies, or objectives; and

	•	agreements governing joint ventures, limited liability companies and partnerships often contain restrictions on the transfer of a joint venturer’s, member’s or partner’s interest or “buy-sell” or other provisions that may result in a purchase or sale of the interest at a disadvantageous time or on disadvantageous terms.

We will, however, generally seek to maintain sufficient control of our partnerships, limited liability companies, and joint ventures to permit us to achieve our business objectives. Our organizational documents do not limit the amount of available funds that we may invest in partnerships, limited liability companies or joint ventures. The occurrence of one or more of the events described above could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to make distributions to our unitholders and payments to our noteholders.

We May be Unable to Consummate Acquisitions on Advantageous Terms or Acquisitions May Not Perform As We Expect.

We intend to continue to acquire primarily industrial properties. The acquisition of and investment in properties entails various risks. In addition to the general investment risks associated with any real estate investment, our investments may not perform in accordance with our expectations or our cost estimates for bringing an acquired property up to market standards may prove inaccurate. Further, we may not be able to acquire additional properties on acceptable terms. We anticipate significant competition for attractive investment opportunities from other major real estate investors with significant capital including both publicly-traded real estate investment trusts and private institutional investment funds. In addition, we expect to finance future acquisitions through a combination of borrowings under our unsecured credit facility, proceeds from debt or limited partnership unit offerings (including issuances of limited partnership units by our subsidiaries) and proceeds from property divestitures, which could have an adverse effect on our cash flow. Our inability to finance future acquisitions on favorable terms, the failure of acquisitions to conform with our expectations or investment criteria, or our failure to timely reinvest the proceeds from property divestitures could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to make distributions to our unitholders and payments to our noteholders.

We have decided to divest ourselves of retail centers and industrial properties that are not in our core markets or which do not meet our strategic objectives. The divestitures of the properties are subject to negotiation of acceptable terms and other customary conditions. Our ability to dispose of properties on advantageous terms is dependent upon factors beyond our control, including competition from other owners (including other real estate investment trusts) that are attempting to dispose of industrial and retail properties and the availability of attractive financing for potential buyers of our properties. Our inability to dispose of properties on favorable terms or redeploy the proceeds of property divestitures in accordance with our investment strategy could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to make distributions to our unitholders and payments to our noteholders.

We May be Unable to Complete Renovation and Development Projects on Advantageous Terms.

The real estate development business, including the renovation and rehabilitation of existing properties, involves significant risks that include the following:


	•	we may not be able to obtain financing on favorable terms for development projects and we may not complete construction on schedule or within budget, resulting in increased debt service expense and construction costs and delays in leasing such properties and generating cash flow;

	•	we may not be able to obtain, or we may experience delays in obtaining, all necessary zoning, land-use, building, occupancy and other governmental permits and authorizations;


	•	new or renovated properties may perform below anticipated levels, producing cash flow below budgeted amounts;

	•	substantial renovation as well as new development activities, regardless of their ultimate success, typically require a substantial portion of management’s time and attention, diverting our attention from our day-to-day operations; and

	•	upon completion of construction, we may not be able to obtain permanent financing, or obtain permanent financing on advantageous terms, for activities that we have financed through construction loans.

These risks could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow, and ability to make distributions to our unitholders and payments to our noteholders.

It is our policy to incur debt, either directly or through our subsidiaries, only if it will not cause our share of debt-to-total market capitalization ratio to exceed approximately 45%. The aggregate amount of indebtedness that we may incur under our policy varies directly with the valuation of AMB Property Corporation’s capital stock and the number of shares of capital stock outstanding. Accordingly, we would be able to incur additional indebtedness under our policy as a result of increases in the market price per share of AMB Property Corporation’s common stock or other outstanding classes of capital stock, and future issuance of shares of AMB Property Corporation’s capital stock. However, our organizational documents do not contain any limitation on the amount of indebtedness that we may incur. Accordingly, AMB Property Corporation, as our general partner, could alter or eliminate this policy without unitholder or noteholder approval. If we change this policy, then we could become more highly leveraged, resulting in an increase in debt service that could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to make distributions to our unitholders and payments to our noteholders.

We are subject to risks normally associated with debt financing, including that cash flow will be insufficient to make distributions to our unitholders and payments to our noteholders, that we will be unable to refinance existing indebtedness on our properties (which in all cases will not have been fully amortized at maturity), and that the terms of refinancing will not be as favorable as the terms of existing indebtedness. As of March 31, 2003, we had total debt outstanding of $2.1 billion.

If we are unable to refinance or extend principal payments due at maturity or pay them with proceeds of other capital transactions, then we expect that our cash flow will not be sufficient in all years to make distributions to our unitholders and payments to our noteholders and to repay all such maturing debt. Furthermore, if prevailing interest rates or other factors at the time of refinancing (such as the reluctance of lenders to make commercial real estate loans) result in higher interest rates upon refinancing, then the interest expense relating to that refinanced indebtedness would increase. This increased interest expense would adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to make distributions to our unitholders and payments to our noteholders. In addition, if we mortgage one or more of our properties to secure payment of indebtedness and we are unable to meet mortgage payments, then the property could be foreclosed upon or transferred to the mortgagee with a consequent loss of income and asset value. A foreclosure on one or more of our properties could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to make distributions to our unitholders and payments to our noteholders.

As of March 31, 2003, we had $51.5 million outstanding under our Alliance Fund II secured credit facility, $17.5 million outstanding on our unsecured credit facility, and we had seven secured loans with an aggregate principal amount of $65.6 million that bear interest at variable rates (with weighted average interest

rate of 3.5% as of March 31, 2003). In addition, we may incur other variable rate indebtedness in the future. Increases in interest rates on this indebtedness could increase our interest expense, which would adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to make distributions to our unitholders and payments to our noteholders. Accordingly, in the future, we may engage in transactions to limit our exposure to rising interest rates.

In order for our general partner, AMB Property Corporation, to qualify as a real estate investment trust under the Internal Revenue Code, we are required each year to make distributions to enable our general partner to distribute to its stockholders at least 90% of our real estate investment trust taxable income (determined without regard to the dividends-paid deduction and by excluding any net capital gain) and it is subject to tax on its income to the extent it is not distributed. Because of this distribution requirement, we may not be able to fund all future capital needs, including capital needs in connection with acquisitions, from cash retained from operations. As a result, to fund capital needs we rely on third-party sources of capital, which we may not be able to obtain on favorable terms or at all. Our access to third-party sources of capital depends upon a number of factors, including:


	•	general market conditions;

	•	the market’s perception of our growth potential;

	•	our current and potential future earnings and cash distributions; and

	•	the market price of AMB Property Corporation’s capital stock.

Additional debt financing may substantially increase our debt-to-total capitalization ratio.

As of March 31, 2003, we had 28 non-recourse secured loans that are cross-collateralized by 62 properties, totaling $719.5 million (not including unamortized debt premium). If we default on any of these loans, then we could be required to repay the aggregate of all indebtedness, together with applicable prepayment charges, to avoid foreclosure on all the cross-collateralized properties within the applicable pool. Foreclosure on our properties, or our inability to refinance our loans on favorable terms, could adversely impact our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to make distributions to our unitholders and payments to our noteholders. In addition, our credit facilities and senior debt securities contain certain cross-default provisions, which are triggered in the event that our other material indebtedness is in default. These cross-default provisions may require us to repay or restructure the credit facilities and the senior debt securities in addition to any mortgage or other debt that is in default, which could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to make distributions to our unitholders and payments to our noteholders.

Contingent or Unknown Liabilities Could Adversely Affect Our Financial Condition.

AMB Property Corporation’s predecessors have been in existence for varying lengths of time up to 19 years. At the time of our formation we acquired the assets of these entities subject to all of their potential existing liabilities. There may be current liabilities or future liabilities arising from prior activities that we are not aware of and therefore have not disclosed in this report. AMB Property Corporation assumed these liabilities as the surviving entity in the various merger and contribution transactions that occurred at the time of our formation. Existing liabilities for indebtedness generally were taken into account in connection with the allocation of our limited partnership units or shares of AMB Property Corporation’s common stock in the formation transactions, but no other liabilities were taken into account for these purposes. We do not have recourse against AMB Property Corporation’s predecessors or any of their respective stockholders or partners


	•	liabilities for clean-up or remediation of undisclosed environmental conditions;

	•	claims of customers, vendors, or other persons dealing with our predecessors prior to the formation transactions that had not been asserted prior to the formation transactions;

	•	accrued but unpaid liabilities incurred in the ordinary course of business;

	•	tax liabilities; and

	•	claims for indemnification by the officers and directors of AMB Property Corporation’s predecessors and others indemnified by these entities.

Certain customers may claim that the formation transactions gave rise to a right to purchase the premises that they occupy. We do not believe any such claims would be material and, to date, no such claims have been filed. See “— Government Regulations — We Could Encounter Costly Environmental Problems” below regarding the possibility of undisclosed environmental conditions potentially affecting the value of our properties. Undisclosed material liabilities in connection with the acquisition of properties, entities and interests in properties, or entities could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow, and ability to make distributions to our unitholders and payments to our noteholders.

Some of AMB Property Corporation’s executive officers and directors own interests in real estate-related businesses and investments. These interests include minority ownership interests in Institutional Housing Partners, L.P., a residential housing finance company (Messrs. Burke and Moghadam) and Aspire Development, Inc. and Aspire Development, L.P., developers of properties not within our investment criteria (Messrs. Belmonte, Burke and Moghadam). The continued involvement in other real estate-related activities by some of AMB Property Corporation’s executive officers could divert management’s attention from our day-to-day operations. AMB Property Corporation’s executive officers have entered into non-competition agreements with AMB Property Corporation pursuant to which they have agreed not to engage in any activities, directly or indirectly, in respect of commercial real estate, and not to make any investment in respect of any industrial or retail real estate, other than through ownership of not more than 5% of the outstanding shares of a public company engaged in such activities or through the existing investments referred to in this report. State law may limit our ability to enforce these agreements.

As of March 31, 2003, Aspire Development, L.P. owned interests in several retail development projects in the U.S., which are individually less than 10,000 feet. In addition, Messrs. Moghadam and Burke, each a founder and director, own less than 1% interests in two partnerships that own office buildings in various markets; these interests have negligible value. Luis A. Belmonte, an executive officer of AMB Property Corporation, owns less than a 10% interest, representing an estimated value of $150,000, in a limited partnership, which owns an office building located in Oakland, California.

In addition, several of AMB Property Corporation’s executive officers individually own:


	•	less than 1% interests in the stocks of certain publicly-traded real estate investment trusts;

	•	certain interests in and rights to developed and undeveloped real property located outside the United States; and

	•	certain other de minimus holdings in equity securities of real estate companies.

Thomas W. Tusher, a member of AMB Property Corporation’s board of directors and chair of the board’s compensation committee, is a limited partner in a venture in which Messrs. Moghadam and Burke are two of three members in the controlling general partner. The venture owns an office building. Mr. Tusher owns a 20% interest in the venture and Messrs. Moghadam and Burke each have a 26.7% interest in the venture. These interests in the venture have negligible value. The venture was formed in 1985, prior to the time of our initial public offering, and we continue currently to act as property and asset manager of the office building, for which services the venture pays us a fee. In our capacity as property and asset manager, we oversee the management and operation of the property, including the obtaining of financing and negotiating with third party lenders in connection therewith. The largest tenant, which occupies 68% of the building, filed for bankruptcy in January 2003.

We believe that the properties and activities set forth above generally do not directly compete with any of our properties. However, it is possible that a property in which an executive officer or director, or an affiliate of an executive officer or director of AMB Property Corporation, has an interest may compete with us in the future if we were to invest in a property similar in type and in close proximity to that property. In addition, the continued involvement by AMB Property Corporation’s executive officers and directors in these properties could divert management’s attention from our day-to-day operations. Our policy prohibits us from acquiring any properties from our executive officers or their affiliates without the approval of the disinterested members of AMB Property Corporation’s board of directors with respect to that transaction.

AMB Property Corporation has fiduciary obligations to its stockholders, the discharge of which may conflict with the interests of our limited partners and noteholders.

As of December 31, 2002, AMB Property Corporation’s two largest stockholders, Morgan Stanley Investment Management, Inc. (with respect to various client accounts for which Morgan Stanley Investment Management, Inc. serves as investment advisor) and ABP Investments U.S. (with respect to various client accounts for which ABP Investments U.S. serves as investment advisor) together beneficially owned 12.8% of AMB Property Corporation’s outstanding common stock. In addition, AMB Property Corporation’s executive officers and directors beneficially owned 4.3% of AMB Property Corporation’s outstanding common stock as of April 30, 2003, and will have influence on AMB Property Corporation’s management and operation and, as stockholders, will have influence on the outcome of any matters submitted to a vote of AMB Property Corporation’s stockholders. This influence might be exercised in a manner that is inconsistent with the interests of our limited partners and noteholders. Although there is no understanding or arrangement for these directors, officers, and stockholders and their affiliates to act in concert, these parties would be in a position to exercise significant influence over AMB Property Corporation’s affairs if they choose to do so.

Many laws and governmental regulations are applicable to our properties and changes in these laws and regulations, or their interpretation by agencies and the courts, occur frequently.

Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, places of public accommodation must meet certain federal requirements related to access and use by disabled persons. Compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act might require us to remove structural barriers to handicapped access in certain public areas where such removal is “readily achievable.” If we fail to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act, then we might be required to pay fines to the government or damages to private litigants. The impact of application of the Americans with Disabilities Act to our properties, including the extent and timing of required renovations, is

uncertain. If we are required to make unanticipated expenditures to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act, then our cash flow and the amounts available for distribution to our unitholders and payments to our noteholders may be adversely affected.

Federal, state and local laws and regulations relating to the protection of the environment impose liability on a current or previous owner or operator of real estate for contamination resulting from the presence or discharge of hazardous or toxic substances or petroleum products at the property. A current or previous owner may be required to investigate and clean up contamination at or migrating from a site. These laws typically impose liability and clean-up responsibility without regard to whether the owner or operator knew of or caused the presence of the contaminants. Even if more than one person may have been responsible for the contamination, each person covered by the environmental laws may be held responsible for all of the clean-up costs incurred. In addition, third parties may sue the owner or operator of a site for damages based on personal injury, property damage, or other costs, including investigation and clean-up costs, resulting from environmental contamination present at or emanating from that site.

Environmental laws also govern the presence, maintenance and removal of asbestos. These laws require that owners or operators of buildings containing asbestos properly manage and maintain the asbestos, that they adequately inform or train those who may come into contact with asbestos and that they undertake special precautions, including removal or other abatement in the event that asbestos is disturbed during renovation or demolition of a building. These laws may impose fines and penalties on building owners or operators for failing to comply with these requirements and may allow third parties to seek recovery from owners or operators for personal injury associated with exposure to asbestos fibers. Some of our properties may contain asbestos-containing building materials.

Some of our properties are leased or have been leased, in part, to owners and operators of businesses that use, store, or otherwise handle petroleum products or other hazardous or toxic substances. These operations create a potential for the release of petroleum products or other hazardous or toxic substances. Some of our properties are adjacent to or near other properties that have contained or currently contain petroleum products or other hazardous or toxic substances. In addition, certain of our properties are on, are adjacent to, or are near other properties upon which others, including former owners or customers of the properties, have engaged or may in the future engage in activities that may release petroleum products or other hazardous or toxic substances. From time to time, we may acquire properties, or interests in properties, with known adverse environmental conditions where we believe that the environmental liabilities associated with these conditions are quantifiable and the acquisition will yield a superior risk-adjusted return. Environmental issues for each property are evaluated and quantified prior to acquisition. The costs of environmental investigation, clean-up and monitoring are underwritten into the cost of the acquisition and appropriate environmental insurance is obtained for the property. In connection with certain divested properties, we have agreed to remain responsible for, and to bear the cost of, remediating or monitoring certain environmental conditions on the properties.

All of our properties were subject to a Phase I or similar environmental assessments by independent environmental consultants at the time of acquisition. Phase I assessments are intended to discover and evaluate information regarding the environmental condition of the surveyed property and surrounding properties and include an historical review, a public records review, an investigation of the surveyed site and surrounding properties, and preparation and issuance of a written report. We may perform additional Phase II testing if recommended by the independent environmental consultant. Phase II testing may include the collection and laboratory analysis of soil and groundwater samples, completion of surveys for asbestos-containing building materials, and any other testing that the consultant considers prudent in order to test for the presence of hazardous materials.

None of the environmental assessments of our properties has revealed any environmental liability that we believe would have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations taken as a whole. Furthermore, we are not aware of any such material environmental liability. Nonetheless, it is possible that the assessments do not reveal all environmental liabilities and that there are material environmental

liabilities of which we are unaware or that known environmental conditions may give rise to liabilities that are materially greater than anticipated. Moreover, the current environmental condition of our properties may be affected by customers, the condition of land, operations in the vicinity of the properties (such as releases from underground storage tanks), or by third-parties unrelated to us. If the costs of compliance with existing or future environmental laws and regulations exceed our budgets for these items, then our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow, and ability to make distributions to our unitholders and payments to our noteholders could be adversely affected.

Our properties are also 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, then we might incur fines by governmental authorities or be required to pay awards of damages to private litigants. We believe that our properties are currently in substantial compliance with all such regulatory requirements. However, these requirements may change or new requirements may be imposed that could require significant unanticipated expenditures by us. Any such unanticipated expenditure could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow, and ability to make distributions to our unitholders and payments to our noteholders.

From time to time, we may transfer or otherwise dispose of some of our properties. Under the Internal Revenue 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 due to our general partner’s election to be treated as a real estate investment trust. Our general partner would be required to pay a 100% penalty tax on that income. Since we acquire properties for investment purposes, we believe that any transfer or disposal of property by us would not be deemed by the Internal Revenue Service to be a prohibited transaction with any resulting gain allocable to us being subject to a 100% penalty tax. 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. While we believe that the Internal Revenue Service would not prevail in any such dispute, if the IRS were to argue successfully that a transfer or disposition of property constituted a prohibited transaction, then our general partner would be required to pay a 100% penalty tax on any gain allocable to us from the prohibited transaction.

Our business has grown rapidly and continues to grow through property acquisitions and developments. If we fail to effectively manage our growth, then our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to make distributions to our unitholders and payments to our noteholders could be adversely affected.

We have and expect to continue to acquire or develop additional properties in foreign countries. Local markets affect our operations and, therefore, we would be subject to economic fluctuations in foreign locations. Our international operations also would be subject to the usual risks of doing business abroad such as the revaluation of currencies, revisions in tax treaties or other laws governing the taxation of revenues, restrictions on the transfer of funds, and, in certain parts of the world, property rights uncertainty and political instability. We cannot predict the likelihood that any such developments may occur. Further, we may enter into agreements with non-U.S. entities that are governed by the laws of, and are subject to dispute resolution in, the courts of another country or region. We cannot accurately predict whether such a forum would provide us with an effective and efficient means of resolving disputes that may arise. Even if we are able to obtain a satisfactory decision through arbitration or a court proceeding, we could have difficulty enforcing any award or judgment on a timely basis. Our business has grown rapidly and continues to grow through property acquisitions and developments. If we fail to effectively manage our international growth, then our financial

condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to make distributions to our unitholders and payments to our noteholders could be adversely affected.

We depend on the efforts of our general partner’s executive officers. While we believe that AMB Property Corporation could find suitable replacements for these key personnel, the loss of their services or the limitation of their availability could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to make distributions to our unitholders and payments to our noteholders. AMB Property Corporation does not have employment agreements with any of its executive officers.

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.


	AMB PROPERTY, L.P.
	Registrant

	By: AMB Property Corporation, its General Partner


	By:	/s/ HAMID R. MOGHADAM



	Hamid R. Moghadam
	Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive
	Officer (Duly Authorized Officer and
	Principal Executive Officer)


	By:	/s/ W. BLAKE BAIRD



	W. Blake Baird
	President and Director (Duly Authorized Officer)


	By:	/s/ MICHAEL A. COKE



	Michael A. Coke
	Chief Financial Officer and Executive Vice
	President (Duly Authorized Officer and Principal
	Financial and Accounting Officer)


	(1)	I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of AMB Property, L.P.;

	(2)	Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report;

	(3)	Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

	(4)	The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:


	a)	designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

	b)	evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this quarterly report (the “Evaluation Date”); and

	c)	presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;


	(5)	The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the board of directors of the registrant’s general partner (or persons performing the equivalent function):


	a)	all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls that could adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize, and report financial data and have identified for the registrant’s auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

	b)	any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal controls; and


	(6)	The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have indicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.


	By:	/s/ HAMID R. MOGHADAM



	Hamid R. Moghadam
	Chairman of the Board and
	Chief Executive Officer
	of AMB Property Corporation, the general
	partner of AMB Property, L.P.


	(1)	I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of AMB Property, L.P.;

	(2)	Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report;

	(3)	Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

	(4)	The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:


	d)	designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

	e)	evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this quarterly report (the “Evaluation Date”); and


	f)	presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;


	(5)	The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the board of directors of the registrant’s general partner (or persons performing the equivalent function):


	c)	all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls that could adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize, and report financial data and have identified for the registrant’s auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

	d)	any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal controls; and


	(6)	The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have indicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.


	By:	/s/ W. BLAKE BAIRD



	W. Blake Baird
	President and Director
	of AMB Property Corporation, the
	general partner of AMB Property, L.P.


	(1)	I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of AMB Property, L.P.;

	(2)	Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report;

	(3)	Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

	(4)	The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:


	g)	designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

	h)	evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this quarterly report (the “Evaluation Date”); and


	i)	presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;


	(5)	The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the board of directors of the registrant’s general partner (or persons performing the equivalent function):


	e)	all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls that could adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize, and report financial data and have identified for the registrant’s auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and


	f)	any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal controls; and


	(6)	The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have indicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.


	By:	/s/ MICHAEL A. COKE



	Michael A. Coke
	Chief Financial Officer and
	Executive Vice President
	of AMB Property Corporation, the
	general partner of AMB Property, L.P.


(Mark One)
þ		QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

		For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2003

or

o		REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934


Delaware		94-3285362
(State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization)		(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)
Pier 1, Bay 1, San Francisco, California		94111
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)		(Zip Code)


PART I
	Item 1. Financial Statements
AMB PROPERTY, L.P.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF PARTNERS’ CAPITAL
	Item 2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
	Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
	Item 4. Controls and Procedures
PART II
	Item 1. Legal Proceedings
	Item 2. Changes in Securities and Use of Proceeds
	Item 3. Defaults Upon Senior Securities
	Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
	Item 5. Other Information
	Item 6. Exhibits and Reports on Form 8-K
SIGNATURES
CERTIFICATIONS


		Page

PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1.	Financial Statements (unaudited)
	Consolidated Balance Sheets as of March 31, 2003, and December 31, 2002		1
	Consolidated Statements of Operations for the three months ended March 31, 2003 and 2002		2
	Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the three months ended March 31, 2003 and 2002		3
	Consolidated Statement of Partners’ Capital for the three months ended March 31, 2003		4
	Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements		5
Item 2.	Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations		19
Item 3.	Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk		37
Item 4.	Controls and Procedures		37
PART II. OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1.	Legal Proceedings		38
Item 2.	Changes in Securities and Use of Proceeds		38
Item 3.	Defaults Upon Senior Securities		38
Item 4.	Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders		38
Item 5.	Other Information		38
Item 6.	Exhibits and Reports on Form 8-K		48


				March 31,			December 31,
				2003			2002


				(Unaudited,
				dollars in thousands)
ASSETS
Investments in real estate:
	Land			$	1,213,631		$	1,236,406
	Buildings and improvements				3,475,523			3,557,086
	Construction in progress				180,587			132,490

		Total investments in properties			4,869,741			4,925,982
	Accumulated depreciation and amortization				(382,900	)		(362,540	)

		Net investments in properties			4,486,841			4,563,442
Investments in unconsolidated joint ventures					67,754			64,428
Properties held for divestiture, net					59,742			107,871

			Net investments in real estate		4,614,337			4,735,741
Cash and cash equivalents					134,793			89,332
Restricted cash					15,115			27,882
Mortgage receivable					13,112			13,133
Accounts receivable, net of allowance for doubtful accounts					76,056			74,207
Other assets					51,909			52,199

		Total assets		$	4,905,322		$	4,992,494

LIABILITIES AND PARTNERS’ CAPITAL
Debt:
	Secured debt			$	1,250,528		$	1,284,675
	Unsecured senior debt securities				800,000			800,000
	Alliance Fund II credit facility				51,500			45,500
	Unsecured debt				10,050			10,186
	Unsecured credit facility				17,464			95,000

		Total debt			2,129,542			2,235,361
Distributions payable					41,441			41,213
Accounts payable and other liabilities					146,609			140,503

		Total liabilities			2,317,592			2,417,077
Commitments and contingencies (Notes 3 and 12) Minority interests					665,026			655,790
Partners’ capital:
	General partner, 81,304,915 and 81,800,038 units, respectively and 3,995,800 Series A preferred units outstanding with a $99,895 liquidation preference				1,687,101			1,684,150
	Limited partners, 4,846,387 units, 1,300,000 Series B preferred units with a $65,000 liquidation preference and 800,000 Series J preferred units with a $40,000 liquidation preference and 800,000 Series K preferred units with a $40,000 liquidation preference				235,603			235,477

		Total partners’ capital			1,922,704			1,919,627

		Total liabilities and partners’ capital		$	4,905,322		$	4,992,494



					For the Three Months Ended
					March 31,

					2003			2002


					(Unaudited,
					dollars in thousands,
					except per unit amounts)
REVENUES AND OTHER INCOME
	Rental revenues				$	158,036		$	141,781
	Equity in earnings of unconsolidated joint ventures					1,235			1,483
	Private capital income					2,361			2,588
	Interest and other income					1,393			2,850

				Total revenues and other income		163,025			148,702
EXPENSES
	Property operating expenses					22,138			17,459
	Real estate taxes					18,249			17,044
	Interest, including amortization					37,180			35,004
	Depreciation and amortization					35,022			27,832
	General and administrative					12,174			10,137

				Total expenses		124,763			107,476

				Income before minority interests		38,262			41,226
	Minority interests’ share of income Preferred units					(3,388	)		(3,537	)
		Minority interests				(7,781	)		(7,966	)

				Total minority interests’ share of income		(11,169	)		(11,503	)

				Income from continuing operations before gains/(losses) on dispositions		27,093			29,723
	Gains/(losses) from dispositions of real estate, net of minority interests					7,429			(288	)

				Income from continuing operations		34,522			29,435
Discontinued operations, net of minority interests:
	Income attributable to discontinued operations					1,606			4,988
	Gains from dispositions of real estate, discontinued operations					29,644			—

			Total discontinued operations			31,250			4,988

				Net income		65,772			34,423
	Series A preferred unit distributions					(2,123	)		(2,125	)
	Series B preferred unit distributions					(1,402	)		(1,402	)
	Series J preferred unit distributions					(795	)		(918	)
	Series K preferred unit distributions					(795	)		—

				Net income available to common unitholders	$	60,657		$	29,978

Income available to common unitholders attributable to:
	General partner					57,255			28,178
	Limited partners					3,402			1,800

				Net income available to common unitholders	$	60,657		$	29,978

BASIC INCOME PER COMMON UNIT
	Income from continuing operations available to common unitholders				$	0.34		$	0.28
	Discontinued operations					0.37			0.06

				Net income available to common unitholders	$	0.71		$	0.34

DILUTED INCOME PER COMMON UNIT
	Income from continuing operations available to common unitholders				$	0.33		$	0.27
	Discontinued operations					0.36			0.06

				Net income available to common unitholders	$	0.69		$	0.33

WEIGHTED AVERAGE COMMON UNITS OUTSTANDING
	Basic					85,944,112			88,262,128

	Diluted					87,360,543			89,724,953


					2003			2002


					(Unaudited, dollars in
					thousands)
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES
Net income					$	65,772		$	34,423
Adjustments to net income:
	Equity in earnings of unconsolidated joint ventures					(1,235	)		(1,483	)
	Straight-line rents					(2,380	)		(3,961	)
	Debt premiums, discounts and finance cost amortization, net					(99	)		(482	)
	Depreciation and amortization, including discontinued operations					35,173			29,675
	Stock-based compensation amortization					1,942			859
	Minority interests, including discontinued operations					11,169			11,503
	Gains/ (losses) from dispositions of real estate, net of minority interests					(37,073	)		288
	Changes in assets and liabilities:
		Accounts receivable and other assets				(2,570	)		(3,076	)
		Accounts payable and other liabilities				6,106			(19,502	)

			Net cash provided by operating activities			76,805			48,244
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES
Change in restricted cash						12,767			(4,002	)
Cash paid for property acquisitions						(10,494	)		(30,486	)
Additions to buildings, development costs and other first generation improvements						(56,058	)		(13,991	)
Additions to second generation building improvements and lease costs						(10,880	)		(11,223	)
Additions to interests in unconsolidated joint ventures						(809	)		—
Distributions received from unconsolidated joint ventures						2,116			1,433
Net proceeds from divestiture of real estate						200,522			36,923

			Net cash provided by/ (used in) investing activities			137,164			(21,346	)
CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES
Issuance of common stock, proceeds from stock option exercises						1,179			868
Retirement of common stock						(20,562	)		—
Borrowings on secured debt						7,913			41,166
Payments on secured debt						(40,688	)		(33,979	)
Borrowings on unsecured credit facility						112,464			—
Payments on unsecured credit facility						(190,000	)		(12,000	)
Borrowings on Alliance Fund II credit facility						6,000			23,500
Payments on Alliance Fund II credit facility						—			(31,000	)
Payment of financing fees						(36	)		(1,662	)
Net proceeds from issuances of senior debt securities						—			19,883
Contributions from co-investment partners						7,039			—
Distributions paid to general partner and preferred unitholders						(40,720	)		(4,445	)
Distributions to minority interests, including preferred units						(11,097	)		(15,471	)

			Net cash used in financing activities			(168,508	)		(13,140	)

				Net increase in cash and cash equivalents		45,461			13,758
				Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period		89,332			73,071

				Cash and cash equivalents at end of period	$	134,793		$	86,829

Supplemental Disclosures of Cash Flow Information
Cash paid for interest, net of capitalized interest					$	29,756		$	20,328
Non-cash transactions:
			Acquisition of properties		$	10,867		$	34,063
			Assumption of debt			—			(3,577	)
			Acquisition capital			(373	)		—

				Net cash paid	$	10,494		$	30,486



			General Partner											Limited Partners


			Preferred Units					Common Units						Preferred Units					Common Units

			Units		Amount			Units			Amount			Units		Amount			Units		Amount			Total


			(Unaudited, dollars in thousands)
Balance at December 31, 2002				3,995,800	$	95,994			81,800,038		$	1,588,156			2,900,000	$	141,103			4,846,387	$	94,374		$	1,919,627
Comprehensive income:
	Net Income			—		2,123			—			57,255			—		2,992			—		3,402
	Currency translation adjustment			—		—			—			103			—		—			—		—
		Total comprehensive income																							65,875
Issuance of common limited partnership units in connection with issuance of restricted stock and options				—		—			238,010			10,755			—		—			—		—			10,755
Issuance of common limited partnership units in connection with the exercise of stock options				—		—			54,667			1,179			—		—			—		—			1,179
Retirement of units				—		—			(787,800	)		(20,562	)		—		—			—		—			(20,562	)
Deferred compensation				—		—			—			(10,753	)		—		—			—		—			(10,753	)
Deferred compensation amortization				—		—			—			1,942			—		—			—		—			1,942
Reallocation of interests				—		—			—			(1,452	)		—		—			—		(1,265	)		(2,717
Distributions				—		(2,123	)		—			(35,516	)		—		(2,992	)		—		(2,011	)		(42,642	)

Balance at March 31, 2003				3,995,800	$	95,994			81,304,915		$	1,591,107			2,900,000	$	141,103			4,846,387	$	94,500		$	1,922,704


1.	Organization and Formation of the Operating Partnership


4.	Property Divestitures and Properties Held for Divestiture



		For the Three
		Months Ended
		March 31,

		2003			2002

Rental revenues		$	2,618		$	10,201
Straight-line rents			88			259
Property operating expenses			(550	)		(1,021	)
Real estate taxes			(357	)		(1,545	)
Interest, including amortization			(42	)		(1,063	)
Depreciation and amortization			(151	)		(1,843	)

	Income attributable to discontinued operations	$	1,606		$	4,988


		Operating		Consolidated		Unsecured
		Partnership		Joint		Senior
		Secured		Venture		Debt		Unsecured		Credit
		Debt		Debt		Securities		Debt		Facilities		Total

2003		$	56,160	$	12,650	$	—	$	422	$	51,500	$	120,732
2004			62,516		65,261		—		601		—		128,378
2005			44,427		59,496		250,000		647		17,464		372,034
2006			82,693		65,996		25,000		698		—		174,387
2007			14,495		43,341		75,000		752		—		133,588
2008			31,665		154,879		175,000		810		—		362,354
2009			4,147		77,032		—		873		—		82,052
2010			50,948		105,766		75,000		941		—		232,655
2011			409		179,525		75,000		1,014		—		255,948
2012			407		107,524		75,000		1,092		—		109,023
Thereafter			481		22,264		125,000		2,200		—		149,945

	Total	$	348,348	$	893,734	$	800,000	$	10,050	$	68,964	$	2,121,096



			For the Three Months
			Ended March 31,

			2003		2002

Joint Venture Partners			$	7,781	$	7,966
Held through AMB Property II, L.P.:
	Series D preferred units (liquidation preference of $79,767)			1,545		1,545
	Series E preferred units (liquidation preference of $11,022)			214		214
	Series F preferred units (liquidation preference of $13,372)			266		395
	Series G preferred units (repurchased in July 2002)			—		20
	Series H preferred units (liquidation preference of $42,000)			853		853
	Series I preferred units (liquidation preference of $25,500)			510		510

		Total minority interests’ share of net income	$	11,169	$	11,503


						Operating
						Partnership’s			Net
						Ownership			Equity
Co-investment Joint Venture		Joint Venture Partner		Square Feet		Percentage			Investment

Elk Grove Du Page			Hamilton Partners		4,046,721		56	%	$	58,883
Pico Rivera			Majestic Realty		855,600		50	%		1,503
Monte Vista Spectrum			Majestic Realty		576,852		50	%		2,223
Industrial Fund I, LLC			Citigroup Alternative Investments		2,446,334		15	%		4,301
Airport Logistics Park of Singapore(1)			Boustead Projects		233,773		50	%		844

	Total investment in unconsolidated JVs				8,159,280		47	%	$	67,754



			Rental Revenues						Property NOI(1)


			For the Three Months						For the Three Months
			Ended March 31,						Ended March 31,

Segments			2003			2002			2003			2002

Industrial domestic hub and gateway markets:
	Atlanta		$	7,246		$	7,313		$	5,700		$	5,880
	Chicago			11,216			11,885			7,840			8,331
	Dallas/ Fort Worth			4,080			6,617			2,728			4,835
	Los Angeles			23,135			18,645			18,646			14,707
	Northern New Jersey/ New York			13,330			10,826			8,662			7,259
	San Francisco Bay Area			32,771			29,994			27,988			25,285
	Miami			8,053			8,296			5,657			6,232
	Seattle			6,887			5,492			5,500			4,375
	On-Tarmac			11,493			4,842			6,075			2,781

		Total industrial domestic hub markets		118,211			103,910			88,796			79,685
Total industrial domestic target markets				20,332			18,768			14,809			14,836
Total industrial domestic non-target markets				14,790			20,180			9,967			13,154
International target markets				1,120			—			902			—
Straight-line rents				2,380			3,961			2,380			3,961
Total retail markets				3,909			5,422			2,594			3,536
Discontinued operations				(2,706	)		(10,460	)		(1,799	)		(7,894	)

		Total rental revenues	$	158,036		$	141,781		$	117,649		$	107,278


Item 1.	*Financial Statements*


2.	Interim Financial Statements


5.	Mortgage Receivable


	*Commitments*



			Total Gross Investment(1)
			As of

			March 31,			December 31,
			2003			2002

Industrial domestic hub and gateway markets:
	Atlanta		$	265,545		$	289,398
	Chicago			371,821			370,139
	Dallas/ Fort Worth			148,526			140,616
	Los Angeles			828,033			760,640
	Northern New Jersey/ New York			479,091			486,644
	San Francisco Bay Area			800,901			828,975
	Miami			347,100			305,399
	Seattle			250,640			249,500
	On-Tarmac			224,931			223,215

		Total industrial domestic hub markets		3,716,588			3,654,526
Total industrial domestic target markets				600,959			599,165
Total industrial domestic non-target markets				439,784			585,939
International target markets				52,827			81,112
Properties held for divestiture				(62,007	)		(115,175	)
Total retail markets				121,590			120,415

		Total investments in properties	$	4,869,741		$	4,925,982


2003		$	14,941
2004			19,753
2005			19,819
2006			20,553
2007			20,772
Thereafter			283,574

	Total lease commitments	$	379,412


Item 2.	*Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations*


Private Capital and Other Income		2003		2002		$ Change			% Change

Equity in earnings of unconsolidated joint ventures		$	1.2	$	1.5	$	(0.3	)		(20.0	)%
Private capital income			2.4		2.6		(0.2	)		(7.7	)%
Interest and other income			1.4		2.8		(1.4	)		(50.0	)%

	Total	$	5.0	$	6.9	$	(1.9	)		(27.5	)%


Property Operating Expenses and Real Estate Taxes (Exclusive of
depreciation and amortization)			2003			2002			$ Change			% Change

Rental expenses			$	22.1		$	17.5		$	4.6			26.3	%
Real estate taxes				18.3			17.0			1.3			7.6	%

	Property operating expenses		$	40.4		$	34.5		$	5.9			17.1	%

Industrial:
	Same store		$	32.9		$	29.9		$	3.0			9.9	%
	2002 acquisitions			4.7			0.1			4.6			—
	Developments			1.6			2.1			(0.5	)		100.0	%
	Divestitures			0.8			3.1			(2.3	)		(74.2	)%
Retail				1.3			1.9			(0.6	)		(31.6	)%
Discontinued operations				(0.9	)		(2.6	)		1.7			65.4	%

		Total	$	40.4		$	34.5		$	5.9			17.1	%


Other Expenses		2003		2002		$ Change		% Change

Interest, including amortization		$	37.2	$	35.0	$	2.2		6.3	%
Depreciation and amortization			35.0		27.8		7.2		25.9	%
General and administrative			12.2		10.1		2.1		20.8	%

	Total	$	84.4	$	72.9	$	11.5		15.8	%


		Our
		Approximate
		Ownership			Original Planned
Co-investment Joint Venture	Joint Venture Partner	Percentage			Capitalization(1)

AMB/ Erie, L.P.	Erie Insurance Company and affiliates		50	%	$	200,000
AMB Institutional Alliance Fund I, L.P.	AMB Institutional Alliance REIT I, Inc.(2)		21	%	$	420,000
AMB Partners II, L.P.	City and County of San Francisco Employees’ Retirement System		20	%	$	500,000
AMB-SGP, L.P.	Industrial JV Pte Ltd.(3)		50	%	$	425,000
AMB Institutional Alliance Fund II, L.P.	AMB Institutional Alliance REIT II, Inc.(4)		20	%	$	489,000


		Units		Market		Market
Security		Outstanding		Price(1)		Value(1)

Common general partnership units			81,304,915	$	28.25	$	2,296,864
Common limited partnership units			4,846,387		28.25		136,910

	Total		86,151,302			$	2,433,774


		Distribution			Liquidation		Redemption
Security		Rate			Preference		Provisions

Series A preferred units			8.50	%	$	99,895	July 2003
Series B preferred units			8.63	%		65,000	November 2003
Series D preferred units			7.75	%		79,767	May 2004
Series E preferred units			7.75	%		11,022	August 2004
Series F preferred units			7.95	%		13,372	March 2005
Series H preferred units			8.13	%		42,000	September 2005
Series I preferred units			8.00	%		25,500	March 2006
Series J preferred units			7.95	%		40,000	September 2006
Series K preferred units			7.95	%		40,000	April 2007

	Weighted average/total		8.17	%	$	416,556


Total debt-to-total market capitalization	43.3	%
Our share of total debt-to-total market capitalization	35.6	%
Total debt plus preferred-to-total market capitalization	51.5	%
Our share of total debt plus preferred-to-total market capitalization	45.0	%
Our share of total debt-to-total book capitalization	44.2	%


Paying Entity	Security	2003	2002

AMB Property, L.P.	Common limited partnership units	$0.415	$0.410
AMB Property, L.P.	Series A preferred units	$0.531	$0.531
AMB Property, L.P.	Series B preferred units	$1.078	$1.078
AMB Property, L.P.	Series J preferred units	$0.994	$0.994
AMB Property, L.P.	Series K preferred units	$0.994	n/a
AMB Property II, L.P.	Series D preferred units	$0.969	$0.969
AMB Property II, L.P.	Series E preferred units	$0.969	$0.969
AMB Property II, L.P.	Series F preferred units	$0.994	$0.994
AMB Property II, L.P.	Series G preferred units	$0.994	$0.994
AMB Property II, L.P.	Series H preferred units	$1.016	$1.016
AMB Property II, L.P.	Series I preferred units	$1.000	$1.000


				Three Months
				Ended
				March 31, 2003

Square feet owned(1)(2)					80,431,776
Occupancy percentage(1)					92.5	%
Weighted average lease terms:
	Original				6.1 years
	Remaining				3.3 years
Tenant retention					68.4	%
Same Space Leasing Activity(3):
	Rent decreases on renewals and rollovers				(6.6	)%
	Same space square footage commencing (millions)				4.9
Second Generation Leasing Activity:
	Tenant improvements and leasing commissions per sq ft.:
		Renewals		$	1.22
		Re-tenanted			1.45

			Weighted average	$	1.30

	Square footage commencing (millions)				6.2


Item 3.	*Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk*



	Expected Maturity Date

													Total
	2003		2004		2005		2006		2007		Thereafter		Debt

Fixed rate debt(1)	$	67,771	$	97,698	$	351,127	$	165,649	$	126,727	$	1,177,611	$	1,986,583
Average interest rate		7.8%		8.0%		7.3%		7.4%		7.4%		7.3%		7.4%
Variable rate debt(2)	$	52,961	$	30,680	$	20,907	$	8,738	$	6,861	$	14,366	$	134,513
Average interest rate		2.2%		3.3%		3.8%		3.1%		3.0%		4.3%		3.0%


Item 4.	*Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders*


	*There are Factors Outside of Our Control that Affect the Performance and Value of Our Properties.*


	*We May Be Unable to Renew Leases or Relet Space as Leases Expire.*


	*A Significant Number of Our Properties are Located in California.*


	*Scheduled Debt Payments Could Adversely Affect Our Financial Condition.*


	*Rising Interest Rates Could Adversely Affect Our Cash Flow.*