Back to GetFilings.com

Table of Contents

UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

(Mark One)
[X]		ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended   January 31, 2003

OR

[   ]

TRANSITION REPORT Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

 For the transition period from     to

Commission file number 1-4372

FOREST CITY ENTERPRISES, INC.

Terminal Tower Suite 1100	50 Public Square Cleveland, Ohio	44113
(Address of principal executive offices)		(Zip Code)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None

Indicate by check mark 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 [X] NO [   ]

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. [   ]

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act).
YES [X] NO [   ]

The aggregate market value of the outstanding common equity held by non-affiliates as of the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter was $1,066,654,493.

The number of shares of registrant’s common stock outstanding on March 3, 2003 was 35,530,242 and 14,130,592 for Class A and Class B common stock, respectively.

Table of Contents

FOREST CITY ENTERPRISES, INC.

ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K
FOR THE YEAR ENDED JANUARY 31, 2003

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1

Table of Contents

PART I

Item 1. Business

     Founded in 1920 and publicly traded since 1960, Forest City Enterprises, Inc. (with its subsidiaries, the “Company” or “Forest City”) is principally engaged in the ownership, development, management and acquisition of commercial and residential real estate properties in 21 states and the District of Columbia. At January 31, 2003, the Company had $5.1 billion in consolidated assets, of which approximately $4.5 billion was invested in real estate, at cost. The Company’s portfolio of real estate assets is diversified both geographically and among property types.

	The Company operates through four Strategic Business Units:

	*		Commercial Group, the Company’s largest business unit, owns, develops, acquires and operates regional malls, specialty/urban retail centers, office buildings, hotels and mixed-use projects.
	*		Residential Group owns, develops, acquires and operates residential rental properties, including upscale and middle-market apartments, adaptive re-use developments and supported-living facilities.
	*		Land Development Group acquires and sells both land and developed lots to residential, commercial and industrial customers. It also owns and develops land into master-planned communities and mixed-use projects.
	*		Lumber Trading Group, a lumber wholesaler.

     The Company has centralized the capital management, financial reporting and administrative functions of its business units. In most other respects the strategic business units operate autonomously, with the Commercial Group and Residential Group each having its own development, acquisition, leasing, property and financial management functions. The Company believes this structure enables its employees to focus their expertise and to exercise the independent leadership, creativity and entrepreneurial skills appropriate for their particular business segment.

Commercial Group

     The Company has developed retail projects for more than 50 years and office and mixed-use projects for more than 30 years. Currently, the Commercial Group owns a diverse portfolio in both urban and suburban locations in 13 states. The Commercial Group targets densely populated markets where it effectively uses its expertise to develop complex projects, often employing public or private partnerships. As of January 31, 2003, the Commercial Group owned interests in 77 completed projects, including 41 retail properties, 28 office properties and eight hotels. New York City operations through the Company’s partnership with Forest City Ratner Companies are part of the Commercial Group.

     The Company opened its first community retail center in 1948, and its first enclosed regional mall in 1962. Since then, it has developed regional malls and specialty retail centers. The specialty retail centers include urban retail centers, entertainment based centers, community centers and power centers (collectively, “Specialty Retail Centers”). As of January 31, 2003, the Commercial Group’s retail portfolio consisted of 12 regional malls with Gross Leasable Area (GLA) of 4.0 million square feet and 29 Specialty Retail Centers with a total GLA of 5.7 million square feet.

     Regional malls are developed in collaboration with anchor stores that typically own their facilities as an integral part of the mall structure and environment but do not generate significant direct payments to the Company. In contrast, anchor stores at specialty retail centers generally are tenants under long term leases that contribute significant rental payments to the Company.

     While the Company continues to develop regional malls in strong markets, the Company has also pioneered the concept of bringing specialty retailing to urban locations previously ignored by major retailers primarily in the New York metropolitan area. With high population densities and disposable income levels at or near those of the suburbs, urban development is proving to be economically advantageous for the Company, for the tenants who realize high sales per square foot and for the cities, which benefit from the new jobs and taxes created in the urban locations.

     At January 31, 2003, the Company’s operating portfolio of office/mixed-use and hotel projects consists of 28 office buildings containing 7.8 million square feet, including mixed-use projects with approximately 311,000 gross leasable square feet of retail space and eight hotels with 2,941 rooms.

2

Table of Contents

Item 1. Business (continued)

     In its office development activities, the Company is primarily a build-to-suit developer that works with tenants to meet their highly specialized requirements. The Company’s office development has focused primarily on mixed-use projects in urban developments, often built in conjunction with hotels and/or retail centers or as part of a major office campus. As a result of this focus on new urban developments, the Company plans to concentrate future office and mixed-use developments largely in the New York City, Boston, Washington, D.C. and Denver metropolitan areas.

Residential Group

     The Company’s Residential Group owns, develops, acquires, leases and manages residential rental property in 17 states and the District of Columbia. The Company has been engaged in apartment community development for over 50 years beginning in Northeast Ohio and gradually expanding nationally. Its residential portfolio includes middle-market apartments, upscale urban properties and adaptive re-use developments. The Company also owns a select number of supported-living facilities located primarily in the New York City metropolitan area.

     At January 31, 2003, the Residential Group’s operating portfolio consists of 36,904 units in 125 properties in which Forest City has an ownership interest, including 5,551 units of syndicated senior citizen subsidized housing in 34 buildings that the Company manages and in which it owns a residual interest.

Land Development Group

     The Company has been in the land development business since the 1930’s. The Land Development Group acquires and sells both raw land and developed lots to residential, commercial and industrial customers. The Land Development Group also owns and develops raw land into master-planned communities, mixed-use projects and other residential developments. Currently the Company owns more than 6,600 acres of undeveloped land for these commercial and residential development purposes and has an option to purchase 2,578 acres of developable land at Stapleton, Denver’s former airport. The Company currently has land development projects in nine states.

     Historically, the Land Development Group’s activities focused on land development projects in Northeast Ohio. Over time, the Group’s activities expanded to larger, more complex projects. In the last 12 years, the Group has extended its activities on a national basis, first in Arizona, and more recently in North Carolina, Florida, Nevada, Colorado, Texas and New Mexico. Land development activities at the Company’s Stapleton project in Denver, Colorado and Central Station project in downtown Chicago, Illinois are reported in the Land Development Group.

     In addition to sales activities of the Land Development Group, the Company also sells land acquired by its Commercial Group and Residential Group adjacent to their respective projects. Proceeds from such land sales are included in the revenues of such Groups.

Lumber Trading Group

     The Company’s original business was selling lumber to homebuilders. The Company expanded this business in 1969 through its acquisition of Forest City Trading Group, Inc., a lumber wholesaler with customers in all 50 states and all Canadian provinces. Through 13 strategically located offices in the United States and Canada, employing over 280 traders, the Company sold the equivalent of over eight billion board feet of lumber in 2002, with a gross sales volume of $2.5 billion, making the Company one of the largest lumber wholesalers in North America.

     The Lumber Trading Group currently has 12 sales and administrative offices in six states and one sales office in Vancouver, British Columbia. The Company opens and closes offices in response to the changing demands of the lumber industry.

     The Lumber Trading Group’s core business is supplying lumber for new home construction and to the repair and remodeling markets. Approximately 64% of the Lumber Trading Group’s sales for 2002 involve back-to-back trades in which the Company brings together a buyer and seller for an immediate purchase and sale. The balance of transactions are trades in which the Company takes a short-term ownership position and is at risk for lumber market fluctuations. This risk, however, is reduced by the implementation of a lumber hedging strategy.

3

Table of Contents

Item 1. Business (continued)

Competition

     The real estate industry is highly competitive in all of the Company’s primary markets. With regard to the Commercial and Residential Groups, there are numerous other developers, managers and owners of commercial and residential real estate that compete with the Company nationally, regionally and/or locally, some of whom may have greater financial resources than the Company. These entities compete with the Company in seeking management and leasing revenues, land for development, properties for acquisition and disposition and tenants for properties. There can be no assurance that the Company will successfully compete for new projects or have the ability to react to competitive pressures on existing projects caused by factors such as declining occupancy rates or rental rates. In addition, tenants at the Company’s retail properties face continued competition in attracting customers from retailers at other shopping centers, catalogue companies, various websites, warehouse stores, large discounters, outlet malls, wholesale clubs and direct mail and telemarketers. The existence of competing developers, managers and owners and competition to the Company’s tenants could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s ability to lease space in its properties and on the rents charged or concessions granted and could materially and adversely affect the Company’s results of operations and cash flows and could affect the realizable value of assets upon sale.

     With regard to the Lumber Trading Group, the lumber wholesale business is highly competitive. Competitors in the lumber brokerage business include numerous brokers and in-house sales departments of lumber manufacturers, many of which are larger and have greater resources than the Company.

Number of Employees

     The Company had 4,430 employees as of January 31, 2003, of which 3,519 were full-time and 911 were part-time.

Segments of Business

     The Company currently has four segments: Commercial Group, Residential Group, Land Development Group and Lumber Trading Group. Financial information about industry segments required by this item is included in Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data, pages 81-82 , Note M “Segment Information.”

Available Information

     Forest City Enterprises, Inc. is an Ohio corporation and its executive offices are located at 50 Public Square, Suite 1100 Cleveland, Ohio 44113. The Company makes available, free of charge, on their website at www.forestcity.net, their annual, quarterly and current reports, including amendments to such reports, as soon as practicable after the Company electronically files such material with, or furnishes such material to, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The Company’s filings can also be obtained from the SEC website at www.sec.gov. However, the information found on the Company’s website and the SEC website is not part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. The Company’s filings are also available by calling the SEC Office of Public Reference at (202) 942-8090 or Investor Information Service toll free at 1-800-SEC-0330, or can be read and copied at the SEC’s Public Reference Room office at 450 Fifth Street N.W., Washington, D.C. 20549.

4

Table of Contents

RISK FACTORS

We Are Subject To Real Estate Development and Investment Risk.

The value of and our income from our real property investments may decline.

     The value of, and our income from, our properties may decline due to developments that adversely affect real estate generally and those that are specific to our properties. General factors that may adversely affect our real estate portfolios include:

	-		a decline in the national economy;
	-		increases in interest rates;
	-		a general tightening of the availability of credit;
	-		a decline in the economic conditions in one or more of our primary markets;
	-		an increase in competition for tenants and customers;
	-		an increase in supply of our product types in our primary markets;
	-		an escalation in terrorist activities or other acts of violence or war in the United States that impact properties in our real estate portfolios or that may impact the general economy;
	-		declines in consumer spending during an economic recession that adversely affect our revenue from our retail centers; and
	-		the adoption on the national, state or local level of more restrictive laws and governmental regulations, including more restrictive zoning or land use regulations and increased real estate taxes.

     In addition, there are factors that may adversely affect the value of, and our income from, specific properties, including:

	-		adverse changes in the perceptions of prospective tenants or purchasers of the attractiveness of the property;
	-		opposition from local community or political groups with respect to development or construction at a particular site;
	-		our inability to provide adequate management and maintenance or to obtain adequate insurance;
	-		our inability to collect rent;
	-		an increase in operating costs; and
	-		introduction of a competitor’s property in close proximity to one of our current markets.

Our Development Projects May Exceed Budget or Be Prevented From Completion For Many Reasons.

     Our development projects may exceed budget or be prevented from completion for many reasons, including:

	-		an inability to secure sufficient financing on favorable terms, including an inability to refinance construction loans;
	-		construction delays or cost overruns, all of which may increase project development costs;
	-		an inability to obtain zoning, occupancy and other required governmental permits and authorizations;
	-		an inability to secure tenants or anchors necessary to support the project; and
	-		failure to achieve anticipated occupancy or sales levels or sustain anticipated lease or sales levels.

     These risks could result in lengthy unanticipated delays or significant unexpected expenses. If any of these occur, it could adversely affect our ability to achieve our projected returns on properties under development.

     In the past, we have elected not to proceed, or have been prevented from proceeding, with specific development projects and anticipate that this may occur again from time to time in the future. A development project may be stalled or terminated because a project partner or prospective anchor tenant withdraws or a third party challenges our entitlements or public financings.

5

Table of Contents

     We periodically serve as either the construction manager or the general contractor for our developments. The construction of real estate projects entails unique risks, including risks that the project will fail to conform to building plans, specifications and timetables. This could be caused by strikes, weather, government regulations and other conditions beyond our control. In addition, we may become liable for injuries and accidents occurring during the construction process that are not insured.

     In the construction of new projects, we generally guarantee the lender under the construction loan the lien-free completion of the project. This guaranty is recourse to us and places the risk of construction delays and cost overruns on us. In addition, from time to time, we guarantee the obligations of a major tenant during the construction phase. This type of guaranty is released upon completion of the project. While we have generally been successful in completing projects on time and on budget, we may have to make significant expenditures in the future in order to comply with our lien-free completion obligations.

     Furthermore, as the general partner of certain limited partnerships, we guarantee the funding of operating deficits of newly-opened apartment projects for an average of five years.

An Economic Decline in One or More of Our Primary Markets May Adversely Affect Our Operating Results and Financial Condition.

     Our core markets are Boston, Denver, California, New York City and Washington, D.C. A downturn in the local economy in any of these areas may have an adverse effect on our results of operations and cash flows resulting from an adverse effect on:

	-		the ability of our tenants to make lease payments;
	-		our ability to market new developments to prospective purchasers and tenants;
	-		our rental and lease rates;
	-		hotel occupancy and room rates; and
	-		land sales.

	In addition, local real estate market conditions may be significantly impacted by any of the following:

	-		business layoffs and downsizing;
	-		industry slowdowns;
	-		relocations or closings of businesses;
	-		changing demographics; and
	-		any oversupply of or reduced demand for real estate.

The occurance of any of these events could have a material adverse effect on our operating results in that particular real estate market.

Terrorists Attacks and Other Acts of Violence or War Have and May in the Future, Impact Our Operations and Profitability.

     Given that our core markets include New York City and Washington, D.C., we face a heightened risk of terrorism. We were directly impacted by the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks at our Battery Park City Hotel and Retail properties. These properties did not re-open until the second quarter of 2002. We have business interruption coverage and property damage coverage, which we believe will adequately cover our operating cash flow needs and property damage, although the ultimate resolution of our insurance claims has not yet been determined. The timing and strength of economic recovery in the area includes inherent risks that may negatively affect these properties’ operating performance and financial results.

     Future terrorist attacks may directly impact physical facilities in our real estate portfolio. In addition, future terrorist attacks or related armed conflicts could cause consumer confidence and spending to decrease, adversely affect mall traffic, increasing volatility in the U.S. and worldwide financial markets and economy and resulting in economic recessions in the U.S. or abroad. Any of these occurrences could have a significant impact on our operating results, revenues, and costs.

There may be a decrease in demand for space in large metropolitan areas that are considered at risk for future terrorist attacks, and this decrease may reduce our revenues from property rentals.

     We have significant investments in large metropolitan areas, including the New York, Boston, California, Washington D.C. and Denver metropolitan areas. In the aftermath of the terrorist attacks, tenants in these areas may choose to relocate their business to less populated, lower-profile areas of the United States that are not as likely to be targets of future terrorist activity. This in turn would trigger a decrease in the demand for space in these areas, which could increase vacancies in our properties and force us to lease our properties on less favorable terms. As a result, the value of our properties and the level of our revenue could decline materially.

6

Table of Contents

We May Be Unable To Sell Properties To Avoid Losses or To Reposition Our Portfolio.

     Because real estate investments are relatively illiquid, we may be unable to dispose of underperforming properties and may be unable to reposition our portfolio to meet changes in regional or local real estate markets. This in turn may cause us to incur operating losses in some of our properties and to write down the value of some of our properties.

Our Results of Operations and Cash Flows May Be Adversely Affected By Tenant Defaults or the Closing or Bankruptcy of Non-Tenant Anchors.

     Our results of operations and cash flows may be adversely affected if a significant number of our tenants were unable to meet their obligations or renew their leases or if we were unable to lease a significant amount of space on economically favorable lease terms. In the event of a default by a tenant, we may experience delays in payments and incur substantial costs in recovering our losses. This could be even more difficult if the tenant is bankrupt or insolvent.

     Ames Department Stores, Inc., one of our retail tenants that leased 236,000 square feet at three properties, filed for bankruptcy protection on August 20, 2001. Ames vacated all three properties and rejected the leases, which allows them to stop paying rent. The Hunting Park property has been re-leased, and it is anticipated, though not assured, that the replacement tenant’s rent will provide sufficient rent to cover debt service. A letter of forbearance has been signed with the lender to provide debt relief until May 2003. Currently the percentage rent from the new tenant is not sufficient enough to cover debt service and an additional forebearance agreement may be required. Strong interest has been expressed by several prospective tenants for the other two properties that were returned to us at the end of December 2002, and we are working with these potential tenants in efforts to achieve rental rates that will assure that debt service will be covered at these locations.

     Additionally, Metromedia Fiber Network, Inc., one of our office tenants that leased approximately 157,800 square feet, filed for bankruptcy protection on May 20, 2002. Metromedia vacated and rejected its lease in one building, but has assumed and continued the lease in the other location. All of the vacated Metromedia premises, approximately 29,700 square feet, have already been re-leased.

     The Ames and Metromedia bankruptcies and the bankruptcies of any of our other tenants could make it difficult for us to enforce our rights as lessor and protect our investment.

     In the context of retail centers, we also could be adversely affected if a non-tenant anchor were to close or enter bankruptcy. Although non-tenant anchors generally do not pay us rent, they typically contribute towards common area maintenance and other charges payable by us, and the loss of these revenues could adversely affect our results of operations and cash flows. Further, the temporary or permanent loss of an anchor is likely to reduce customer traffic in the retail center, which could result in reduced levels of percentage rent paid by retail center tenants, or cause retail center tenants to close or enter bankruptcy. One or more of these factors could cause the retail center to fail to meet its debt service requirements.

We Are Controlled by the Ratner, Miller and Shafran Families, Whose Interest May Differ from Those of Other Shareholders.

     Our authorized common stock consists of Class A common stock and Class B common stock. The economic rights of each class of common stock are identical, but the voting rights differ. The Class A common shareholder, voting as a separate class, is entitled to elect 25% of the members of the board of directors, while the Class B common shareholder, voting as a separate class, is entitled to elect the remaining 75% of the board of directors. On all other matters, the Class A common shareholder and Class B common shareholder vote together as a single class, with each share of Class A common stock entitled to one vote per share and each share of Class B common stock entitled to ten votes per share.

     At March 3, 2003, members of the Ratner, Miller and Shafran families, which includes members of our current board of directors and executive officers, owned 74.7% of the Class B common stock. RMS, Limited Partnership, which owned 74.4% of the Class B common stock, is a limited partnership, comprised of interests of these families, with eight individual general partners, currently consisting of:

	-		Samuel H. Miller, treasurer of Forest City and co-chairman of the board of directors;
	-		Charles A. Ratner, president, chief executive officer of Forest City and a director;
	-		Ronald A. Ratner, executive vice president of Forest City and a director;
	-		Brian J. Ratner, executive vice president — East Coast Development, Inc. of Forest City and a director;
	-		Deborah Ratner Salzberg, president of Forest City Washington, Inc., a subsidiary of Forest City, and a director;
	-		Joan K. Shafran, a director;
	-		Joseph Shafran; and
	-		Abraham Miller.

7

Table of Contents

     Joan K. Shafran is the sister of Joseph Shafran. Charles A. Ratner, James A. Ratner, executive vice president of Forest City and a director, and Ronald A. Ratner are brothers. Albert B. Ratner, co-chairman of the board of directors, is the father of Brian J. Ratner and Deborah Ratner Salzberg and is first cousin to Charles A. Ratner, James A. Ratner, Ronald A. Ratner, Joan K. Shafran and Joseph Shafran. Samuel H. Miller was married to Ruth Ratner Miller (now deceased), a sister of Albert B. Ratner, and is the father of Abraham Miller. General partners holding 60% of the total voting power of RMS, Limited Partnership determine how to vote the Class B common stock held by RMS, Limited Partnership. No person may transfer his or her interest in the Class B common stock held by RMS, Limited Partnership without complying with various rights of first refusal.

     In addition, at March 3, 2003, members of these families collectively owned 23.2% of the Class A common stock. As a result of their ownership in Forest City, these family members and RMS, Limited Partnership have the ability to elect a majority of the board of directors and to control the management and policies of Forest City. Generally, they may also determine, without the consent of our other shareholders, the outcome of any corporate transaction or other matters submitted to the shareholders for approval, including mergers, consolidations and the sale of all or substantially all of our assets and prevent or cause a change in control of Forest City.

     Even if these families or RMS, Limited Partnership reduce their level of ownership of Class B common stock below the level necessary to maintain a majority of voting power, the effect of specific provisions of Ohio law and our Restated Articles of Incorporation may have the effect of discouraging a third party from making a proposal to acquire us or delaying or preventing a change in control or management of Forest City without the approval of these families or RMS, Limited Partnership.

Some of the Relationships that Exist Between Us and Some of Our Directors and Executive Officers Create Conflicts of Interest.

RMS Investment Corp. provides property management and leasing services to us and is controlled by some of our affiliates.

     We paid approximately $205,000 and $163,000 as total compensation during fiscal 2002 and 2001, respectively, to RMS Investment Corp. for property management and leasing services. RMS Investment Corp. is controlled by members of the Ratner, Miller and Shafran families, including some of whom are our directors and executive officers.

     RMS Investment Corp. manages and provides leasing services to two of our Cleveland-area specialty retail centers, Golden Gate, which has 362,000 square feet, and Midtown Plaza, which has 258,000 square feet. The rate of compensation for these management services is 4% of all rental income, plus a leasing fee of 2% to 3% of rental income. Management believes these fees are comparable to those other management companies would charge.

Our Directors and Executive Officers May Have Interests in Competing Properties, and We Do Not Have Non-Compete Agreements With Our Directors and Executive Officers.

     Under our current policy, no director, officer or employee, including any member of the Ratner, Miller and Shafran families, is allowed to invest in a competing real estate opportunity without first obtaining the approval of the Forest City board of directors’ audit committee. We do not have non-compete agreements with any director, officer or employee. Upon leaving Forest City, any director, officer or employee could compete with us. An exception to our conflict-of-interest policy permits those of our principal shareholders who are officers and employees to own, alone or in conjunction with others, certain commercial, industrial and residential properties that may be developed, expanded, operated and sold independently of our business. The ownership of these properties by these principal shareholders makes it possible that conflicts of interest may arise between them and Forest City. Areas of possible conflict include the development or expansion of properties that may compete with our properties and the solicitation of tenants for the use of these properties.

Our High Debt Leverage May Prevent Us from Responding to Changing Business and Economic Conditions.

Our High Degree of Debt Leverage Could Limit Our Ability to Obtain Additional Financing or Adversely Affect the Market Price of Our Common Stock.

     We have a relatively high ratio of debt, consisting primarily of non-recourse mortgage debt, to total market capitalization, which was approximately 67% at January 31, 2003 based on the market value of our outstanding Class A common stock and Class B common stock, long-term debt and outstanding mortgage debt at that date. Our high leverage may adversely affect our ability to obtain additional financing for working capital, capital expenditures, acquisitions, development or other general corporate purposes and may make us more vulnerable to a downturn in the economy generally.

8

Table of Contents

     We do not expect to repay a substantial amount of the outstanding principal of our debt prior to maturity or to have funds on hand sufficient to repay this debt at maturity. As a result, it will be necessary for us to refinance our debt through new debt financings or through additional equity offerings. If interest rates are higher at the time of refinancing, our interest expense would increase, which would adversely affect our results of operations and cash flows. In addition, in the event we were unable to secure refinancing on acceptable terms, we might be forced to sell properties on unfavorable terms, which could result in the recognition of losses and could adversely affect our financial position, results of operations and cash flows. If we were unable to make the required payments on, or refinance when due, any debt secured by a mortgage on one of our properties, the mortgage lender could take that property through foreclosure and, as a result, we could lose income and asset value.

     Approximately $545 million of principal becomes due in fiscal 2003 and approximately $281 million becomes due in fiscal 2004, which includes anticipated future draws on financing commitments. Additionally, we have obtained credit enhanced mortgage debt for a number of our properties. Generally, the credit enhancement, such as a letter of credit, expires prior to the term of the underlying mortgage debt and must be renewed or replaced to prevent acceleration of the underlying mortgage debt. We treat credit enhanced debt as expiring in the year the credit enhancement expires.

     We cannot assure you that we will be able to refinance this debt, obtain renewals or replacement of credit enhancement devices, such as a letter of credit, or otherwise obtain funds by selling assets or by raising equity. Our inability to repay or refinance when the debt becomes due could cause the mortgage lender to foreclose on those properties.

     As of the date of this annual report on Form 10-K, we have no mortgages that are past their stated maturity date. From time to time, a non-recourse mortgage may become past due and if we are unsuccessful in negotiating an extension or refinancing, the lender could commence foreclosure proceedings.

Our Credit Facility Covenants Could Adversely Affect Our Financial Condition.

     We have guaranteed the obligations of one of our consolidated subsidiaries, Forest City Rental Properties Corporation, or FCRPC, under the FCRPC credit agreement. This guaranty imposes a number of restrictive covenants on Forest City Earning Before Depreciation and Deferred Taxes, including a prohibition on consolidations and mergers, limitations on the amount of debt, guarantees and property liens that Forest City may incur. The guaranty also requires Forest City to maintain a specified minimum cash flow coverage ratio, consolidated shareholders’ equity and Earnings Before Depreciation and Deferred Taxes (EBDT). Under the guaranty, we are also prohibited from repurchasing our Class A common stock or Class B common stock or paying dividends on our class A common stock or class B common stock to the extent the total amount of such repurchase and dividends would exceed $20.0 million in any year, measured as of the anniversary date of the guaranty.

     A failure to comply with any of the covenants under the guaranty or failure by FCRPC to comply with any of the covenants under the FCRPC credit agreement could, result in an event of default, which would trigger our obligation to repay all amounts outstanding under the FCRPC credit agreement. Our ability and the ability of FCRPC to comply with these covenants will depend upon the future economic performance of Forest City and FCRPC. We cannot assure you that these covenants will not affect our ability to finance our future operations or capital needs or to engage in other business activities that may be desirable or advantageous to us.

Any Rise in Interest Rates Would Increase Our Interest Costs.

     An increase in interest rates will increase the interest expenses associated with our floating-rate debt and the refinancing of any fixed-rate debt originally financed at a lower rate. At January 31, 2003, including properties accounted for on the equity method, a 100 basis point increase in taxable interest rates would have increased the pre-tax interest cost of our taxable variable-rate debt by approximately $7.0 million (including both mortgage debt and corporate borrowings) at our share. This calculation reflects the interest rate swaps and long-term LIBOR contracts in effect as of January 31, 2003. Our interest rate exposure would increase if one or more counterparties to these swap agreements defaulted. Although tax-exempt interest rates generally increase in an amount that is smaller than corresponding changes in taxable interest rates, a 100 basis point increase in tax-exempt interest rates would have increased the pre-tax interest cost of our tax-exempt variable-rate debt by approximately $6.1 million at our share.

If We Are Unable to Obtain Tax-Exempt Financings, Our Interest Costs Would Rise.

     We regularly utilize tax-exempt financings and tax increment financings, which generally bear interest rates below interest rates available through conventional taxable financing. We cannot assure you that tax-exempt bonds or similar government subsidized financing will continue to be available in the future, either for new development or acquisitions, or for the refinancing of outstanding debt. Our inability to obtain these financings or to refinance outstanding debt on favorable terms could significantly affect our ability to develop or acquire properties and could have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations and cash flows.

9

Table of Contents

Our Properties and Businesses Face Significant Competition.

     The real estate industry is highly competitive in our primary markets. Competition has over-saturated the market in Southfield, Michigan where our Trowbridge property is located. As a result we did not have sufficient cash to meet the debt service requirements on the property, and although we attempted to negotiate a restructuring with the successor mortgagee, we were not successful and the mortgagee will accept the deed in lieu of foreclosure. Additionally, we have experienced a slower leasing rate in our supported-living communities located in the New York metropolitan area due to a higher level of new competition than was initially anticipated.

     There are numerous other developers, managers and owners of commercial and residential real estate that compete with us nationally, regionally and/or locally, some of whom may have greater financial resources than us. They compete with us for management and leasing revenues, land for development, properties for acquisition and disposition and for anchor department stores and tenants for properties. We may not be able to successfully compete in these areas.

     Tenants at our retail properties face continual competition in attracting customers from retailers at other shopping centers, catalogue companies, various websites, warehouse stores, large discounters, outlet malls, wholesale clubs and direct mail and telemarketers. Our competitors and those of our tenants could have a material adverse effect on our ability to lease space in our properties and on the rents we can charge or the concessions we can grant. This in turn could materially and adversely affect our results of operations and cash flows, and could affect the realizable value of our assets upon sale.

     The lumber wholesaling business is also highly competitive. Competitors in the lumber brokerage business include numerous brokers and in-house sales departments of lumber manufacturers, many of which are larger and have greater resources than us.

Our Business Would Be Adversely Impacted Should an Uninsured Loss Occur or a Loss in Excess of Insurance Limits.

     We carry comprehensive liability, fire, flood, extended coverage and rental loss and environmental insurance with respect to our properties within insured limits and policy specifications that we believe are customary for similar properties. There are, however, specific types of losses, generally of a catastrophic nature, such as wars, terrorism or earthquakes, for which we cannot obtain adequate insurance coverage or, in our judgment, for which we cannot obtain insurance at a reasonable cost. In the event of an uninsured loss or a loss in excess of our insurance limits, we could lose both our invested capital in and anticipated profits from the affected property. Any such loss could materially and adversely affect our results of operations, cash flows and financial position.

     Under our current policy, which expires November 1, 2003, our properties are insured against acts of terrorism, subject to various limits, deductibles and exceptions for terrorist acts that constitute acts of war and terror acts that involve biological, chemical and nuclear materials. There was a significant increase in our insurance costs to obtain terrorism insurance and while we were able to pass some of the increase in costs to tenants, much of this increase was absorbed by us.

     We cannot assure you that we will be able to obtain adequate terrorism coverage at a reasonable cost once this policy expires. In addition, we cannot assure you that our insurers will be able to maintain reinsurance sufficient to cover any losses that may be incurred as a result of terrorist acts. As a result, our insurers’ ability to pay for any damages that we sustain as a result of a terrorist attack may be reduced.

     Additionally, most of our current project mortgages require all-risk insurance, and we cannot assure you that we will be able to obtain policies that will satisfy lender requirements.

     We are self-insured as to the first $500,000 of liability coverage and self-insured on the first $250,000 of property damage. Our captive insurance company, licensed and regulated by the State of Vermont, is adequately funded per state regulations to cover the first $250,000 of potential property damage claims. While we believe that our self-insurance reserves are adequate, we cannot assure you that we will not incur losses that exceed these self-insurance reserves.

Our Lumber Trading Group May Suffer if Home Building or Remodeling Activities Decline.

     The lumber business is highly cyclical. The Lumber Trading Group is exposed to the risk of downturns in new home building and home remodeling activities. While we believe that we have in place adequate controls to effectively manage this risk, we cannot assure you that we will not suffer a loss from or a downturn in the new home building and home remodeling markets.

10

Table of Contents

We Are Subject to Market Risk Associated With Changes in Lumber Prices.

     Lumber prices can be highly volatile. Although a majority of the Lumber Trading Group’s sales involve back-to-back trades in which we bring together a buyer and seller for an immediate purchase and sale, the remainder of our transactions are trades in which we take a short-term ownership position in lumber. This short-term ownership subjects us to market risk associated with fluctuations in lumber prices. Even though we may enter into lumber futures contracts as a hedge against lumber price fluctuations, we may be adversely affected by an unanticipated change in lumber prices.

We May Incur Unanticipated Costs and Liabilities Due to Environmental Problems.

     Under various federal, state and local environmental laws, an owner or operator of real property may become liable for the costs of the investigation, removal and remediation of hazardous or toxic substances at that property. These laws often impose liability without regard to whether the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the presence of the hazardous or toxic substances. The presence of hazardous or toxic substances, or the failure to remediate these substances when present, may adversely affect the owner’s ability to sell or rent that real property or to borrow funds using that real property as collateral. It may impose unanticipated costs and delays on projects. Persons who arrange for the disposal or treatment of hazardous or toxic wastes may also be liable for the costs of the investigation, removal and remediations of those wastes at the disposal or treatment facility, regardless of whether that facility is owned or operated by that person. In some instances, federal, state and local laws require abatement or removal of specific asbestos-containing materials in the event of demolition, renovations, remodeling, damage or decay. These laws also impose specific worker protection and notification requirements and govern emissions of and exposure to asbestos fibers in the air.

     We could be held liable for the environmental response costs associated with the release of some regulated substances or related claims, whether by us, our tenants, former owners or tenants of the affected property, or others. In addition to remediation actions brought by federal, state and local agencies, the presence of hazardous substances on a property could result in personal injury, contribution or other claims by private parties. These claims could result in costs or liabilities that could exceed the value of that property. We are not aware of any notification by any private party or governmental authority of any claim in connection with environmental conditions at any of our properties that we believe will involve any material expenditure. Nor are we aware of any environmental condition on any of our properties that we believe will involve any material expenditure. However, we cannot assure you that any non-compliance, liability, claim or expenditure will not arise in the future. To the extent that we are held liable for the release of regulated substances by tenants or others, we cannot assure you we would be able to recover our costs from those persons.

We Face Potential Liability from Residential Properties Accounted for on the Equity Method and Other Partnership Risks.

     As part of our financing strategy, we have financed several real estate projects through limited partnerships with investment partners. The investment partner, typically a large, sophisticated institution or corporate investor, invests cash in exchange for a limited partnership interest and special allocations of expenses and the majority of tax losses and credits associated with the project. These partnerships typically require us to indemnify, on an after-tax or “grossed up” basis, the investment partner against the failure to receive or the loss of allocated tax credits and tax losses.

     We believe that all the necessary requirements for qualification for such tax credits have been and will be met and that our investment partners will be able to receive expense allocations associated with the properties. However, we cannot assure you that this will, in fact, be the case or that we will not be required to indemnify our investment partners on an after-tax basis for these amounts. Any indemnification payment could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and cash flows.

     In addition to partnerships, we also use limited liability companies, or LLC’s, to finance some of our projects with third party lenders. Acting through our wholly-owned subsidiaries, we typically are a general partner or managing member in these partnerships or LLC’s. There are, however, instances in which we do not control or even participate in management or day-to-day operations.

The use of a partnership or LLC may involve special risks associated with the possibility that:

11

Table of Contents

     To the extent we are a general partner or managing partner, we may be exposed to unlimited liability, which may exceed our investment or equity in the partnership. If one of our subsidiaries is a general partner or managing partner of a particular partnership, it may be exposed to the same kind of unlimited liability.

Compliance or Failure to Comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and Other Similar Laws Could Result in Substantial Costs.

     The Americans with Disabilities Act generally requires that public buildings, including office buildings and hotels, be made accessible to disabled persons.

     In the event that we are not in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, the federal government could fine us or private parties could be awarded damages against us. If we are required to make substantial alterations and capital expenditures in one or more of our properties, including the removal of access barriers, it could adversely affect our results of operations and cash flows.

     We may also incur significant costs complying with other regulations. Our properties are subject to various federal, state and local regulatory requirements, such as state and local fire and safety requirements. If we fail to comply with these requirements, we could incur fines or private damage awards. We believe that our properties are currently in material compliance with all of these regulatory requirements. However, existing requirements may change and compliance with future requirements may require significant unanticipated expenditures that could affect our cash flows and results of operations.

Item 2. Properties

     The Corporate headquarters of Forest City Enterprises, Inc. is located in Cleveland, Ohio and is owned by the Company. The Company’s core markets include Boston, Denver, California, New York City and Washington, D. C.   Forest City Trading Group, Inc. maintains its headquarters in Portland, Oregon with 12 trading and administrative offices and one processing plant located in six states and one sales office in Canada.

     The following table provides summary information concerning the Company’s real estate portfolio as of January 31, 2003.

12

Table of Contents

Item 2. Properties

Forest City Rental Properties Corporation Portfolio of Real Estate

COMMERCIAL GROUP
OFFICE BUILDINGS

[Additional columns below]

[Continued from above table, first column(s) repeated]

						Total
						Square
Name		Major Tenants				Feet
Consolidated Office Buildings
† 35 Landsdowne Street		Millennium Pharmaceuticals					202,000
* 40 Landsdowne Street		Millennium Pharmaceuticals					215,000
65/80 Landsdowne Street		Partners HealthCare System					122,000
45/75 Sidney Street		Millennium Pharmaceuticals					277,000
† 88 Sidney Street		Alkermes, Inc					145,000
* Atlantic Terminal		Bank of New York					399,000
Chase Financial Tower		Chase Manhattan Mortgage Corporation					119,000
Eleven MetroTech Center		City of New York - CDCSA; E-911					216,000
Halle Building		Liggett-Stashower; Focal Communications; Climaco & Co., LPA;
		First American Equity					392,000
* Harlem Center		OGS-Office of Temporary Disability & Assistance; Office of
		General Service - State Liquor Authority					146,000
Jackson Building		Ariad Pharmaceuticals					99,000
Knight Ridder Building at Fairmont Plaza		Knight Ridder; Merrill Lynch; PaineWebber; Calpine					334,000
Nine MetroTech Center North		City of New York - Fire Department					317,000
* Nine MetroTech Center South		Empire Blue Cross and Blue Shield; City of New York-HRA					653,000
One MetroTech Center		Keyspan; Bear Stearns					933,000
One Pierrepont Plaza		Morgan Stanley; Goldman Sachs; U.S. Attorney					656,000
Pavilion		Metromedia Fiber Network; Pinnacle Fitness					250,000
Richards Building		Genzyme Biosurgery; Alkermes, Inc					126,000
Skylight Office Tower		Cap Gemini Ernst & Young LLP; Travelers Indemnity					320,000
Ten MetroTech Center		Internal Revenue Service					409,000
Terminal Tower		Forest City Enterprises, Inc.;Weston Hurd;Walter & Haverfield					584,000
* Twelve MetroTech Center							171,000	(1)
Two MetroTech Center		Securities Industry Automation Corp.; City of New York-BOE					521,000
Consolidated Office Buildings Subtotal							7,606,000
Unconsolidated Office Buildings
350 Massachusetts Avenue		Star Market; Tofias, Fleishman, Shapiro & Co.					169,000
Chagrin Plaza I & II		National City Bank; Benihana; H&R Block					114,000
Clark Building		Acambis					122,000
Emery-Richmond		Allstate Insurance					5,000
Enterprise Place		Kemper Insurance; University of Phoenix					125,000
Liberty Center		Federated Investors					527,000
One International Place		Battelle Memorial; Medical Life Insurance					88,000
Signature Square I		Ciuni & Panichi					79,000
Signature Square II		Allen Telecom, Inc.; Revenue Assistance					82,000
Washington Plaza		Washington Group; Chase Manhattan Mortgage Corporation					492,000
Unconsolidated Office Buildings Subtotal							1,803,000
Total Office Buildings at January 31, 2003							9,409,000
Total Office Buildings at January 31, 2002							8,864,000

*  Property under construction at January 31, 2003.

†  Property opened or acquired in 2002.

††Expansion of property opened in 2002.

(1)	At the completion of this project, the Company will own 171,000 square feet (approximately 15%) of the property’s 1.1 million total square feet. No leases for this space have been executed to date.

13

Table of Contents

Item 2. Properties (continued)

Forest City Rental Properties Corporation Portfolio of Real Estate

COMMERCIAL GROUP
RETAIL CENTERS

14

Table of Contents

Item 2.  Properties (continued)

Forest City Rental Properties Corporation Portfolio of Real Estate

COMMERCIAL GROUP
RETAIL CENTERS (continued)

[Additional columns below]

[Continued from above table, first column(s) repeated]

							Total				Gross
							Square				Leasable
Name		Major Tenants					Feet				Area
Unconsolidated Regional Malls
Boulevard Mall		JCPenney; Kaufmann’s; Sears; CompUSA; Michael’s					904,000				327,000
Chapel Hill Mall		Kaufmann’s; JCPenney; Sears					860,000				301,000
Charleston Town Center Mall		Kaufmann’s; JCPenney; Sears					897,000				361,000
††Galleria at Sunset		Dillard’s; Robinsons-May; Mervyn’s; JCPenney; Galyan’s					1,008,000				330,000
Mall at Robinson		Kaufmann’s; Sears; JCPenney; Dick’s Sporting Goods					872,000				318,000
Mall at Stonecrest		Rich’s; Dillard’s; JCPenney; Parisian; Sears;
		Megastar Cinemas					1,162,000				397,000
Manhattan Town Center Mall		Dillard’s; JCPenney; Sears					392,000				197,000
* Short Pump Town Center		Lord & Taylor; Nordstrom; Hecht’s; Dillard’s;
		Dick’s Sporting Goods					1,185,000				438,000
Unconsolidated Regional Malls Subtotal							7,280,000				2,669,000
Unconsolidated Specialty Retail Centers
Chapel Hill Suburban		Value City; HH Gregg					117,000				117,000
Golden Gate		OfficeMax; Old Navy; Michael’s; Linens-N-Things;
		World Market; Golf Galaxy					362,000				362,000
Marketplace at Riverpark		JCPenney; Best Buy; Linens-N-Things;
		Marshall’s; Office Max; Old Navy					466,000				466,000
Midtown Plaza		Office Max; Marc’s					258,000				258,000
Plaza at Robinson Town Center		T.J Maxx; Marshall’s					489,000				489,000
Showcase		Coca-Cola(R); M&M’s World/Ethel M Chocolates;
		Game Works; United Artists					186,000				186,000
Unconsolidated Specialty Retail Centers Subtotal							1,878,000				1,878,000
Unconsolidated Retail Centers Total							9,158,000				4,547,000
Total Retail Centers at January 31, 2003							18,120,000				10,646,000
Total Retail Centers at January 31, 2002							18,027,000				10,385,000

COMMERCIAL GROUP

HOTELS

15

Table of Contents

Item 2. Properties (continued)

Forest City Rental Properties Corporation Portfolio of Real Estate

RESIDENTIAL GROUP
APARTMENTS