Back to GetFilings.com



Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, DC 20549

 


 

FORM 10-K

 


 

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

 

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004

 

or

 

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

 

For the transition period from              to             

 

Commission File Number 0-24763

 


 

REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

 


 

Delaware   59-3429602

(State or other jurisdiction of

incorporation or organization)

 

(I.R.S. Employer

identification No.)

121 West Forsyth Street, Suite 200

Jacksonville, Florida

  32202
(Address of principal executive offices)   (zip code)

 

(904) 598-7000

(Registrant’s telephone No.)

 


 

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

 

None

(Title of Class)

 

Not Applicable

(Name of exchange on which registered)

 

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

Class B Units of Partnership Interest

 


 

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 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.  x

 

The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common stock held by non-affiliates of the Registrant and the number of shares of Registrant’s voting common stock outstanding is not applicable.

 

Documents Incorporated by Reference

 

Regency Centers Corporation is the general partner of Regency Centers, L.P. Portions of Regency Centers Corporation’s Proxy Statement in connection with its 2005 Annual Meeting of Shareholders are incorporated by reference in Part III.

 



Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

Item No.


      

Form 10-K

Report Page


    PART I     
1.  

Business

   1
2.  

Properties

   4
3.  

Legal Proceedings

   15
4.  

Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders

   15
    PART II     
5.  

Market for the Registrant’s Common Equity and Related Shareholder Matters

   15
6.  

Selected Consolidated Financial Data

   17
7.  

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

   18
7a.  

Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk

   36
8.  

Consolidated Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

   36
9.  

Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure

   36
9a.  

Controls and Procedures

   37
9b.  

Other Information

   37
    PART III     
10.  

Directors and Executive Officers of the Registrant

   37
11.  

Executive Compensation

   38
12.  

Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters

   39
13.  

Certain Relationships and Related Transactions

   39
14.  

Principal Accounting Fees and Services

   40
    PART IV     

15.

 

Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules

   41


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Forward Looking Statements

 

In addition to historical information, the following information contains forward-looking statements as defined under federal securities laws. These statements are based on current expectations, estimates and projections about the industry and markets in which Regency operates, and management’s beliefs and assumptions. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve certain known and unknown risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by such statements. Such risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to, changes in national and local economic conditions; financial difficulties of merchants and retailers; competitive market conditions, including pricing of acquisitions and sales of properties and out-parcels; changes in expected leasing activity and market rents; timing of acquisitions, development starts and sales of properties and out-parcels; weather; the ability to obtain governmental approvals; and meeting development schedules. The following discussion should be read in conjunction with the accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes thereto of Regency Centers, L.P. appearing elsewhere within.

 

PART I

 

Item 1. Business

 

Operating and Investment Philosophy

 

Regency Centers Corporation (“Regency” or the “Company”) is a qualified real estate investment trust (“REIT”), which began operations in 1993. Our primary operating and investment goal is long-term growth in earnings per share and total shareholder return, which we hope to achieve by focusing on a strategy of owning, operating and developing neighborhood and community shopping centers that are anchored by market-leading supermarkets, and located in areas with attractive demographics. Regency owns and operates its shopping centers through its operating partnership, Regency Centers, L.P. (“RCLP”), in which it currently owns approximately 98% of the operating partnership units. Regency’s operating, investing and financing activities are generally performed by RCLP, its wholly owned subsidiaries and its joint ventures with third parties.

 

Currently, our real estate investment portfolio before depreciation totals $4.5 billion with 291 shopping centers in 23 states, including approximately $1.4 billion in real estate assets composed of 78 shopping centers owned by unconsolidated joint ventures in 17 states. [Portfolio information is presented (a) on a combined basis, including unconsolidated joint ventures (“Combined Basis”), (b) on a basis that excludes the unconsolidated joint ventures (“Consolidated Properties”) and (c) on a basis that includes only the unconsolidated joint ventures (“Unconsolidated Properties”).] We believe that providing our shopping center portfolio information under these methods provides a more complete understanding of the properties that we own, including those that we partially own and for which we provide property and asset management services. At December 31, 2004, our gross leasable area (“GLA”) on a Combined Basis totaled 33.8 million square feet and was 92.7% leased. The GLA for the Consolidated Properties totaled 24.5 million square feet and was 91.2% leased. The GLA for the Unconsolidated Properties totaled 9.3 million square feet and was 96.7% leased.

 

We earn revenues and generate operating cash flow by leasing space to grocers and retail side-shop tenants in our shopping centers. We experience growth in revenues by increasing occupancy and rental rates at currently owned shopping centers, and by developing new shopping centers. A neighborhood center is a convenient, cost-effective distribution platform for food retailers. Grocery anchored centers generate substantial daily traffic and offer sustainable competitive advantages to their tenants. This high traffic generates increased sales, thereby driving higher occupancy, rental rates and rental-rate growth for Regency, which we expect to sustain our growth in earnings per share and increase the value of our portfolio over the long term.

 

We seek a range of strong national, regional and local specialty tenants, for the same reason that we choose to anchor our centers with leading grocers. We have created a formal partnering process — the Premier Customer Initiative (“PCI”) — to promote mutually beneficial relationships with our non-grocer specialty retailers. The objective of the PCI is for Regency to build a base of specialty tenants who represent the “best-in-class” operators in their respective merchandising categories. Such tenants reinforce the consumer appeal and other strengths of a center’s grocery anchor, help to stabilize a center’s occupancy, reduce re-leasing downtime, reduce tenant turnover and yield higher sustainable rents.

 

We grow our shopping center portfolio through new shopping center development, where we acquire the land and construct the building. Development is customer driven, meaning we generally have an executed lease from the anchor before we start construction. Developments serve the growth needs of our market-leading grocers

 

1


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

and anchors, and our specialty retail customers, resulting in modern shopping centers with long-term leases from the grocery anchors and produce attractive returns on our invested capital. This development process can require up to 36 months from initial land or redevelopment acquisition through construction, lease-up and stabilization of rental income, depending upon the size of the project. Generally, anchor tenants begin operating their stores prior to the completion of construction of the entire center, resulting in rental income during the development phase.

 

We intend to maintain a conservative capital structure to fund our growth programs without compromising our investment-grade ratings. Our approach is founded on our self-funding business model. This model utilizes center “recycling” as a key component. Our recycling strategy calls for us to re-deploy the proceeds from the sales of properties into new, higher-quality developments that we expect to generate sustainable revenue growth and more attractive returns. Our commitment to maintaining a high-quality shopping center portfolio dictates that we continually assess the value of all of our properties and sell those that no longer meet our long-term investment criteria.

 

Joint venturing of shopping centers also provides us with a capital source for new development, as well as the opportunity to earn fees for asset and property management services. As asset manager, we are engaged by our partners to apply similar operating, investment, and capital strategies to the portfolios owned by the joint ventures. Joint ventures grow their shopping center investments through acquisitions from third parties or direct purchases from Regency. Although selling properties to joint ventures reduces our ownership interest, we continue to share in the risks and rewards of centers that meet our long-term investment strategy. Regency is not subject to liability and has no obligations or guarantees of the joint ventures beyond its ownership percentage.

 

Risk Factors Relating to Ownership of Regency Common Stock

 

We are subject to certain business risks that could affect our industry which include, among others:

 

  increased competition from super-centers such as Wal-Mart could result in grocery anchor closings or consolidations in the grocery store industry which could reduce our cash flow;

 

  a slow down in our shopping center development program would reduce our operating revenues and gains from sales;

 

  the bankruptcy or insolvency of, or a downturn in the business of, any of our major tenants could reduce our cash flow,

 

  the possibility that major tenants will not renew their leases as they expire or renew at lower rental rates could reduce our cash flow,

 

  the internet and e-commerce could reduce the demand for tenants to occupy our shopping centers,

 

  vacant anchor space could affect the entire shopping center because of the loss of the anchor’s customer drawing power,

 

  poor market conditions could create an over supply of space or a reduction in demand for our shopping centers,

 

  risks relating to leverage, including uncertainty that we will be able to refinance our indebtedness, and the risk of higher interest rates,

 

  our inability to satisfy our cash requirements from operations and the possibility that we may be required to borrow funds to meet distribution requirements in order to maintain our qualification as a REIT,

 

  potential liability for unknown or future environmental matters and costs of compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act,

 

  the risk of uninsured losses, and

 

  unfavorable economic conditions could also result in the inability of tenants in certain retail sectors to meet their lease obligations and could adversely affect our ability to attract and retain desirable tenants.

 

2


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Compliance with Governmental Regulations

 

Under various federal, state and local laws, ordinances and regulations, we may be liable for the cost to remove or remediate certain hazardous or toxic substances at our shopping centers. These laws often impose liability without regard to whether the owner knew of, or was responsible for, the presence of the hazardous or toxic substances. The cost of required remediation and the owner’s liability for remediation could exceed the value of the property and/or the aggregate assets of the owner. The presence of such substances, or the failure to properly remediate such substances, may adversely affect the owner’s ability to sell or rent the property or borrow using the property as collateral. We have a number of properties that could require or are currently undergoing varying levels of environmental remediation. Environmental remediation is not currently expected to have a material financial effect on us due to reserves for remediation, insurance programs designed to mitigate the cost of remediation and various state-regulated programs that shift the responsibility and cost to the state.

 

Competition

 

We are among the largest publicly-held owners of grocery-anchored shopping centers in the nation based on revenues, number of properties, gross leaseable area and market capitalization. There are numerous companies and private individuals engaged in the ownership, development, acquisition and operation of shopping centers which compete with us in our targeted markets. This results in competition for attracting grocery anchor tenants, as well as, the acquisition of existing shopping centers and new development sites. We believe that the principal competitive factors in attracting tenants in our market areas are location, demographics, rental costs, tenant mix, property age and maintenance. We believe that our competitive advantages include our locations within our market areas, our strong demographics surrounding our shopping centers, our relationships with our grocery anchor tenants and side-shop retailers, our PCI program which allows us to provide retailers with multiple locations, our practice of maintaining and renovating of our shopping centers, and our ability to source and develop new shopping centers.

 

Changes in Policies

 

Our Board of Directors establishes the policies that govern our investment and operating strategies including, among others, development and acquisition of shopping centers, tenant and market focus, debt and equity financing policies, quarterly distributions to shareholders, and REIT tax status. The Board of Directors may amend these policies at any time without a vote of our shareholders.

 

Employees

 

Our headquarters are located at 121 West Forsyth Street, Suite 200, Jacksonville, Florida. We presently maintain 18 offices in 12 states where we conduct management, leasing, construction, and investment activities. At December 31, 2004, we had 385 employees and we believe that our relations with our employees are good.

 

Company Website Access and SEC Filings

 

The Company’s website may be accessed at www.regencycenters.com. All of our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission can be accessed through our website promptly after filing; however, in the event that the website is inaccessible, then we will provide paper copies of our most recent annual report on Form 10-K, the most recent quarterly report on Form 10-Q, current reports filed or furnished on Form 8-K, and all related amendments, excluding exhibits, free of charge upon request.

 

3


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Item 2. Properties

 

The following table is a list of the shopping centers summarized by state and in order of largest holdings presented on a Combined Basis:

 

     December 31, 2004

    December 31, 2003

 

Location


   #
Properties


   GLA

   % of Total
GLA


    %
Leased


    #
Properties


   GLA

   % of Total
GLA


    %
Leased


 

California

   51    6,527,802    19.3 %   91.9 %   49    5,917,372    19.5 %   90.8 %

Florida

   50    5,970,898    17.7 %   94.9 %   50    5,943,345    19.6 %   94.3 %

Texas

   32    3,968,940    11.7 %   89.3 %   41    5,086,086    16.7 %   88.1 %

Georgia

   36    3,383,495    10.0 %   97.4 %   20    2,008,066    6.6 %   95.8 %

North Carolina

   13    1,890,444    5.6 %   94.2 %   3    408,211    1.3 %   97.0 %

Ohio

   14    1,876,013    5.5 %   87.7 %   14    1,901,538    6.3 %   90.6 %

Colorado

   15    1,639,055    4.8 %   98.0 %   14    1,623,674    5.3 %   94.2 %

Virginia

   12    1,488,324    4.4 %   91.1 %   10    1,272,369    4.2 %   89.1 %

Illinois

   9    1,191,424    3.5 %   98.0 %   6    444,234    1.5 %   96.5 %

Washington

   11    1,098,752    3.2 %   97.6 %   10    1,050,061    3.5 %   98.7 %

Oregon

   8    838,056    2.5 %   95.5 %   9    1,020,470    3.4 %   96.4 %

Tennessee

   7    697,034    2.1 %   70.4 %   7    652,906    2.1 %   91.5 %

Arizona

   5    588,486    1.7 %   93.1 %   8    838,715    2.8 %   92.2 %

South Carolina

   8    522,109    1.5 %   95.7 %   5    339,926    1.1 %   95.7 %

Michigan

   4    368,348    1.1 %   93.4 %   4    368,260    1.2 %   87.2 %

Maryland

   2    326,638    1.0 %   93.9 %   1    188,243    0.6 %   90.2 %

Alabama

   4    324,044    1.0 %   86.7 %   6    543,330    1.8 %   85.5 %

Kentucky

   2    302,670    0.9 %   97.5 %   3    323,029    1.1 %   97.8 %

Delaware

   2    240,418    0.7 %   99.9 %   2    240,418    0.8 %   99.5 %

Pennsylvania

   2    225,697    0.7 %   100.0 %   1    6,000    —       100.0 %

New Hampshire

   2    138,488    0.4 %   50.0 %   —      —      —       —    

Nevada

   1    118,495    0.4 %   45.5 %   —      —      —       —    

Indiana

   1    90,340    0.3 %   69.2 %   —      —      —       —    

Missouri

   —      —      —       —       1    82,498    0.3 %   91.5 %

New Jersey

   —      —      —       —       1    88,993    0.3 %   89.4 %
    
  
  

 

 
  
  

 

Total

   291    33,815,970    100.0 %   92.7 %   265    30,347,744    100.0 %   92.2 %
    
  
  

 

 
  
  

 

 

4


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Item 2. Properties (continued)

 

The following table is a list of the shopping centers summarized by state and in order of largest holdings presented for Consolidated Properties:

 

     December 31, 2004

    December 31, 2003

 

Location


   #
Properties


   GLA

   % of Total
GLA


    %
Leased


    #
Properties


   GLA

   % of Total
GLA


    %
Leased


 

California

   44    5,479,470    22.3 %   90.5 %   41    4,859,526    19.8 %   90.1 %

Florida

   38    4,684,299    19.1 %   94.6 %   39    4,738,901    19.3 %   94.1 %

Texas

   29    3,652,338    14.9 %   88.8 %   34    4,167,951    17.0 %   87.9 %

Ohio

   13    1,767,110    7.2 %   87.1 %   13    1,792,635    7.3 %   92.7 %

Georgia

   17    1,656,297    6.8 %   96.1 %   17    1,656,294    6.7 %   96.8 %

Colorado

   11    1,093,403    4.4 %   97.6 %   11    1,223,072    5.0 %   92.6 %

North Carolina

   9    970,508    3.9 %   97.5 %   9    970,558    3.9 %   98.6 %

Virginia

   8    925,491    3.8 %   86.4 %   8    910,103    3.7 %   85.2 %

Washington

   9    747,440    3.0 %   97.3 %   7    662,573    2.7 %   95.6 %

Tennessee

   6    633,034    2.6 %   67.4 %   6    444,234    1.8 %   96.5 %

Oregon

   6    574,458    2.3 %   96.1 %   7    688,359    2.8 %   92.2 %

Arizona

   4    480,839    2.0 %   91.6 %   6    545,277    2.2 %   90.5 %

Illinois

   3    415,011    1.7 %   97.4 %   3    408,211    1.7 %   97.0 %

Michigan

   4    368,348    1.5 %   93.4 %   4    368,260    1.5 %   87.2 %

Delaware

   2    240,418    1.0 %   99.9 %   2    240,418    1.0 %   99.5 %

Pennsylvania

   2    225,697    0.9 %   100.0 %   1    6,000    —       100.0 %

South Carolina

   2    140,982    0.6 %   85.7 %   3    223,315    0.9 %   94.3 %

New Hampshire

   2    138,488    0.6 %   50.0 %   —      —      —       —    

Alabama

   2    130,486    0.5 %   97.3 %   5    468,238    1.9 %   83.1 %

Nevada

   1    118,495    0.5 %   45.5 %   —      —      —       —    

Indiana

   1    90,340    0.4 %   69.2 %   —      —      —       —    

Kentucky

   —      —      —       —       1    20,360    0.1 %   93.1 %

Missouri

   —      —      —       —       1    82,498    0.3 %   91.5 %

New Jersey

   —      —      —       —       1    88,993    0.4 %   89.4 %
    
  
  

 

 
  
  

 

Total

   213    24,532,952    100.0 %   91.2 %   219    24,565,776    100.0 %   91.8 %
    
  
  

 

 
  
  

 

 

The following table is a list of the shopping centers summarized by state and in order of largest holdings presented for Unconsolidated Properties owned in joint ventures:

 

     December 31, 2004

    December 31, 2003

 

Location


   # Properties

   GLA

   % of Total
GLA


    %
Leased


    #
Properties


   GLA

   % of Total
GLA


    %
Leased


 

Georgia

   19    1,727,198    18.6 %   98.6 %   3    351,772    6.1 %   91.1 %

Florida

   12    1,286,599    13.8 %   96.1 %   11    1,204,444    20.8 %   98.0 %

California

   7    1,048,332    11.3 %   99.1 %   8    1,057,846    18.3 %   97.5 %

North Carolina

   4    919,936    9.9 %   90.7 %   1    79,503    1.4 %   100.0 %

Illinois

   6    776,413    8.4 %   98.3 %   —      —      —       —    

Virginia

   4    562,833    6.1 %   98.9 %   2    362,266    6.3 %   99.0 %

Colorado

   4    545,652    5.9 %   98.7 %   3    400,602    6.9 %   99.1 %

South Carolina

   6    381,127    4.1 %   99.3 %   2    116,611    2.0 %   98.5 %

Washington

   2    351,312    3.8 %   98.1 %   2    357,897    6.2 %   97.8 %

Maryland

   2    326,638    3.5 %   93.9 %   1    188,243    3.3 %   90.2 %

Texas

   3    316,602    3.4 %   94.6 %   7    918,135    15.9 %   89.2 %

Kentucky

   2    302,670    3.3 %   97.5 %   2    302,669    5.2 %   98.1 %

Oregon

   2    263,598    2.8 %   94.3 %   1    150,356    2.5 %   92.5 %

Alabama

   2    193,558    2.1 %   79.6 %   1    75,092    1.3 %   100.0 %

Ohio

   1    108,903    1.2 %   96.1 %   1    108,903    1.9 %   88.4 %

Arizona

   1    107,647    1.1 %   100.0 %   1    107,629    1.9 %   96.3 %

Tennessee

   1    64,000    0.7 %   100.0 %   —      —      —       —    
    
  
  

 

 
  
  

 

Total

   78    9,283,018    100.0 %   96.7 %   46    5,781,968    100.0 %   95.7 %
    
  
  

 

 
  
  

 

 

5


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Item 2. Properties (continued)

 

The following table summarizes the largest tenants occupying our shopping centers on a Combined Basis as of December 31, 2004 based upon a percentage of total annualized base rent exceeding .5%. The table includes 100% of the GLA in unconsolidated joint ventures, however annualized base rent includes only Regency’s pro-rata share of rent from unconsolidated joint ventures.

 

Tenant


   GLA

   Percent to
Company
Owned GLA


    Rent

   Percentage of
Annualized
Base Rent


    Number of
Leased
Stores


   Anchor
Owned
Stores (a)


Kroger

   3,577,584    10.6 %   26,826,566    7.88 %   60    3

Publix

   2,862,241    8.5 %   16,547,979    4.86 %   61    —  

Safeway

   2,230,123    6.6 %   14,195,833    4.17 %   44    7

Albertsons

   963,707    2.8 %   7,550,659    2.22 %   18    6

Blockbuster

   389,540    1.2 %   6,739,697    1.98 %   70    —  

H.E.B. Grocery

   417,151    1.2 %   4,497,612    1.32 %   5    —  

CVS

   334,018    1.0 %   3,588,428    1.05 %   24    —  

Walgreens

   255,156    0.8 %   3,077,669    0.90 %   18    —  

Harris Teeter

   307,499    0.9 %   3,072,112    0.90 %   6    —  

Whole Foods

   115,846    0.3 %   2,958,883    0.87 %   4    —  

Washington Mutual Bank

   124,647    0.4 %   2,564,454    0.75 %   35    —  

Kohl’s Department Store

   177,374    0.5 %   2,372,487    0.70 %   2    —  

Hallmark

   196,486    0.6 %   2,314,766    0.68 %   44    —  

Stater Brothers

   185,605    0.5 %   1,961,645    0.58 %   4    —  

The UPS Store

   123,350    0.4 %   1,957,382    0.57 %   88    —  

Shoppers Food Warehouse/ Supervalu

   249,809    0.7 %   1,946,736    0.57 %   4    —  

Starbucks

   86,756    0.3 %   1,933,276    0.57 %   57    —  

K-Mart/ Sears

   541,855    1.6 %   1,900,209    0.56 %   5    —  

T.J. Maxx / Marshalls

   272,263    0.8 %   1,867,017    0.55 %   10    —  

Circuit City

   117,077    0.3 %   1,857,317    0.55 %   4    —  

Hollywood Video

   134,241    0.4 %   1,847,298    0.54 %   21    —  

Petco

   157,362    0.5 %   1,830,663    0.54 %   12    —  

Winn Dixie

   376,806    1.1 %   1,813,599    0.53 %   8    —  

Staples

   149,006    0.4 %   1,800,535    0.53 %   7    —  

Subway

   91,486    0.3 %   1,770,570    0.52 %   72    —  

Michaels

   203,934    0.6 %   1,747,353    0.51 %   8    —  

Great Clips

   95,318    0.3 %   1,734,372    0.51 %   75    —  

(a) Includes stores owned by anchor tenant that are attached to our centers.

 

Regency’s leases have terms generally ranging from three to five years for tenant space under 5,000 square feet. Leases greater than 10,000 square feet generally have lease terms in excess of five years, mostly comprised of anchor tenants. Many of the anchor leases contain provisions allowing the tenant the option of extending the term of the lease at expiration. The leases provide for the monthly payment in advance of fixed minimum rentals, additional rents calculated as a percentage of the tenant’s sales, the tenant’s pro rata share of real estate taxes, insurance, and common area maintenance expenses, and reimbursement for utility costs if not directly metered.

 

6


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Item 2. Properties (continued)

 

The following table sets forth a schedule of lease expirations for the next ten years, assuming no tenants renew their leases:

 

Lease Expiration Year


   Expiring
GLA (2)


   Percent of
Total
Company
GLA (2)


    Minimum
Rent
Expiring
Leases (3)


   Percent of
Total
Minimum
Rent (3)


 

(1)

   365,535    1.2 %   $ 4,493,075    1.4 %

2005

   2,001,378    6.7 %     26,773,606    8.2 %

2006

   2,952,893    9.9 %     38,045,139    11.7 %

2007

   3,317,419    11.1 %     41,070,841    12.7 %

2008

   2,981,174    10.0 %     37,237,989    11.5 %

2009

   2,761,571    9.3 %     40,505,308    12.5 %

2010

   1,468,458    4.9 %     14,424,334    4.4 %

2011

   1,012,542    3.4 %     11,519,474    3.5 %

2012

   1,374,886    4.6 %     13,237,755    4.1 %

2013

   894,291    3.0 %     10,046,038    3.1 %

2014

   1,235,068    4.1 %     11,197,764    3.5 %
    
  

 

  

10 Yr. Total

   20,365,215    68.2 %   $ 248,551,323    76.6 %
    
  

 

  


(1) leased currently under month to month rent or in process of renewal
(2) represents GLA for the Combined properties
(3) total minimum rent includes current minimum rent and future contractual rent steps for the Consolidated properties, but excludes additional rent such as percentage rent, common area maintenance, real estate taxes and insurance reimbursements

 

See the property table below and also see Item 7, Management’s Discussion and Analysis for further information about Regency’s properties.

 

7


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Property Name


   Year
Acquired


  

Year

Con-

structed (1)


   Gross
Leasable
Area (GLA)


   Percent
Leased (2)


   

Grocery Anchor


  

Drug Store & Other

Anchors > 10,000 Sq Ft


CALIFORNIA

                              

Los Angeles / Southern CA

                              

4S Commons Town Center (3)

   2004    2004    265,239    49.9 %   Ralph’s    —  

4S Fitness Center (3)

   2004    2004    38,000    100.0 %   —      LA Fitness

Amerige Heights Town Center (5)

   2000    2000    96,679    100.0 %   Albertson’s    Target (4)

Bear Creek Village Center (3)

   2003    2004    80,318    96.1 %   Stater Brothers    —  

Campus Marketplace (5)

   2000    2000    144,288    100.0 %   Ralph’s    Long’s Drug, Discovery Isle Child Development Center

Costa Verde

   1999    1988    178,622    100.0 %   Albertson’s    Bookstar

El Camino

   1999    1995    135,884    99.1 %   Von’s Food & Drug    Sav-On Drugs

El Norte Parkway Pla

   1999    1984    87,990    86.6 %   Von’s Food & Drug    —  

Falcon Ridge (3)

   2003    2004    232,610    93.4 %   Stater Brothers    Target (4), Sports Authority, Ross Dress for Less, Linen’s N’ Things, Michaels, Pier 1 Imports

French Valley (3)

   2004    2004    103,161    61.6 %   Stater Brothers    —  

Friars Mission

   1999    1989    146,897    100.0 %   Ralph’s    Long’s Drug

Garden Village Shopping Center (5)

   2000    2000    112,767    100.0 %   Albertson’s    Rite Aid

Gelson’s Westlake Market Plaza

   2002    2002    84,848    98.6 %   Gelsons    John of Italy Salon & Spa

Hasley Canyon Village (3)

   2003    2003    69,800    100.0 %   Ralph’s    —  

Heritage Plaza

   1999    1981    231,602    98.9 %   Ralph’s    Sav-On Drugs, Hands On Bicycles, Inc., Total Woman, Ace Hardware

Morningside Plaza

   1999    1996    91,600    98.2 %   Stater Brother    —  

Newland Center

   1999    1985    149,174    100.0 %   Albertson’s    —  

Oakbrook Plaza

   1999    1982    83,279    100.0 %   Albertson’s    Long’s Drug

Park Plaza Shopping Center (5)

   2001    1991    197,166    99.6 %   Von’s Food & Drug    Sav-On Drugs, Petco, Ross Dress For Less, Office Depot

Plaza Hermosa

   1999    1984    94,940    100.0 %   Von’s Food & Drug    Sav-On Drugs

Rona Plaza

   1999    1989    51,754    100.0 %   Food 4 Less    —  

Santa Ana Downtown

   1999    1987    100,305    100.0 %   Food 4 Less    Famsa, Inc.

Seal Beach (5)

   2002    1966    74,214    92.9 %   Safeway    Sav-On Drugs

The Shops of Santa Barbara

   2003    2004    51,568    87.2 %   —      Circuit City

The Shops of Santa Barbara Phase II (3)

   2004    2004    69,457    57.6 %   Whole Foods    —  

Twin Peaks

   1999    1988    198,139    100.0 %   Albertson’s    Target

Valencia Crossroads

   2002    2003    167,857    100.0 %   Whole Foods    Kohl’s

Ventura Village

   1999    1984    76,070    98.5 %   Von’s Food & Drug    —  

Victoria Gateway Center (3)

   2003    2004    94,998    98.2 %   —      Circuit City, Recreational Equipment, Drexel Heritage, Beverages & More!

Vista Village Phase I

   2002    2003    126,266    100.0 %   Sprout’s    Krikorian Theatres, Linen’s N’ Things, Lowe’s

Vista Village Phase II (3)

   2002    2003    55,000    100.0 %   —      Staples

Westlake Village Plaza and Center

   1999    1975    190,519    98.0 %   Von’s Food & Drug    Sav-On Drugs, Long’s Drug

Westridge

   2001    2003    92,287    100.0 %   Albertson’s    Beverages & More!

Woodman Van Nuys

   1999    1992    107,614    100.0 %   Gigante    —  

San Francisco / Northern CA

                              

Alameda Bridgeside Shopping Center (3)

   2003    2004    104,983    58.9 %   Nob Hill    —  

Blossom Valley

   1999    1990    93,316    100.0 %   Safeway    Long’s Drug

Clayton Valley (3)

   2003    2004    236,683    83.0 %   —      Yardbirds Home Center, Long’s Drugs, Dollar Tree

Clovis Commons (3)

   2004    2004    183,286    0.0 %   —      Super Target (4)

Corral Hollow (5)

   2000    2000    167,184    100.0 %   Safeway    Long’s Drug, Orchard Supply & Hardware

Diablo Plaza

   1999    1982    63,214    100.0 %   Safeway (4)    Long’s Drug, Jo-Ann Fabrics

El Cerrito Plaza (5)

   2000    2000    256,034    98.8 %   Albertson’s (4) /Trader Joe’s    Long’s Drug, Bed Bath & Beyond, Barnes & Noble, Copelands Sports, Petco, Ross Dress For Less

Encina Grande

   1999    1965    102,499    99.1 %   Safeway    Walgreens

Folsom Prairie City Crossing

   1999    1999    90,209    100.0 %   Safeway    —  

Gilroy

   2002    2003    322,955    99.5 %   —      Kohl’s, Sportsmart, Ross Dress for Less, Bed Bath & Beyond, Michaels, Barnes & Noble, Petsmart, Pier 1 Imports, Beverages & More!, Target (4)

Loehmanns Plaza California

   1999    1983    113,310    100.0 %   Safeway (4)    Long’s Drug, Loehmann’s

Powell Street Plaza

   2001    1987    165,928    100.0 %   Trader Joe’s    Circuit City, Copelands Sports, Ethan Allen, Jo-Ann Fabrics, Ross Dress For Less

San Leandro

   1999    1982    50,432    100.0 %   Safeway (4)    Long’s Drug

Sequoia Station

   1999    1996    103,148    100.0 %   Safeway (4)    Long’s Drug, Barnes & Noble, Old Navy, Wherehouse Music

Strawflower Village

   1999    1985    78,827    100.0 %   Safeway    Long’s Drug

Tassajara Crossing

   1999    1990    146,188    99.0 %   Safeway    Long’s Drug, Ace Hardware

West Park Plaza

   1999    1996    88,103    100.0 %   Safeway    Rite Aid

Woodside Central

   1999    1993    80,591    100.0 %   —      CEC Entertainment, Marshalls. Target (4)
              
  

        

Subtotal/Weighted Average (CA)

             6,527,802    91.9 %         
              
  

        

FLORIDA

                              

Ft. Myers / Cape Coral

                              

Grande Oak

   2000    2000    78,784    100.0 %   Publix    —  

Jacksonville / North Florida

                              

Anastasia Plaza (5)

   1993    1988    102,342    92.5 %   Publix    —  

Bolton Plaza

   1994    1988    172,938    93.4 %   —      Wal-Mart

Carriage Gate

   1994    1978    76,833    95.6 %   —      Leon County Tax Collector, TJ Maxx

Courtyard Shopping Center

   1993    1987    137,256    100.0 %   Albertson’s (3)    Target

Fleming Island

   1998    2000    136,662    100.0 %   Publix    Stein Mart, Target (4)

Highland Square (5)

   1998    1999    262,194    96.8 %   Publix/Winn-Dixie    CVS, Bailey’s Powerhouse Gym, Beall’s Outlet, Big Lots

 

8


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Property Name


   Year
Acquired


  

Year

Con-

structed (1)


   Gross
Leasable
Area (GLA)


   Percent
Leased (2)


   

Grocery Anchor


  

Drug Store & Other
Anchors > 10,000 Sq Ft


FLORIDA (continued)

                              

Jacksonville /North Florida (continued)

                              

John’s Creek Shopping Center (3)

   2003    2004    105,414    75.6 %   Publix    Walgreens

Julington Village (5)

   1999    1999    81,820    100.0 %   Publix    CVS

Lynnhaven (5)

   2001    2001    63,871    100.0 %   Publix    —  

Millhopper

   1993    1974    84,065    100.0 %   Publix    Jean Coutou, Jo-Ann Fabrics

Newberry Square

   1994    1986    180,524    93.7 %   Publix    Jo-Ann Fabrics, K-Mart

Ocala Corners (5)

   2000    2000    86,772    100.0 %   Publix    —  

Old St. Augustine Plaza

   1996    1990    232,459    100.0 %   Publix    CVS, Burlington Coat Factory, Hobby Lobby

Palm Harbor Shopping Village (5)

   1996    1991    172,758    99.1 %   Publix    CVS, Bealls

Pine Tree Plaza

   1997    1999    60,787    100.0 %   Publix    —  

Plantation Plaza (5)

   2004    2004    65,156    91.5 %   Publix    —  

Plantation Plaza Phase II (3) (5)

   2004    2004    17,000    0.0 %   —      —  

Regency Court

   1997    1992    218,649    97.5 %   —      Sports Authority, Comp Usa, Office Depot, Recreational Factory Warehouse, Sofa Express

Starke

   2000    2000    12,739    100.0 %   —      CVS

Vineyard Shopping Center

   2001    2002    62,821    88.3 %   Publix    —  

Miami / Ft. Lauderdale

                              

Aventura Shopping Center

   1994    1974    102,876    89.5 %   Publix    CVS

Berkshire Commons

   1994    1992    106,354    100.0 %   Publix    Walgreens

Garden Square

   1997    1991    90,258    97.9 %   Publix    CVS

Palm Trails Plaza

   1997    1998    76,067    95.3 %   Winn-Dixie    —  

Pebblebrook Plaza (5)

   2000    2000    76,767    100.0 %   Publix    Walgreens

Shoppes @ 104 (5)

   1998    1990    108,192    98.7 %   Winn-Dixie    Navarro Discount Pharmacies

Welleby

   1996    1982    109,949    99.5 %   Publix    Bealls

Tampa / Orlando

                              

Beneva Village Shops

   1998    1987    141,532    100.0 %   Publix    Walgreens, Bealls, Harbor Freight Tools

Bloomingdale

   1998    1987    267,935    99.9 %   Publix    Ace Hardware, Bealls, Wal-Mart

East Towne Shopping Center

   2002    2003    69,841    94.3 %   Publix    —  

Kings Crossing Sun City

   1999    1999    75,020    100.0 %   Publix    —  

Mainstreet Square

   1997    1988    107,134    95.9 %   Winn-Dixie    —  

Mariners Village

   1997    1986    133,440    97.4 %   Winn-Dixie    Walgreens, LA Fitness

Marketplace St. Pete

   1995    1983    90,296    99.0 %   Publix    Dollar World

Peachland Promenade

   1995    1991    82,082    98.7 %   Publix    —  

Regency Square Brandon

   1993    1986    349,848    97.3 %   —      AMC Theatre, Dollar Tree, Marshalls, Michaels, S & K Famous Brands, Shoe Carnival, Staples, TJ Maxx, Petco

Regency Village (5)

   2000    2002    83,170    89.4 %   Publix    Walgreens

Town Square

   1997    1999    44,679    99.3 %   —      Petco, Pier 1 Imports

University Collection

   1996    1984    106,899    95.3 %   Kash N Karry (4)    CVS, Dockside Imports, Jo-Ann Fabrics. Staples

Village Center 6

   1995    1993    181,110    95.2 %   Publix    Walgreens, Stein Mart

Willa Springs Shopping Center

   2000    2000    89,930    98.9 %   Publix    —  

West Palm Beach / Treasure Coast

                              

Boynton Lakes Plaza

   1997    1993    130,924    96.9 %   Winn-Dixie    World Gym

Chasewood Plaza

   1993    1986    155,603    98.5 %   Publix    Bealls, Books-A-Million

East Port Plaza

   1997    1991    235,842    55.1 %   Publix    Walgreens

Martin Downs Village Center

   1993    1985    121,946    100.0 %   —      Bealls, Coastal Care

Martin Downs Village Shoppes

   1993    1998    49,743    97.8 %   —      Walgreens

Ocean Breeze

   1993    1985    108,209    83.0 %   Publix    Beall’s Outlet, Coastal Care

Shops of San Marco (5)

   2002    2002    91,537    100.0 %   Publix    Walgreens

Town Center at Martin Downs

   1996    1996    64,546    100.0 %   Publix    —  

Wellington Town Square

   1996    1982    107,325    98.8 %   Publix    CVS
              
  

        

Subtotal/ Weighted Average (FL)

             5,970,898    94.9 %         
              
  

        

TEXAS

                              

Austin

                              

Hancock

   1999    1998    410,438    97.3 %   H.E.B.    Sears, Old Navy, Petco, 24 Hour Fitness

Market at Round Rock

   1999    1987    123,046    97.8 %   Albertson’s    —  

North Hills

   1999    1995    144,019    100.0 %   H.E.B.    —  

Dallas / Ft. Worth

                              

Bethany Park Place

   1998    1998    74,066    100.0 %   Kroger    —  

Casa Linda Plaza

   1999    1997    324,639    79.0 %   Albertson’s    Casa Linda Cafeteria, Dollar Tree, Petco, 24 Hour Fitness

Cooper Street

   1999    1992    133,196    100.0 %   —      Circuit City, Home Depot, Office Max

Hebron Park (5)

   1999    1999    46,800    85.6 %   Albertson’s (4)    —  

Hillcrest Village

   1999    1991    14,530    100.0 %   —      —  

Keller Town Center

   1999    1999    114,937    97.3 %   Tom Thumb    —  

Lebanon/Legacy Center

   2000    2002    56,669    86.3 %   Albertson’s (4)    —  

Main Street Center (3)

   2002    2002    42,922    70.0 %   Albertson’s (4)    —  

Market at Preston Forest

   1999    1990    91,624    100.0 %   Tom Thumb    Petco

Mockingbird Common

   1999    1987    120,321    87.6 %   Tom Thumb    —  

Preston Park

   1999    1985    273,396    79.3 %   Tom Thumb    Gap, Williams Sonoma

Prestonbrook

   1998    1998    91,274    100.0 %   Kroger    —  

 

9


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Property Name


   Year
Acquired


  

Year

Con-

structed (1)


   Gross
Leasable
Area (GLA)


   Percent
Leased (2)


   

Grocery Anchor


  

Drug Store & Other
Anchors > 10,000 Sq Ft


TEXAS (continued)

                              

Dallas / Ft. Worth (continued)

                              

Prestonwood Park

   1999    1999    101,024    76.4 %   Albertson’s (4)    —  

Rockwall (3)

   2002    2004    65,644    0.0 %   Tom Thumb (4)    Walgreens

Shiloh Springs

   1998    1998    110,040    100.0 %   Kroger    —  

Signature Plaza (3)

   2003    2004    28,874    83.2 %   Kroger (4)    —  

Trophy Club

   1999    1999    106,607    85.3 %   Tom Thumb    Walgreens

Valley Ranch Centre

   1999    1997    117,187    87.3 %   Tom Thumb    —  

Houston

                              

Alden Bridge

   2002    1998    138,953    96.5 %   Kroger    Walgreens

Atascocita Center (3)

   2002    2003    94,180    80.3 %   Kroger (4)    —  

Champions Forest

   1999    1983    115,247    88.0 %   Randall’s Food    Eklektik Interiors

Cochran’s Crossing

   2002    1994    138,192    100.0 %   Kroger    CVS

Fort Bend Center

   2000    2000    30,164    79.0 %   Kroger (4)    —  

Indian Springs Center (3) (5)

   2002    2003    135,757    92.4 %   H.E.B.    —  

Kleinwood Center (3)

   2002    2003    152,886    84.8 %   H.E.B.    Walgreens

Panther Creek

   2002    1994    165,560    95.4 %   Randall’s Food    CVS, Sears Paint & Hardware

Spring West Center (3)

   2003    2004    144,060    77.8 %   H.E.B.    —  

Sterling Ridge

   2002    2000    128,643    100.0 %   Kroger    CVS

Sweetwater Plaza (5)

   2001    2000    134,045    100.0 %   Kroger    Walgreens
              
  

        

Subtotal/Weighted Average (TX)

             3,968,940    89.3 %         
              
  

        

GEORGIA

                              

Atlanta

                              

Ashford Place

   1997    1993    53,450    100.0 %   —      —  

Bethesda Walk (5)

   2004    2003    68,271    100.0 %   Publix    —  

Braelinn Village (5)

   2004    1991    226,522    98.8 %   Kroger    K-Mart

Briarcliff La Vista

   1997    1962    39,203    100.0 %   —      Michaels

Briarcliff Village

   1997    1990    187,156    98.9 %   Publix    La-Z-Boy Furniture Galleries, Office Depot, Party City, Petco, TJ Maxx

Brookwood Village (5)

   2004    2000    28,774    100.0 %   —      CVS

Buckhead Court

   1997    1984    55,235    83.8 %   —      —  

Buckhead Crossing (5)

   2004    1989    221,874    100.0 %   —      Office Depot, HomeGoods, Marshalls, Michael’s, Hancock Fabricks, Ross

Cambridge Square Shopping Ctr

   1996    1979    71,475    100.0 %   Kroger    —  

Cobb Center (5)

   2004    1996    69,548    100.0 %   Publix    —  

Coweta Crossing (5)

   2004    1994    68,489    100.0 %   Publix    —  

Cromwell Square

   1997    1990    70,282    96.4 %   —      CVS, Hancock Fabrics, Haverty’s, Lakewood Antiques

Cumming 400

   1997    1994    126,900    95.9 %   Publix    Big Lots

Delk Spectrum

   1998    1991    100,539    96.8 %   Publix    —  

Dunwoody Hall

   1997    1986    89,351    99.1 %   Publix    Jean Coutou

Dunwoody Village

   1997    1975    120,598    87.4 %   Fresh Market    Walgreens, Dunwoody Prep

Howell Mill Village (5)

   2004    1984    97,990    98.7 %   Save Rite Grocery Store    Jean Coutou

Killian Hill Center (5)

   2000    2000    113,216    97.5 %   Publix    —  

Lindbergh Crossing (5)

   2004    1998    27,059    100.0 %   —      CVS

Loehmanns Plaza Georgia

   1997    1986    137,601    93.2 %   —      Jean Coutou

Memorial Bend Shopping Center

   1997    1995    177,283    95.0 %   Publix    Hollywood Video, TJ Maxx

Northlake Promenade (5)

   2004    1986    25,394    100.0 %   —      —  

Orchard Square (5)

   1995    1987    93,222    94.9 %   Publix    Harbor Freight Tools, Remax Elite

Paces Ferry Plaza

   1997    1987    61,696    100.0 %   —      Harry Norman Realtors

Peachtree Parkway Plaza (5)

   2004    2001    95,509    96.9 %   Winn-Dixie    Jean Coutou

Powers Ferry Kroger (5)

   2004    1983    45,528    100.0 %   Kroger    —  

Powers Ferry Square

   1997    1987    97,706    92.6 %   —      CVS, Pearl Arts & Crafts

Powers Ferry Village

   1997    1994    78,996    99.9 %   Publix    CVS, Mardi Gras

Publix Plaza (5)

   2004    1995    60,425    100.0 %   Publix    —  

Rivermont Station

   1997    1996    90,267    100.0 %   Kroger    —  

Rose Creek (5)

   2004    1993    69,790    98.1 %   Publix    —  

Roswell Crossing (5)

   2004    1999    201,979    96.2 %   —      PetsMart, Office Max, Pike Nurseries, Party City, Walgreens, LA Fitness

Russell Ridge

   1994    1995    98,559    98.8 %   Kroger    —  

Thomas Crossroads (5)

   2004    1995    84,928    100.0 %   Kroger    —  

Trowbridge Crossing (5)

   2004    1998    62,558    100.0 %   Publix    —  

Woodstock Crossing (5)

   2004    1994    66,122    100.0 %   Kroger    —  
              
  

        

Subtotal/Weighted Average (GA)

             3,383,495    97.4 %         
              
  

        

NORTH CAROLINA

                              

Charlotte

                              

Carmel Commons

   1997    1979    132,651    98.9 %   Fresh Market    CVS, Chuck E. Cheese, Party City, Mighty Dollar

Union Square Shopping Center

   1996    1989    97,191    91.3 %   Harris Teeter    Walgreens, Consolidated Theaters

Greensboro

                              

Kernersville Plaza

   1998    1997    72,590    100.0 %   Harris Teeter    —  

 

10


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Property Name


   Year
Acquired


  

Year

Con-

structed (1)


   Gross
Leasable
Area (GLA)


   Percent
Leased (2)


   

Grocery Anchor


  

Drug Store & Other
Anchors > 10,000 Sq Ft


NORTH CAROLINA (continued)

                              

Raleigh / Durham

                              

Bent Tree Plaza (5)

   1998    1994    79,503    98.5 %   Kroger    —  

Cameron Village (5)

   2004    1949    629,994    86.6 %   Harris Teeter, Fresh Market    CVS, Talbots, Wake County Public Library, Great Outdoor Provision Co., Blockbuster Video, York Properties, Carolina Antique Mall

Fuquay Crossing (5)

   2004    2002    124,774    100.0 %   Kroger    Gold’s Gym, Dollar Tree

Garner

   1998    1998    221,776    98.9 %   Kroger    Office Max, Petsmart, Shoe Carnival, Target (4), United Artist Theater, Home Depot

Glenwood Village

   1997    1983    42,864    100.0 %   Harris Teeter    —  

Greystone Village (5)

   2004    1986    85,665    100.0 %   Food Lion    Jean Coutou

Lake Pine Plaza

   1998    1997    87,691    93.6 %   Kroger    —  

Maynard Crossing

   1998    1997    122,782    97.8 %   Kroger    —  

Southpoint Crossing

   1998    1998    103,128    97.3 %   Kroger    —  

Woodcroft Shopping Center

   1996    1984    89,835    98.7 %   Food Lion    True Value Hardware
              
  

        

Subtotal/Weighted Average (NC)

             1,890,444    94.2 %         
              
  

        

OHIO

                              

Cincinnati

                              

Beckett Commons

   1998    1995    121,498    99.5 %   Kroger    Stein Mart

Cherry Grove

   1998    1997    195,497    91.3 %   Kroger    Hancock Fabrics, Shoe Carnival, TJ Maxx

Hyde Park

   1997    1995    397,893    98.9 %   Kroger/Thriftway    Walgreens, Barnes & Noble, Jo-Ann Fabrics, Famous Footwear, Michaels, Staples

Regency Commons (3)

   2004    2004    30,654    31.6 %   —      —  

Regency Milford Center (5)

   2001    2001    108,903    96.1 %   Kroger    CVS

Shoppes at Mason

   1998    1997    80,800    100.0 %   Kroger    —  

Westchester Plaza

   1998    1988    88,182    100.0 %   Kroger    —  

Columbus

                              

East Pointe

   1998    1993    86,503    100.0 %   Kroger    —  

Kingsdale Shopping Center

   1997    1999    268,970    60.9 %   Giant Eagle    —  

Kroger New Albany Center

   1999    1999    91,722    100.0 %   Kroger    —  

Maxtown Road (Northgate)

   1998    1996    85,100    100.0 %   Kroger    Home Depot

Park Place Shopping Center

   1998    1988    106,834    33.3 %   —      —  

Windmiller Plaza Phase I

   1998    1997    120,362    97.9 %   Kroger    Sears Orchard

Worthington Park Centre

   1998    1991    93,095    94.2 %   Kroger    Dollar Tree
              
  

        

Subtotal/Weighted Average (OH)

             1,876,013    87.7 %         
              
  

        

COLORADO

                              

Colorado Springs

                              

Cheyenne Meadows (5)

   1998    1998    89,893    100.0 %   King Soopers    —  

Monument Jackson Creek

   1998    1999    85,263    100.0 %   King Soopers    —  

Woodmen Plaza

   1998    1998    104,558    100.0 %   King Soopers    —  

Denver

                              

Belleview Square Shopping Center

   2004    1978    117,085    100.0 %   King Soopers    —  

Boulevard Center

   1999    1986    88,511    96.3 %   Safeway (4)    One Hour Optical

Buckley Square

   1999    1978    111,146    98.2 %   King Soopers    True Value Hardware

Centerplace of Greeley (5)

   2002    2003    148,575    97.6 %   Safeway    Target (4), Ross Dress For Less, Famous Footwear

Crossroads Commons (5)

   2001    1986    144,288    98.9 %   Whole Foods    Barnes & Noble, Mann Theatres

Hilltop Village

   2002    2003    100,028    94.5 %   King Soopers    —  

Leetsdale Marketplace

   1999    1993    119,916    96.7 %   Safeway    —  

Littleton Square

   1999    1997    94,257    99.0 %   King Soopers    Walgreens

Lloyd King Center

   1998    1998    83,326    100.0 %   King Soopers    —  

New Windsor Marketplace (3)

   2002    2003    95,877    89.2 %   King Soopers    —  

Stroh Ranch

   1998    1998    93,436    100.0 %   King Soopers    —  

Willow Creek Center (5)

   2001    1985    162,896    98.8 %   Safeway    Family Fitness Centers, Terri’s Consign & Design
              
  

        

Subtotal/Weighted Average (CO)

             1,639,055    98.0 %         
              
  

        

VIRGINIA

                              

Washington DC

                              

Ashburn Farm Market Center

   2000    2000    91,905    100.0 %   Giant    —  

Braemar Shopping Center (5)

   2004    2004    96,439    96.8 %   Safeway    —  

Cheshire Station

   2000    2000    97,156    100.0 %   Safeway    Petco

Fortuna (3)

   2004    2004    108,582    70.4 %   Shoppers Food Warehouse    Target (4)

Signal Hill (3)

   2003    2004    109,200    93.0 %   Shoppers Food Warehouse    —  

Somerset Crossing (5)

   2002    2002    104,128    100.0 %   Shoppers Food Warehouse    —  

Tall Oaks Village Center

   2002    1998    71,953    100.0 %   Giant    —  

The Market at Opitz Crossing

   2003    2003    149,810    100.0 %   Safeway    Boat U.S., USA Discounters

Village Center at Dulles (5)

   2002    1991    298,601    99.3 %   Shoppers Food Warehouse    CVS, Advance Auto Parts, Chuck E. Cheese, Gold’s Gym, Petco, Staples, The Thrift Store

 

11


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Property Name


   Year
Acquired


  

Year

Con-
structed (1)


   Gross
Leasable
Area (GLA)


   Percent
Leased (2)


   

Grocery Anchor


  

Drug Store & Other
Anchors > 10,000 Sq Ft


VIRGINIA (continued)

                              

Other Virginia

                              

Brookville Plaza (5)

   1998    1991    63,665    98.1 %   Kroger    —  

Hollymead Town Center (3)

   2003    2004    163,225    48.8 %   Harris Teeter    Target (4)

Statler Square Phase I

   1998    1996    133,660    97.9 %   Kroger    Staples
              
  

        

Subtotal/Weighted Average (VA)

             1,488,324    91.1 %         
              
  

        

ILLINIOS

                              

Chicago

                              

Baker Hill Center (5)

   2004    1998    135,285    99.1 %   Dominicks    —  

Deer Grove Center (5)

   2004    1996    209,449    98.6 %   Dominicks    Target (4), Linen’s N’ Things, Michael’s, Staples, Petco, Factory Card Outlet, Dress Barn

Deer Grove Phase II (3) (5)

   2004    2004    25,107    81.2 %   —      Staples

Fox Lake Crossing (5)

   2004    2002    99,072    95.5 %   Dominicks    —  

Frankfort Crossing Shopping Center

   2003    1992    114,534    96.0 %   Jewel / OSCO    Ace Hardware

Geneva Crossing (5)

   2004    1997    123,182    100.0 %   Dominicks    John’s Christian Stores

Hinsdale

   1998    1986    178,975    100.0 %   Dominicks    Ace Hardware, Murray’s Party Time Supplies

Shorewood Crossing (5)

   2004    2001    87,705    100.0 %   Dominicks    —  

Stearns Crossing (5)

   2004    1999    96,613    100.0 %   Dominicks    —  

Westbrook Commons

   2001    1984    121,502    95.1 %   Dominicks    —  
              
  

        

Subtotal/Weighted Average (IL)

             1,191,424    98.0 %         
              
  

        

WASHINGTON

                              

Seattle

                              

Cascade Plaza (5)

   1999    1999    211,072    99.4 %   Safeway    Bally Total Fitness, Fashion Bug, Jo-Ann Fabrics, Long’s Drug, Ross Dress For Less

Inglewood Plaza

   1999    1985    17,253    100.0 %   —      —  

James Center (5)

   1999    1999    140,240    96.0 %   Fred Myer    Rite Aid

Pine Lake Village

   1999    1989    102,953    100.0 %   Quality Foods    Rite Aid

Sammamish Highland

   1999    1992    101,289    100.0 %   Safeway (4)    Bartell Drugs Store, Ace Hardware

South Point Plaza

   1999    1997    190,378    100.0 %   Cost Cutters    Rite Aid, Office Depot, Pacific Fabrics, Pep Boys

Southcenter

   1999    1990    58,282    94.0 %   —      Target (4)

Thomas Lake

   1999    1998    103,872    100.0 %   Albertson’s    Rite Aid

Spokane

                              

Spokane Valley

   2003    2004    37,887    100.0 %   —      Petsmart, Wal-Mart (4)

Vancouver

                              

Orchard Market Center (3)

   2002    2004    51,957    100.0 %   —      Jo-Ann Fabrics, Petco

Padden Parkway Market Center (3)

   2002    2003    83,569    80.1 %   Albertson’s    —  
              
  

        

Subtotal/Weighted Average (WA)

             1,098,752    97.6 %         
              
  

        

OREGON

                              

Portland

                              

Cherry Park Market (5)

   1999    1997    113,518    89.1 %   Safeway    —  

Hillsboro Market Center (5)

   2000    2000    150,080    98.1 %   Albertson’s    Petsmart, Marshalls

McMinnville Market Center

   2003    2003    74,400    96.8 %   Albertson’s    —  

Murrayhill Marketplace

   1999    1988    149,215    89.9 %   Safeway    Segal’s Baby News

Sherwood Crossroads

   1999    1999    84,266    97.2 %   Safeway    —  

Sherwood Market Center

   1999    1995    124,257    99.2 %   Albertson’s    —  

Sunnyside 205

   1999    1988    52,710    100.0 %   —      —  

Walker Center

   1999    1987    89,610    98.6 %   —      Sportmart
              
  

        

Subtotal/Weighted Average (OR)

             838,056    95.5 %         
              
  

        

TENNEESSEE

                              

Knoxville

                              

Market Place (5)

   2004    1988    64,000    100.0 %   Kroger    —  

Nashville

                              

Dickson (Hwy 46 & 70)

   1998    1998    10,908    100.0 %   —      CVS

Harding Mall (3)

   2004    2004    198,800    1.3 %   —      Wal-Mart Supercenter

Harpeth Village Fieldstone

   1997    1998    70,091    100.0 %   Publix    —  

Nashboro

   1998    1998    86,811    98.4 %   Kroger    Walgreens

Northlake Village I & II

   2000    1988    151,629    94.1 %   Kroger    CVS, Outside Nursery Space, Petco

Peartree Village

   1997    1997    114,795    100.0 %   Harris Teeter    Jean Coutou, Office Max
              
  

        

Subtotal/Weighted Average (TN)

             697,034    70.4 %         
              
  

        

 

12


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Property Name


   Year
Acquired


  

Year

Con-
structed (1)


   Gross
Leasable
Area (GLA)


   Percent
Leased (2)


   

Grocery Anchor


  

Drug Store & Other

Anchors > 10,000 Sq Ft


ARIZONA

                              

Phoenix

                              

Anthem Marketplace

   2003    2000    113,292    98.9 %   Safeway    —  

Palm Valley Marketplace (5)

   2001    1999    107,647    100.0 %   Safeway    —  

Paseo Village

   1999    1998    92,399    59.1 %   —      Walgreens

Pima Crossing

   1999    1996    239,438    100.0 %   —      Bally Total Fitness, Chez Antiques, E & J Designer Shoe Outlet, Paddock Pools Store, Pier 1 Imports, Stein Mart

The Shops

   2003    2000    35,710    95.5 %   —      Ace Hardware
              
  

        

Subtotal/Weighted Average (AZ)

             588,486    93.1 %         
              
  

        

SOUTH CAROLINA

                              

Charleston

                              

Merchants Village (5)

   1997    1997    79,724    100.0 %   Publix    —  

Queensborough (5)

   1998    1993    82,333    100.0 %   Publix    —  

Columbia

                              

Murray Landing

   2002    2003    64,441    89.5 %   Publix    —  

North Pointe (5)

   2004    1996    64,257    100.0 %   Publix    —  

Rosewood Shopping Center (5)

   2001    2001    36,887    100.0 %   Publix    —  

Greenville

                              

Fairview Market (5)

   2004    1998    53,888    97.4 %   Publix    —  

Pelham Commons (3)

   2002    2003    76,541    82.6 %   Publix    —  

Poplar Springs (5)

   2004    1995    64,038    98.2 %   Publix    —  
              
  

        

Subtotal/Weighted Average (SC)

             522,109    95.7 %         
              
  

        

MICHIGAN

                              

Fenton Marketplace

   1999    1999    97,224    97.1 %   Farmer Jack    Michaels

Independence Square (3)

   2003    2004    89,083    91.8 %   Kroger    —  

Lakeshore

   1998    1996    85,940    85.0 %   Kroger    Rite Aid

Waterford Towne Center

   1998    1998    96,101    98.5 %   Kroger    —  
              
  

        

Subtotal/Weighted Average (MI)

             368,348    93.4 %         
              
  

        

MARYLAND

                              

Clinton Park (5)

   2003    2003    206,050    90.4 %   Giant    K-Mart, GCO Carpet Outlet, Toys “R” Us

King Farm Village Center (5)

   2004    2001    120,588    100.0 %   Safeway    —  
              
  

        

Subtotal/Weighted Average (MD)

             326,638    93.9 %         
              
  

        

ALABAMA

                              

Southgate Village Shopping Ctr (5)

   2001    1988    75,092    100.0 %   Publix    Pet Supplies Plus

Trace Crossing

   2001    2002    74,130    95.2 %   Publix    —  

Valleydale Village Shop Center (3) (5)

   2002    2003    118,466    66.7 %   Publix    —  

Village in Trussville

   1993    1987    56,356    100.0 %   Bruno’s    CVS
              
  

        

Subtotal/Weighted Average (AL)

             324,044    86.7 %         
              
  

        

KENTUCKY

                              

Franklin Square (5)

   1998    1988    203,318    97.0 %   Kroger    Rite Aid, Chakeres Theatre, JC Penney, Office Depot

Silverlake (5)

   1998    1988    99,352    98.5 %   Kroger    —  
              
  

        

Subtotal/Weighted Average (KY)

             302,670    97.5 %         
              
  

        

DELAWARE

                              

Pike Creek

   1998    1981    229,510    99.9 %   Acme Markets    Jean Coutou, K-Mart

White Oak—Dover DE

   2000    2000    10,908    100.0 %   —      Jean Coutou
              
  

        

Subtotal/Weighted Average (DE)

             240,418    99.9 %         
              
  

        

PENNSYLVANIA

                              

Gateway Shopping Center

   2004    1960    219,697    100.0 %   Trader Joe’s    Gateway Pharmacy, Staples, TJ Maxx, Famous Footwear, Valley Forge Brewery, JoAnn Fabrics

Hershey

   2000    2000    6,000    100.0 %   —      —  
              
  

        

Subtotal/Weighted Average (PA)

             225,697    100.0 %         
              
  

        

NEW HAMPSHIRE

                              

Amherst Street Village Center (3)

   2004    2004    47,720    31.1 %   —      Petsmart

Merrimack Shopping Center (3)

   2004    2004    90,768    60.0 %   Shaw’s    —  
              
  

        

Subtotal/Weighted Average (NH)

             138,488    50.0 %         
              
  

        

 

13


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Property Name


   Year
Acquired


  

Year

Con-
structed (1)


   Gross
Leasable
Area (GLA)


   Percent
Leased (2)


   

Grocery Anchor


  

Drug Store & Other
Anchors > 10,000 Sq Ft


NEVADA

                              

Athem Highland Shopping Center (3)

   2004    2004    118,495    45.5 %   Albertson’s    —  
              
  

        

Subtotal/Weighted Average (NV)

             118,495    45.5 %         
              
  

        

INDIANA

                              

I-65 County Line Road (3)

   2004    2004    90,340    69.2 %   —      Gander Mountain, Wal-Mart
              
  

        

Subtotal/Weighted Average (IN)

             90,340    69.2 %         
              
  

        

Total Weighted Average

             33,815,970    92.7 %         
              
  

        

(1) Or latest renovation.
(2) Includes development properties. If development properties are excluded, the total percentage leased would be 95.4% for Company shopping centers.
(3) Property under development or redevelopment.
(4) Tenant owns its own building.
(5) Owned by a partnership with outside investors in which the Partnership or an affiliate is the general partner.

 

14


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Item 3. Legal Proceedings

 

We are a party to various legal proceedings, which arise, in the ordinary course of our business. We are not currently involved in any litigation nor to our knowledge, is any litigation threatened against us, the outcome of which would, in our judgment based on information currently available to us, have a material adverse effect on our financial position or results of operations.

 

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

 

No matters were submitted for stockholder vote during the fourth quarter of 2004.

 

PART II

 

Item 5. Market for the Registrant’s Common Equity and Related Shareholder Matters

 

There is no established public trading market for the units of partnership interest in the Partnership (“Units”), and Units may be transferred only with the consent of the general partner as provided in the Fourth Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership (the “Partnership Agreement”). As of December 31, 2004 there were approximately 40 holders of record in the aggregate of Original Limited Partnership Units, Additional Units and Series D, E and F Preferred Units, determined in accordance with Rule 12g5-1 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. To the Partnership’s knowledge, there have been no bids for the Units and, accordingly, there is no available information with respect to the high and low quotation of the Units for any quarter since Regency became the general partner of the Partnership. Regency directly or indirectly through a subsidiary holds 98% of the Common Units. Each outstanding Unit other than the Units held directly or indirectly by Regency and the Series D, E and F Preferred Units which are convertible into Regency preferred stock may be exchangeable by its holder on a one share per one Unit basis, for the common stock of Regency or for cash, at Regency’s election.

 

The Partnership Agreement provides that the Partnership will make priority distributions of Available Cash (as defined in the Partnership Agreement) first to Series D, E and F Preferred Units on each March 31, June 30, September 30 and December 31 in a distribution amount equal to 7.45%, 8.75% and 8.75% of the original capital contribution per Series D, E and F Preferred Units, respectively. Subject to the prior right of the holders of Series D, E and F Preferred Units to receive all distributions accumulated on such Units in full, at the time of each distribution to holders of common stock of Regency, distributions of Available Cash will then be made pro-rata to the holders of common Units, including Regency.

 

Our common stock is traded on the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) under the symbol “REG”. We currently have approximately 18,000 shareholders. The following table sets forth the high and low prices and the cash dividends declared on our common stock by quarter for 2004 and 2003.

 

     2004

   2003

Quarter Ended


   High
Price


   Low
Price


   Cash
Dividends
Declared


   High
Price


   Low
Price


   Cash
Dividends
Declared


March 31

   $ 46.73    38.90    .53    33.53    30.40    .52

June 30

     47.35    34.52    .53    35.72    32.41    .52

September 30

     47.70    41.98    .53    36.95    34.09    .52

December 31

     55.40    46.03    .53    40.43    35.56    .52

 

We intend to pay regular quarterly distributions to our common stockholders. Future distributions will be declared and paid at the discretion of our Board of Directors, and will depend upon cash generated by operating activities, our financial condition, capital requirements, annual distribution requirements under the REIT provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and such other factors as our Board of Directors deem relevant. We anticipate that for the foreseeable future, cash available for distribution will be greater than earnings and profits due to non-cash expenses, primarily depreciation and amortization, to be incurred by us. Distributions by us to the extent of our current and accumulated earnings and profits for federal income tax purposes will be taxable to stockholders as either ordinary dividend income or capital gain income if so declared by us. Distributions

 

15


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

in excess of earnings and profits generally will be treated as a non-taxable return of capital. Such distributions have the effect of deferring taxation until the sale of a stockholder’s common stock. In order to maintain our qualification as a REIT, we must make annual distributions to stockholders of at least 90% of our taxable income. Under certain circumstances, which we do not expect to occur, we could be required to make distributions in excess of cash available for distributions in order to meet such requirements. We currently maintain the Regency Centers Corporation Dividend Reinvestment and Stock Purchase Plan which enables our stockholders to automatically reinvest distributions, as well as, make voluntary cash payments towards the purchase of additional shares.

 

Under our loan agreement for our line of credit, distributions may not exceed 95% of Funds from Operations (“FFO”) based on the immediately preceding four quarters. FFO is defined in accordance with the NAREIT definition available on their website at www.nareit.com. Also, in the event of any monetary default, we may not make distributions to stockholders.

 

There were no sales of unregistered securities during the periods covered by this report other than a total of 69,063 shares issued during 2004 on a one-for-one basis for exchangeable common units of our operating partnership, Regency Centers L.P., pursuant to Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933.

 

16


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Item 6. Selected Consolidated Financial Data

             (in thousands, except per share data and number of properties)

 

The following table sets forth Selected Consolidated Financial Data for RCLP on a historical basis for the five years ended December 31, 2004. This information should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements of RCLP (including the related notes thereto) and Management’s Discussion and Analysis of the Financial Condition and Results of Operations, each included elsewhere in this Form 10-K. This historical Selected Consolidated Financial Data has been derived from the audited consolidated financial statements and restated for discontinued operations.

 

     2004

   2003

   2002

   2001

   2000

Operating Data:

                          

Revenues

   $ 391,948    363,200    339,810    307,454    291,153

Operating expenses

     213,716    189,368    169,113    158,646    144,548

Other expenses (income)

     42,619    34,836    62,134    39,904    48,031

Minority interests

     319    501    492    721    2,632

Income from continuing operations

     135,294    138,495    108,071    108,183    95,942

Income from discontinued operations

     23,441    25,164    38,725    28,513    23,762

Net income

     158,735    163,659    146,796    136,696    119,704

Preferred unit distributions and original issuance costs

     28,462    34,001    33,475    33,475    29,601

Net income for common unit holders

     130,273    129,658    113,321    103,221    90,103

Income per common unit - diluted:

                          

Income from continuing operations

   $ 1.71    1.71    1.20    1.21    1.08

Net income for common unit holders

   $ 2.08    2.12    1.84    1.69    1.49

Balance Sheet Data:

                          

Real estate investments before accumulated depreciation

   $ 3,332,671    3,166,346    3,094,071    3,156,831    2,943,627

Total assets

     3,243,824    3,098,229    3,068,928    3,109,314    3,035,144

Total debt

     1,493,090    1,452,777    1,333,524    1,396,721    1,307,072

Total liabilities

     1,610,743    1,562,530    1,426,349    1,478,811    1,390,796

General partners’ capital

     1,304,008    1,205,803    1,221,720    1,219,051    1,225,415

Other Information:

                          

Distributions per unit

   $ 2.12    2.08    2.04    2.00    1.92

Common units outstanding

     64,297    61,227    61,512    60,645    60,048

Series A-F Preferred Units outstanding

     1,040    2,290    4,640    4,640    4,640

Combined Basis gross leasable area (GLA)

     33,816    30,348    29,483    29,089    27,991

Combined Basis number of properties owned

     291    265    262    272    261

Ratio of earnings to fixed charges

     2.2    1.9    1.6    1.5    1.5

 

17


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

 

Overview and Operating Philosophy

 

Regency is a qualified real estate investment trust (“REIT”), which began operations in 1993. Our primary operating and investment goal is long-term growth in earnings per share and total shareholder return, which we hope to achieve by focusing on a strategy of owning, operating and developing neighborhood and community shopping centers that are anchored by market-leading supermarkets, and located in areas with attractive demographics. Regency owns and operates its shopping centers through its operating partnership, Regency Centers, L.P. (“RCLP”), in which it currently owns approximately 98% of the operating partnership units. Regency’s operating, investing and financing activities are generally performed by RCLP, its wholly owned subsidiaries and its joint ventures with third parties.

 

Currently, our real estate investment portfolio before depreciation totals $4.5 billion with 291 shopping centers in 23 states, including approximately $1.4 billion in real estate assets composed of 78 shopping centers owned by unconsolidated joint ventures in 17 states. [Portfolio information is presented (a) on a combined basis, including unconsolidated joint ventures (“Combined Basis”), (b) on a basis that excludes the unconsolidated joint ventures (“Consolidated Properties”) and (c) on a basis that includes only the unconsolidated joint ventures (“Unconsolidated Properties”).] We believe that providing our shopping center portfolio information under these methods provides a more complete understanding of the properties that we own, including those that we partially own and for which we provide property and asset management services. At December 31, 2004, our gross leasable area (“GLA”) on a Combined Basis totaled 33.8 million square feet and was 92.7% leased. The GLA for the Consolidated Properties totaled 24.5 million square feet and was 91.2% leased. The GLA for the Unconsolidated Properties totaled 9.3 million square feet and was 96.7% leased.

 

We earn revenues and generate operating cash flow by leasing space to grocers and retail side-shop tenants in our shopping centers. We experience growth in revenues by increasing occupancy and rental rates at currently owned shopping centers, and by acquiring and developing new shopping centers. A neighborhood center is a convenient, cost-effective distribution platform for food retailers. Grocery-anchored centers generate substantial daily traffic and offer sustainable competitive advantages to their tenants. This high traffic generates increased sales, thereby driving higher occupancy, rental rates and rental-rate growth for Regency, which we expect to sustain our growth in earnings per share and increase the value of our portfolio over the long term.

 

We seek a range of strong national, regional and local specialty tenants, for the same reason that we choose to anchor our centers with leading grocers. We have created a formal partnering process — the Premier Customer Initiative (“PCI”) — to promote mutually beneficial relationships with our non-grocer specialty retailers. The objective of PCI is for Regency to build a base of specialty tenants who represent the “best-in-class” operators in their respective merchandising categories. Such tenants reinforce the consumer appeal and other strengths of a center’s grocery anchor, help to stabilize a center’s occupancy, reduce re-leasing downtime, reduce tenant turnover and yield higher sustainable rents.

 

We grow our shopping center portfolio through new shopping center development, where we acquire the land and construct the building. Development is customer driven, meaning we generally have an executed lease from the anchor before we start construction. Developments serve the growth needs of our market-leading grocers and anchors, and our specialty retail customers, resulting in modern shopping centers with long-term leases from the grocery anchors and produce attractive returns on our invested capital. This development process can require up to 36 months from initial land or redevelopment acquisition through construction, lease-up and stabilization of rental income, depending upon the size of the project. Generally, anchor tenants begin operating their stores prior to the completion of construction of the entire center, resulting in rental income during the development phase.

 

We intend to maintain a conservative capital structure to fund our growth programs without compromising our investment-grade ratings. Our approach is founded on our self-funding business model. This model utilizes center “recycling” as a key component. Our recycling strategy calls for us to

 

18


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

re-deploy the proceeds from the sales of properties into new, higher-quality developments that we expect to generate sustainable revenue growth and more attractive returns. Our commitment to maintaining a high-quality shopping center portfolio dictates that we continually assess the value of all of our properties and sell those that no longer meet our long-term investment criteria.

 

Joint venturing of shopping centers also provides us with a capital source for new development, as well as the opportunity to earn fees for asset and property management services. As asset manager, we are engaged by our partners to apply similar operating, investment, and capital strategies to the portfolios owned by the joint ventures. Joint ventures grow their shopping center investments through acquisitions from third parties or direct purchases from RCLP. Although selling properties to joint ventures reduces our ownership interest, we continue to share in the risks and rewards of centers that meet our long-term investment strategy. RCLP is not subject to liability and has no obligations or guarantees of the joint ventures beyond its ownership percentage.

 

We have identified certain significant risks and challenges affecting our industry, and we are addressing them accordingly. An economic downturn could result in declines in occupancy levels at our shopping centers, which would reduce our rental revenues; however, we believe that our investment focus on grocery anchored shopping centers that provide daily necessities will minimize the impact of a downturn in the economy. Increased competition from super-centers such as Wal-Mart could result in grocery-anchor closings or consolidations in the grocery store industry. We closely monitor the operating performance and tenants’ sales in our shopping centers that operate near super-centers. A slowdown in our shopping center development program could reduce operating revenues and gains from sales. We believe that developing shopping centers in markets with strong demographics with leading grocery stores will enable us to continue to maintain our development program at historical averages.

 

19


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Shopping Center Portfolio

 

The following tables summarize general operating statistics related to our shopping center portfolio, which we use to evaluate and monitor our performance. The portfolio information below is presented (a) on a Combined Basis, (b) for Consolidated Properties and (c) for Unconsolidated Properties:

 

    

December 31,

2004


   

December 31,

2003


 

Number of Properties (a)

   291     265  

Number of Properties (b)

   213     219  

Number of Properties (c)

   78     46  

Properties in Development (a)

   34     36  

Properties in Development (b)

   32     34  

Properties in Development (c)

   2     2  

Gross Leaseable Area (a)

   33,815,970     30,347,744  

Gross Leaseable Area (b)

   24,532,952     24,565,776  

Gross Leaseable Area (c)

   9,283,018     5,781,968  

% Leased – All Properties (a)

   92.7 %   92.2 %

% Leased – All Properties (b)

   91.2 %   91.8 %

% Leased – All Properties (c)

   96.7 %   95.7 %

% Leased – Non development (a)

   96.1 %   95.4 %

% Leased – Non development (b)

   95.6 %   95.1 %

% Leased – Non development (c)

   97.2 %   97.1 %

 

The Partnership seeks to reduce its operating and leasing risks through diversification which it achieves by geographically diversifying its shopping centers; avoiding dependence on any single property, market, or tenant, and owning a portion of its shopping centers through joint ventures.

 

20


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

The following table is a list of the shopping centers summarized by state and in order of largest holdings presented on a Combined Basis:

 

     December 31, 2004

    December 31, 2003

 

Location


   #
Properties


   GLA

   % of Total
GLA


    %
Leased


    #
Properties


   GLA

   % of Total
GLA


    %
Leased


 

California

   51    6,527,802    19.3 %   91.9 %   49    5,917,372    19.5 %   90.8 %

Florida

   50    5,970,898    17.7 %   94.9 %   50    5,943,345    19.6 %   94.3 %

Texas

   32    3,968,940    11.7 %   89.3 %   41    5,086,086    16.7 %   88.1 %

Georgia

   36    3,383,495    10.0 %   97.4 %   20    2,008,066    6.6 %   95.8 %

North Carolina

   13    1,890,444    5.6 %   94.2 %   3    408,211    1.3 %   97.0 %

Ohio

   14    1,876,013    5.5 %   87.7 %   14    1,901,538    6.3 %   90.6 %

Colorado

   15    1,639,055    4.8 %   98.0 %   14    1,623,674    5.3 %   94.2 %

Virginia

   12    1,488,324    4.4 %   91.1 %   10    1,272,369    4.2 %   89.1 %

Illinois

   9    1,191,424    3.5 %   98.0 %   6    444,234    1.5 %   96.5 %

Washington

   11    1,098,752    3.2 %   97.6 %   10    1,050,061    3.5 %   98.7 %

Oregon

   8    838,056    2.5 %   95.5 %   9    1,020,470    3.4 %   96.4 %

Tennessee

   7    697,034    2.1 %   70.4 %   7    652,906    2.1 %   91.5 %

Arizona

   5    588,486    1.7 %   93.1 %   8    838,715    2.8 %   92.2 %

South Carolina

   8    522,109    1.5 %   95.7 %   5    339,926    1.1 %   95.7 %

Michigan

   4    368,348    1.1 %   93.4 %   4    368,260    1.2 %   87.2 %

Maryland

   2    326,638    1.0 %   93.9 %   1    188,243    0.6 %   90.2 %

Alabama

   4    324,044    1.0 %   86.7 %   6    543,330    1.8 %   85.5 %

Kentucky

   2    302,670    0.9 %   97.5 %   3    323,029    1.1 %   97.8 %

Delaware

   2    240,418    0.7 %   99.9 %   2    240,418    0.8 %   99.5 %

Pennsylvania

   2    225,697    0.7 %   100.0 %   1    6,000    —       100.0 %

New Hampshire

   2    138,488    0.4 %   50.0 %   —      —      —       —    

Nevada

   1    118,495    0.4 %   45.5 %   —      —      —       —    

Indiana

   1    90,340    0.3 %   69.2 %   —      —      —       —    

Missouri

   —      —      —       —       1    82,498    0.3 %   91.5 %

New Jersey

   —      —      —       —       1    88,993    0.3 %   89.4 %
    
  
  

 

 
  
  

 

Total

   291    33,815,970    100.0 %   92.7 %   265    30,347,744    100.0 %   92.2 %
    
  
  

 

 
  
  

 

 

21


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

The following table is a list of the shopping centers summarized by state and in order of largest holdings presented for Consolidated Properties:

 

     December 31, 2004

    December 31, 2003

 

Location


   #
Properties


   GLA

   % of Total
GLA


    %
Leased


    #
Properties


   GLA

   % of Total
GLA


    %
Leased


 

California

   44    5,479,470    22.3 %   90.5 %   41    4,859,526    19.8 %   90.1 %

Florida

   38    4,684,299    19.1 %   94.6 %   39    4,738,901    19.3 %   94.1 %

Texas

   29    3,652,338    14.9 %   88.8 %   34    4,167,951    17.0 %   87.9 %

Ohio

   13    1,767,110    7.2 %   87.1 %   13    1,792,635    7.3 %   92.7 %

Georgia

   17    1,656,297    6.8 %   96.1 %   17    1,656,294    6.7 %   96.8 %

Colorado

   11    1,093,403    4.4 %   97.6 %   11    1,223,072    5.0 %   92.6 %

North Carolina

   9    970,508    3.9 %   97.5 %   9    970,558    3.9 %   98.6 %

Virginia

   8    925,491    3.8 %   86.4 %   8    910,103    3.7 %   85.2 %

Washington

   9    747,440    3.0 %   97.3 %   7    662,573    2.7 %   95.6 %

Tennessee

   6    633,034    2.6 %   67.4 %   6    444,234    1.8 %   96.5 %

Oregon

   6    574,458    2.3 %   96.1 %   7    688,359    2.8 %   92.2 %

Arizona

   4    480,839    2.0 %   91.6 %   6    545,277    2.2 %   90.5 %

Illinois

   3    415,011    1.7 %   97.4 %   3    408,211    1.7 %   97.0 %

Michigan

   4    368,348    1.5 %   93.4 %   4    368,260    1.5 %   87.2 %

Delaware

   2    240,418    1.0 %   99.9 %   2    240,418    1.0 %   99.5 %

Pennsylvania

   2    225,697    0.9 %   100.0 %   1    6,000    —       100.0 %

South Carolina

   2    140,982    0.6 %   85.7 %   3    223,315    0.9 %   94.3 %

New Hampshire

   2    138,488    0.6 %   50.0 %   —      —      —       —    

Alabama

   2    130,486    0.5 %   97.3 %   5    468,238    1.9 %   83.1 %

Nevada

   1    118,495    0.5 %   45.5 %   —      —      —       —    

Indiana

   1    90,340    0.4 %   69.2 %   —      —      —       —    

Kentucky

   —      —      —       —       1    20,360    0.1 %   93.1 %

Missouri

   —      —      —       —       1    82,498    0.3 %   91.5 %

New Jersey

   —      —      —       —       1    88,993    0.4 %   89.4 %
    
  
  

 

 
  
  

 

Total

   213    24,532,952    100.0 %   91.2 %   219    24,565,776    100.0 %   91.8 %
    
  
  

 

 
  
  

 

 

The following table is a list of the shopping centers summarized by state and in order of largest holdings presented for Unconsolidated Properties owned in joint ventures:

 

     December 31, 2004

    December 31, 2003

 

Location


   #
Properties


   GLA

   % of Total
GLA


    %
Leased


    #
Properties


   GLA

   % of Total
GLA


    %
Leased


 

Georgia

   19    1,727,198    18.6 %   98.6 %   3    351,772    6.1 %   91.1 %

Florida

   12    1,286,599    13.8 %   96.1 %   11    1,204,444    20.8 %   98.0 %

California

   7    1,048,332    11.3 %   99.1 %   8    1,057,846    18.3 %   97.5 %

North Carolina

   4    919,936    9.9 %   90.7 %   1    79,503    1.4 %   100.0 %

Illinois

   6    776,413    8.4 %   98.3 %   —      —      —       —    

Virginia

   4    562,833    6.1 %   98.9 %   2    362,266    6.3 %   99.0 %

Colorado

   4    545,652    5.9 %   98.7 %   3    400,602    6.9 %   99.1 %

South Carolina

   6    381,127    4.1 %   99.3 %   2    116,611    2.0 %   98.5 %

Washington

   2    351,312    3.8 %   98.1 %   2    357,897    6.2 %   97.8 %

Maryland

   2    326,638    3.5 %   93.9 %   1    188,243    3.3 %   90.2 %

Texas

   3    316,602    3.4 %   94.6 %   7    918,135    15.9 %   89.2 %

Kentucky

   2    302,670    3.3 %   97.5 %   2    302,669    5.2 %   98.1 %

Oregon

   2    263,598    2.8 %   94.3 %   1    150,356    2.5 %   92.5 %

Alabama

   2    193,558    2.1 %   79.6 %   1    75,092    1.3 %   100.0 %

Ohio

   1    108,903    1.2 %   96.1 %   1    108,903    1.9 %   88.4 %

Arizona

   1    107,647    1.1 %   100.0 %   1    107,629    1.9 %   96.3 %

Tennessee

   1    64,000    0.7 %   100.0 %   —      —      —       —    
    
  
  

 

 
  
  

 

Total

   78    9,283,018    100.0 %   96.7 %   46    5,781,968    100.0 %   95.7 %
    
  
  

 

 
  
  

 

 

22


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

The following summarizes the four largest grocery tenants occupying our shopping centers at December 31, 2004:

 

Grocery Anchor


   Number of
Stores (a)


   Percentage of
Partnership-
owned GLA (b)


   

Percentage of
Annualized

Base Rent (c)


 

Kroger

   63    10.6 %   7.9 %

Publix

   61    8.5 %   4.9 %

Safeway

   51    6.6 %   4.2 %

Albertsons

   24    2.8 %   2.2 %

(a) For the Combined Properties including stores owned by grocery anchors that are attached to our centers.
(b) For the Combined Properties.
(c) Annualized base rent includes the Consolidated Properties plus RCLP’s pro-rata share of the Unconsolidated Properties which reflects our effective risk related to those tenants.

 

Liquidity and Capital Resources

 

General

 

We expect that cash generated from revenues, including gains from the sale of real estate, will provide the necessary funds on a short-term basis to pay our operating expenses, interest expense, scheduled principal payments on outstanding indebtedness, recurring capital expenditures necessary to maintain our shopping centers properly, and distributions to stock and unit holders. Net cash provided by operating activities was $183.9 million, $180.6 million and $154.8 million, for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. During the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, our gains from the sale of real estate were $60.5 million, $65.9 million, and $40.1 million, we incurred capital expenditures of $11.7 million, $13.5 million and $15.0 million to maintain our shopping centers, paid scheduled principal payments of $5.7 million, $4.1 million and $5.6 million to our lenders, and paid dividends and distributions of $157.2 million, $157.9 million and $158.5 million to our share and unit holders, respectively.

 

Although base rent is supported by long-term lease contracts, tenants who file bankruptcy are able to cancel their leases and close the related stores. In the event that a tenant with a significant number of leases in our shopping centers files bankruptcy and cancels its leases, we could experience a significant reduction in our revenues. On February 21, 2005, Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc. filed a voluntary petition for reorganization under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. We currently lease seven stores to Winn-Dixie, three of which are owned directly by us and four are owned in joint ventures. Our annualized base rent from Winn-Dixie including our share of the joint ventures is $1.5 million or less than 1% of our annual base rents. As of the date of their bankruptcy filing, Winn-Dixie owed RCLP $32,841 in past-due rent related to real estate tax reimbursements. Winn-Dixie has not yet given notice to us as to whether they will reject any of the lease agreements between us. We are not aware at this time of the current or pending bankruptcy of any of our other tenants that would cause a significant reduction in our revenues, and no tenant represents more than 8% of our annual base rental revenues.

 

We expect to meet long-term capital requirements for maturing preferred units and debt, the acquisition of real estate, and the renovation or development of shopping centers from: (i) residual cash generated from operating activities after the payments described above, (ii) proceeds from the sale of real estate, (iii) joint venturing of real estate, (iv) refinancing of debt, and (v) equity raised in the private or public markets.

 

We currently have $400 million available for equity securities under our shelf registration and RCLP has $180 million available for debt under its shelf registration. Additionally, we have the right to call and repay, at par, outstanding preferred units beginning five years after their issuance date, at our discretion.

 

23


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

We intend to continue to grow our portfolio through new developments and acquisitions, either directly or through our joint venture relationships. Because development and acquisition activities are discretionary in nature, they are not expected to burden the capital resources we have currently available for liquidity requirements. Capital necessary to complete developments-in-process are funded from our line of credit. RCLP expects that cash provided by operating activities, unused amounts available under our line of credit, and cash reserves are adequate to meet short-term and committed long-term liquidity requirements.

 

Shopping Center Developments, Acquisitions and Sales

 

At December 31, 2004, on a Combined Basis, we had 34 projects under construction or undergoing major renovations, which, when completed, will represent an investment of $728.7 million before the estimated reimbursement of certain tenant-related costs and projected sales proceeds from adjacent land and out-parcels of $117.3 million. Costs necessary to complete these developments are estimated to be $342.2 million. These costs are usually already committed as part of existing construction contracts, and will be expended through 2007. These developments are approximately 53% complete and 72% pre-leased. The costs necessary to complete these developments will be funded from the Partnership’s unsecured line of credit, which had a commitment amount of $500 million and a balance of $200 million at December 31, 2004. In 2004, we started 17 new developments representing an investment of $270 million upon completion.

 

During 2004, we acquired five operating properties from unrelated parties for $164.4 million. The purchase price included the assumption of $61.7 million in debt, the issuance of 920,562 exchangeable operating partnership units valued at $38.4 million, and cash. During 2003, we acquired four operating properties from unrelated parties for $75.4 million. The acquisitions were accounted for as purchases and the results of their operations are included in the consolidated financial statements from their respective dates of acquisition. These acquisitions were not considered significant to our operations in the current or preceding periods.

 

During 2004, we sold 100% of our interest in 17 properties for net proceeds of $130.5 million. The combined operating income of these properties and resulting gain of $23.4 million on these sales and properties held for sale are included in discontinued operations. The revenues from properties included in discontinued operations, including properties sold in 2004, 2003 and 2002, as well as operating properties held for sale, were $9.9 million, $23.1 million and $48.6 million for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. The operating income from these properties was $4.2 million, $8.8 million and $22.2 million for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.

 

24


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Off Balance Sheet Arrangements

 

Investments in Unconsolidated Real Estate Partnerships

 

At December 31, 2004, we had investments in real estate partnerships of $179.7 million. The following is a summary of unconsolidated combined assets and liabilities of these partnerships, and our pro-rata share at December 31, 2004 and 2003 (in thousands):

 

     2004

   2003

Number of Joint Ventures

     11      8

RCLP’s Ownership

     20%-50%      20%-50%

Number of Properties

     78      46

Combined Assets

   $ 1,439,617    $ 812,190

Combined Liabilities

     689,988      336,340

Combined Equity

     749,629      475,850

RCLP’s Share of:

             

Assets

   $ 374,430    $ 256,050

Liabilities

     179,459      106,034

 

We account for all investments in which we own 50% or less and do not have a controlling financial interest using the equity method. Investments in real estate partnerships are primarily composed of joint ventures where we invest with three co-investment partners, as further described below. In addition to earning our pro-rata share of net income in each of these partnerships, these co-investment partners pay us fees for asset management, property management, and acquisition and disposition services. During 2004, 2003 and 2002, we received fees from these joint ventures of $9.3 million, $5.6 million, and $3.5 million, respectively. Our investments in real estate partnerships as of December 31, 2004 and 2003 consist of the following (in thousands):

 

     Ownership

   2004

   2003

Macquarie CountryWide-Regency (MCWR)

   25%    $ 65,134    30,347

Macquarie CountryWide Direct (MCWR)

   25%      8,001    8,724

Columbia Regency Retail Partners (Columbia)

   20%      41,380    40,267

Cameron Village LLC (Columbia)

   30%      21,612    —  

Columbia Regency Partners II (Columbia)

   20%      3,107    —  

RegCal, LLC (RegCal)

   25%      13,232    —  

Other investments in real estate partnerships

   27%-50%      27,211    61,158
         

  
          $ 179,677    140,496
         

  

 

We co-invest with the Oregon Public Employees Retirement Fund in three joint ventures (collectively “Columbia”), in which we have ownership interests of 20% or 30%. As of December 31, 2004, Columbia owned 18 shopping centers, had total assets of $496.9 million, and net income of $23.8 million. Our share of Columbia’s total assets and net income was $111.5 million and $4.1 million, respectively. During 2004, Columbia acquired eight shopping centers from unrelated parties for a purchase price of $250.8 million. We contributed $31.9 million for our proportionate share of the purchase price. Columbia sold three shopping centers during 2004 for $74.0 million to unrelated parties with a gain of $10.0 million. During 2003, Columbia acquired two shopping centers for $39.1 million from unrelated parties and sold one shopping center to an unrelated party for $46.2 million with a gain of $9.3 million.

 

We also co-invest with Macquarie CountryWide Trust of Australia (“MCW”) in two joint ventures (collectively, “MCWR”) in which we have an ownership interest of 25%. As of December 31, 2004, MCWR owned 51 shopping centers, had total assets of $734.6 million, and net income of $12.1 million.

 

25


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Our share of MCWR’s total assets and net income was $183.6 million and $3.5 million, respectively. During 2004, MCWR acquired 23 shopping centers from unrelated parties for a purchase price of $274.5 million. We contributed $34.8 million for our proportionate share of the purchase price. In addition, MCWR acquired three shopping centers from us valued at $69.7 million, for which we received cash of $63.7 million. MCWR sold one shopping center during 2004 to an unrelated party for $12.8 million with a gain of $190,559. During 2003, MCWR acquired 12 shopping centers from us valued at $232.9 million, for which we received cash of $79.4 million and short-term notes receivable of $95.3 million. MCWR repaid the notes during 2003 and 2004. During 2003, MCWR sold two shopping centers to unrelated parties for $20.1 million.

 

On February 14, 2005, we entered into a contract with CalPERS/First Washington to acquire 101 shopping centers operating in 17 states, but primarily in the Washington D.C./Baltimore metro area, as well as, northern and southern California (“FW Portfolio”). The contract purchase price is $2.74 billion. The portfolio of shopping centers will be owned in a new joint venture (“MCWR II”) between Regency and MCW in which we will have an ownership interest of 35%. The acquisition is expected to close during the second quarter of 2005. We expect to account for our investment in the venture as an unconsolidated investment in real estate partnerships. We have executed a bank commitment to provide the financing for our share of the purchase price further discussed below as a part of Contractual Obligations.

 

In December 2004, we formed a new joint venture with the California State Teachers’ Retirement System (“RegCal”) in which we have a 25% ownership interest. As of December 31, 2004, RegCal owned four shopping centers, had total assets of $126.4 million, and had net income of $70,608. Our share of RegCal’s total assets and net income was $31.6 million and $17,652, respectively. During 2004, RegCal acquired four shopping centers from us valued at $124.5 million, for which it assumed debt from us of $34.8 million and paid cash to us of $73.9 million.

 

Recognition of gains from sales to joint ventures is recorded on only that portion of the sales not attributable to our ownership interest. The gains and operations are not recorded as discontinued operations because of our continuing involvement in these shopping centers. Columbia, MCWR and RegCal intend to continue to acquire retail shopping centers, some of which they may acquire directly from us. For those properties acquired from unrelated parties, we are required to contribute our pro-rata share of the purchase price to the partnerships.

 

On November 30, 2004, we sold a 50% interest in Valleydale, LLC, a single asset entity, to an affiliate of Publix Supermarkets for $12.8 million and transferred our residual 50% investment interest to unconsolidated investments in real estate partnerships.

 

In August 2004, we sold our membership interest in the Hermosa Venture 2002, LLC to our partner. In March 2004, the only two shopping centers owned by the OTR/Regency Texas Realty Holdings, L.P., an unconsolidated joint venture in which we had a 30% equity interest, were sold to an unrelated party for $28.3 million, resulting in a gain of $8.2 million. We received $17.2 million which represents a $4.3 million distribution for our 30% equity interest and $12.9 million for the repayment of a loan owed to us. We recognized a $1.2 million gain included in equity in income of investments in real estate partnerships in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations. We have no remaining investment or commitment in either of these two joint ventures.

 

Shopping center acquisitions, sales and the net acquisitions or sales activities within our investments in real estate partnerships are included in investing activities in the accompanying consolidated statements of cash flows. Net cash used in investing activities was $38.3 million and $49.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. Net cash provided by investing activities was $128.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2002.

 

 

26


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Contractual Obligations

 

We have debt obligations related to our mortgage loans, unsecured notes, and our unsecured line of credit as described further below. We have shopping centers that are subject to non-cancelable long-term ground leases where a third party owns and has leased the underlying land to us to construct and/or operate a shopping center. In addition, we have non-cancelable operating leases pertaining to office space where we conduct our business. The following table summarizes our debt maturities, excluding recorded debt premiums that are not obligations, and obligations under non-cancelable operating leases as of December 31, 2004 including our pro-rata share of obligations within unconsolidated joint ventures (in thousands):

 

Contractual Obligations


   2005

   2006

   2007

   2008

   2009

   Beyond 5
years


   Total

Notes Payable:

                                    

Regency

   $ 180,217    24,858    265,797    23,005    56,547    939,133    1,489,557

Regency’s share of JV

     20,401    13,629    —      10,666    35,978    84,973    165,647

Operating Leases:

                                    

Regency

     2,585    2,426    1,449    974    633    3,737    11,804

Regency’s share of JV

     —      —      —      —      —      —      —  

Ground Leases:

                                    

Regency

     359    365    365    365    365    8,658    10,477

Regency’s share of JV

     176    176    176    177    177    8,271    9,153
    

  
  
  
  
  
  

Total

   $ 203,738    41,454    267,787    35,187    93,700    1,044,772    1,686,638
    

  
  
  
  
  
  

 

The table of contractual obligations excludes obligations related to interest which is discussed below as part of outstanding debt.

 

Outstanding debt at December 31, 2004 and 2003 consists of the following (in thousands):

 

     2004

   2003

Notes Payable:

           

Fixed-rate mortgage loans

   $ 275,726    217,001

Variable-rate mortgage loans

     68,418    41,629

Fixed-rate unsecured loans

     948,946    999,147
    

  

Total notes payable

     1,293,090    1,257,777

Unsecured line of credit

     200,000    195,000
    

  

Total

   $ 1,493,090    1,452,777
    

  

 

Mortgage loans are secured and may be prepaid, but could be subject to yield maintenance premiums. Mortgage loans are generally due in monthly installments of interest and principal, and mature over various terms through 2017. Variable interest rates on mortgage loans are currently based on LIBOR, plus a spread in a range of 125 to 150 basis points. Fixed interest rates on mortgage loans range from 5.01% to 9.50% and average 6.71%.

 

On March 26, 2004, we entered into a new unsecured revolving line of credit (the “Line”). Under the new agreement, we reduced the Line commitment from $600 million to $500 million (“Line Commitment”), but we have the right to expand the Line by an additional $150 million subject to additional lender syndication. The new facility has a three-year term, a one-year extension option at maturity, and an interest rate of LIBOR plus .75%, which is a reduction of 10 basis points from the previous agreement. Interest rates paid on the Line, which are based on LIBOR plus .75%, were 3.1875% at December 31, 2004 and LIBOR plus .85% or 1.975% at December 31, 2003. The spread that we pay on the Line is

 

27


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

dependent upon maintaining specific investment-grade ratings. We are also required to comply, and are in compliance, with certain financial covenants such as Minimum Net Worth, Total Liabilities to Gross Asset Value (“GAV”), Secured Indebtedness to GAV and other covenants customary with this type of unsecured financing. The Line is used primarily to finance the development and acquisition of real estate, but is also available for general working-capital purposes.

 

On February 15, 2005, we executed a commitment letter related to the Line which will temporarily modify certain Line covenants related to borrowing capacity and leverage, and will also add a temporary bridge loan for $275 million (“Bridge Commitment”). The temporary modifications will expire and the Bridge Commitment will mature nine months after the closing of the FW Portfolio into MCWR II. The Bridge Commitment combined with existing borrowing capacity under the Line will provide sufficient cash for our equity investment into MCWR II. These borrowings will raise our debt to assets leverage ratio above current levels, which could exceed the current allowable Line covenant leverage ratio of 55%. The temporary modification to the leverage covenant is intended to keep us from defaulting on the Line during the term that the Bridge Commitment is outstanding. We intend to payoff the Bridge Commitment within the nine month term through a combination of issuing equity and selling shopping centers under our capital recycling program.

 

As of December 31, 2004, scheduled principal repayments on notes payable and the Line were as follows (in thousands):

 

Scheduled Payments by Year


   Scheduled
Principal
Payments


   Term Loan
Maturities


   Total
Payments


2005

   $ 4,042    176,175    180,217

2006

     3,775    21,083    24,858

2007 (includes the Line)

     3,542    262,255    265,797

2008

     3,388    19,617    23,005

2009

     3,458    53,089    56,547

Beyond 5 Years

     17,795    921,338    939,133

Unamortized debt premiums

     —      3,533    3,533
    

  
  

Total

   $ 36,000    1,457,090    1,493,090
    

  
  

 

Our investments in real estate partnerships had unconsolidated notes and mortgage loans payable of $665.5 million at December 31, 2004, which mature through 2028. Our proportionate share of these loans was $168.1 million, of which 87% had average fixed interest rates of 5.47% and 13% had variable interest rates based upon a spread above Libor of 1.2% to 1.6%. The loans are primarily non-recourse, but for those that are guaranteed by a joint venture, our guarantee does not extend beyond our ownership percentage of the joint venture.

 

We are exposed to capital market risk such as changes in interest rates. In order to manage the volatility related to interest-rate risk, we originate new debt with fixed interest rates, or we consider entering into interest-rate hedging arrangements. At December 31, 2004, 82% of our total debt had fixed interest rates, compared with 84% at December 31, 2003. We intend to limit the percentage of variable interest-rate debt to be no more than 30% of total debt, which we believe to be an acceptable risk. Based upon the variable interest-rate debt outstanding at December 31, 2004, if variable interest rates were to increase by 1%, our annual interest expense would increase by $2.7 million. We do not utilize derivative financial instruments for trading or speculative purposes. We account for derivative instruments under Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 133, “Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities” as amended (“Statement 133”).

 

On April 1, 2004, we completed the sale of $150 million ten-year senior unsecured notes (the “Notes”). The 4.95% Notes are due April 15, 2014 and were priced at 99.747% to yield 4.982%. The proceeds of the offering combined with borrowings from the Line were used to repay $200 million of 7.4% notes that matured on April 1, 2004. Related to the offering, we settled two forward-starting interest rate

 

28


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

swaps that were initiated in 2003 totaling $144.2 million. On March 31, 2004, the interest rate swaps were settled for $5.7 million, which is recorded in other comprehensive income (“OCI”) and is being amortized over the ten-year term of the Notes to interest expense. The swaps qualified for hedge accounting under Statement 133; therefore, the change in fair value was recorded in OCI. After taking into account the hedge settlement, the effective interest rate on the Notes is 5.47%.

 

Equity Capital Transactions

 

From time to time, we issue equity in the form of exchangeable operating partnership units or preferred units of RCLP, or in the form of common or preferred stock of Regency Centers Corporation. As previously discussed, these sources of long-term equity financing allow us to fund our growth while maintaining a conservative capital structure. The following describes our equity capital transactions during 2004.

 

Preferred Units

 

We have issued Preferred Units in various amounts since 1998, the net proceeds of which we used to reduce the balance of the Line. We issued Preferred Units primarily to institutional investors in private placements. The Preferred Units, which may be called by us in 2005 and 2009, have no stated maturity or mandatory redemption, and they pay a cumulative, quarterly dividend at fixed rates ranging from 7.45% to 8.75%. Generally, the Preferred Units may be exchanged by the holders for Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock at an exchange rate of one share for one unit after ten years from the date of issue or as modified and agreed to by us. The Preferred Units and the related Preferred Stock are not convertible into Regency common stock. At December 31, 2004 and 2003, the face value of total Preferred Units issued was $104 million and $229 million with an average fixed distribution rate of 8.13% and 8.88%, respectively. Included in Preferred Units are original issuance costs of $2.2 million that will be expensed as the underlying Preferred Units are redeemed in the future.

 

We expect that we will either redeem $54 million of Preferred Units in 2005 or renegotiate the dividend rate to a lower market rate of distribution. If we decide to redeem these Preferred Units, we will likely issue common stock or preferred stock to finance the redemption price.

 

On November 11, 2004, we renegotiated the distribution rate on the outstanding balance of $50 million of Series D Preferred Units from 9.125% to 7.45%. Previously, on September 3, 2004, we redeemed $85 million of Series B 8.75% Preferred Units and $40 million of Series C 9.0% Preferred Units from proceeds of a Series 4 Preferred stock offering described below. At the time of the redemptions, $3.2 million of previously deferred costs related to the original preferred units’ issuance were recognized in the consolidated statements of operations as minority interest of preferred units.

 

Preferred Stock

 

On August 31, 2004, we sold 5 million depositary shares, representing 500,000 shares of Series 4 Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock, for $125 million. The depositary shares are perpetual preferred stock, are not convertible into common stock of the Company, are redeemable at par upon our election on or after August 31, 2009, pay a 7.25% annual dividend, and have a liquidation value of $25 per depositary share. The proceeds from this offering were used to redeem Preferred Units. The terms of the Series 4 Preferred Stock do not contain any unconditional obligations that would require us to redeem the securities at any time or for any purpose.

 

Common Stock

 

On August 24, 2004 we sold 1.5 million shares of common stock in an underwritten public offering and the net proceeds of approximately $67 million were used to reduce the balance of the Line.

 

29


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

In summary, net cash used in financing activities related to the debt and equity activity discussed above was $80.1 million, $158.2 million and $255.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.

 

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

 

Knowledge about our accounting policies is necessary for a complete understanding of our financial results, and discussion and analysis of these results. The preparation of our financial statements requires that we make certain estimates that impact the balance of assets and liabilities at a financial statement date and the reported amount of income and expenses during a financial reporting period. These accounting estimates are based upon, but not limited to, our judgments about historical results, current economic activity and industry standards. They are considered to be critical because of their significance to the financial statements and the possibility that future events may differ from those judgments, or that the use of different assumptions could result in materially different estimates. We review these estimates on a periodic basis to ensure reasonableness. However, the amounts we may ultimately realize could differ from such estimates.

 

Revenue Recognition and Tenant Receivables – Tenant Receivables represent revenues recognized in our financial statements, and include base rent, percentage rent, and expense recoveries from tenants for common area maintenance costs, insurance and real estate taxes. We analyze tenant receivables, historical bad debt levels, customer credit worthiness and current economic trends when evaluating the adequacy of our allowance for doubtful accounts. In addition, we analyze the accounts of tenants in bankruptcy, and we estimate the recovery of pre-petition and post-petition claims. Our reported net income is directly affected by our estimate of the collectability of tenant receivables.

 

Capitalization of Costs - We have an investment services group with an established infrastructure that supports the due diligence, land acquisition, construction, leasing and accounting of our development properties. All direct costs related to these activities are capitalized. Included in these costs are interest and real estate taxes incurred during construction, as well as estimates for the portion of internal costs that are incremental and deemed directly or indirectly related to our development activity. If future accounting standards limit the amount of internal costs that may be capitalized, or if our development activity were to decline significantly without a proportionate decrease in internal costs, we could incur a significant increase in our operating expenses.

 

Real Estate Acquisitions - Upon acquisition of operating real estate properties, we estimate the fair value of acquired tangible assets (consisting of land, building and improvements), and identified intangible assets and liabilities (consisting of above- and below-market leases, in-place leases and tenant relationships) and assumed debt in accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 141, Business Combinations (“Statement 141”). Based on these estimates, we allocate the purchase price to the applicable assets and liabilities. We utilize methods similar to those used by independent appraisers in estimating the fair value of acquired assets and liabilities. We evaluate the useful lives of amortizable intangible assets each reporting period and account for any changes in estimated useful lives over the revised remaining useful life.

 

Valuation of Real Estate Investments - Our long-lived assets, primarily real estate held for investment, are carried at cost unless circumstances indicate that the carrying value of the assets may not be recoverable. We review long-lived assets for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate such an evaluation is warranted. The review involves a number of assumptions and estimates used to determine whether impairment exists. Depending on the asset, we use varying methods such as i) estimating future cash flows, ii) determining resale values by market, or iii) applying a capitalization rate to net operating income using prevailing rates in a given market. These methods of determining fair value can fluctuate significantly as a result of a number of factors, including changes in the general economy of those markets in which we operate, tenant credit quality and demand for new retail stores. If we determine that permanent impairment exists due to our inability to recover an asset’s carrying value, a provision for loss is recorded to the extent that the carrying value exceeds estimated fair value.

 

30


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Discontinued Operations - The application of current accounting principles that govern the classification of any of our properties as held for sale on the balance sheet, or the presentation of results of operations and gains on the sale of these properties as discontinued, requires management to make certain significant judgments. In evaluating whether a property meets the criteria set forth by SFAS No. 144 “Accounting for the Impairment and Disposal of Long-Lived Assets” (“Statement 144”), the Partnership makes a determination as to the point in time that it can be reasonably certain that a sale will be consummated. Given the nature of all real estate sales contracts, it is not unusual for such contracts to allow potential buyers a period of time to evaluate the property prior to formal acceptance of the contract. In addition, certain other matters critical to the final sale, such as financing arrangements often remain pending even upon contract acceptance. As a result, properties under contract may not close within the expected time period, or may not close at all. Due to these uncertainties, it is not likely that the Partnership can meet the criteria of Statement 144 prior to the sale formally closing. Therefore, any properties categorized as held for sale represent only those properties that management has determined are likely to close within the requirements set forth in Statement 144. The Partnership also makes judgments regarding the extent of involvement it will have with a property subsequent to its sale, in order to determine if the results of operations and gain on sale should be reflected as discontinued. Consistent with Statement 144, any property sold to an entity in which the Partnership has significant continuing involvement (most often joint ventures) is not considered to be discontinued. In addition, any property which the Partnership sells to an unrelated third party, but retains a property or asset management function, is also not considered discontinued. Therefore, only properties sold, or to be sold, to unrelated third parties that the Partnership, in its judgment, has no continuing involvement are classified as discontinued.

 

Income Tax Status - The prevailing assumption underlying the operation of our business is that we will continue to operate in order to qualify as a REIT, defined under the Internal Revenue Code. We are required to meet certain income and asset tests on a periodic basis to ensure that we continue to qualify as a REIT. As a REIT, we are allowed to reduce taxable income by all or a portion of our distributions to stockholders. We evaluate the transactions that we enter into and determine their impact on our REIT status. Determining our taxable income, calculating distributions, and evaluating transactions requires us to make certain judgments and estimates as to the positions we take in our interpretation of the Internal Revenue Code. Because many types of transactions are susceptible to varying interpretations under federal and state income tax laws and regulations, our positions are subject to change at a later date upon final determination by the taxing authorities.

 

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

 

On December 16, 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued SFAS No. 123 (revised 2004), “Share-Based Payment” (“Statement 123(R)”), which is a revision of Statement 123. Statement 123(R) supersedes Opinion 25. Generally, the approach in Statement 123(R) is similar to the approach described in Statement 123. However, Statement 123(R) requires all share-based payments to employees, including grants of employee stock options, to be recognized in the income statement based on their fair values. Pro-forma disclosure is no longer an alternative. Statement 123(R) must be adopted no later than July 1, 2005.

 

Statement 123(R) permits companies to adopt its requirements using one of two methods:

 

1. The “modified prospective” method in which compensation cost is recognized beginning with the effective date (a) based on the requirements of Statement 123(R) for all share-based payments granted after the effective date and (b) based on the requirements of Statement 123 for all awards granted to employees prior to the effective date of Statement 123(R) that remain unvested on the effective date.

 

2. The “modified retrospective” method includes the requirements of the modified prospective method described above, but also permits entities to restate based on the amounts previously recognized under Statement 123 for purposes of pro-forma disclosures either (a) all prior periods presented or (b) prior interim periods of the year of adoption.

 

31


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

The Partnership adopted Statement 123(R) using the modified prospective method on January 1, 2005.

 

As permitted by Statement 123, the Partnership currently accounts for share-based payments to employees using Opinion 25’s intrinsic value method and, as such, generally recognizes no compensation cost for employee stock options. Accordingly, the adoption of Statement 123(R)’s fair value method will have an impact on its results of operations in 2005 as described in note 1(i) to the consolidated financial statements.

 

We have a Long-Term Omnibus Plan (the “Plan”) under which our Board of Directors may grant stock options and other stock-based awards to officers, directors and other key employees. All stock options previously granted contained stock option “reload” rights. The “reload” rights allowed for an option holder to receive new options each time existing options were exercised if the existing options were exercised under specific criteria provided for in the Plan. In January 2005, we offered to acquire the “reload” rights of existing stock options from our employees by issuing them additional stock options that will vest 25% per year over four years. As a result of the offer, on January 18, 2005, we granted 771,645 options with an exercise price of $51.36, the fair value of our common stock on the date of grant. As a result, substantially all of the “reload” rights on existing stock options have been cancelled. The options granted in January 2005 will be expensed to net income over a four-year period beginning in 2005 in accordance with Statement 123(R).

 

Results from Operations

 

Comparison of the years ended December 31, 2004 to 2003

 

At December 31, 2004, on a Combined Basis, we were operating or developing 291 shopping centers, as compared to 265 shopping centers at the end of 2003. We identify our shopping centers as either development properties or stabilized properties. Development properties are defined as properties that are in the construction or initial lease-up process and have not reached their initial full occupancy (reaching full occupancy generally means achieving at least 93% leased and rent paying on newly constructed or renovated GLA). At December 31, 2004, on a Combined Basis, we were developing 34 properties, as compared to 36 properties at the end of 2003.

 

Our revenues increased by $28.7 million, or 8%, to $391.9 million in 2004. This increase was related to changes in occupancy in the portfolio of stabilized and development properties, growth in re-leasing rental rates, shopping centers acquired during 2004, and revenues from new developments commencing operations in 2004, net of a reduction in revenues from properties sold. In addition to collecting minimum rent from our tenants for the GLA that they lease from us, we also collect contingent rent based upon tenant sales, which we refer to as percentage rent. Tenants are also responsible for reimbursing us for their pro-rata share of the expenses associated with operating our shopping centers. In 2004, our minimum rent increased by $21.4 million, or 8%, and our recoveries from tenants increased $4.7 million, or 6%. Percentage rent was $4.1 million in 2004, compared with $4.5 million in 2003. The reduction was primarily related to renewing anchor tenant leases with minimum rent increases, which had a corresponding reduction to percentage rent.

 

Our operating expenses increased by $24.3 million, or 13%, to $213.7 million in 2004 related to increased operating and maintenance costs, general and administrative costs and depreciation expense, as further described below.

 

Our combined operating, maintenance, and real estate taxes increased by $6.0 million, or 7%, during 2004 to $94.3 million. This increase was primarily due to shopping centers acquired in 2004, new developments that only recently began operating and therefore incurred operating expenses for only a portion of the previous year, normal increases in operating expenses on the stabilized properties and the cost to repair our shopping centers impacted by hurricanes during 2004. Although three hurricanes affected 42 shopping centers in Florida, all of these centers are currently operating and fully functional. Our repair costs related to the hurricanes are estimated to be $1 million.

 

32


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Our general and administrative expenses were $30.3 million during 2004, compared with $24.2 million in 2003, or 25% higher, related to an increase in the total number of employees, higher costs associated with incentive compensation and costs related to implementing new regulations for public companies imposed by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.

 

Our depreciation and amortization expense increased $9.2 million during the current year primarily related to shopping centers acquired in 2004 and new development properties placed in service during 2004.

 

Our net interest expense decreased to $81.2 million in 2004 from $83.6 million in 2003. Average interest rates on our outstanding debt declined to 5.93% at December 31, 2004, compared with 6.64% at December 31, 2003. The reduction was primarily related to reducing the interest rate spread on the Line and issuing $150 million of 4.95% Notes in April 2004, the proceeds of which were used to repay maturing Notes that had fixed rates of 7.4%. Our average fixed interest rates were 6.71% at December 31, 2004, compared with 7.54%, at December 31, 2003. Our weighted average outstanding debt during 2004 was $1.5 billion, compared with $1.4 billion in 2003.

 

We account for profit recognition on sales of real estate in accordance with SFAS Statement No. 66, “Accounting for Sales of Real Estate.” Profits from sales of real estate will not be recognized by us unless (i) a sale has been consummated; (ii) the buyer’s initial and continuing investment is adequate to demonstrate a commitment to pay for the property; (iii) we have transferred to the buyer the usual risks and rewards of ownership; and (iv) we do not have substantial continuing involvement with the property. Gains from the sale of operating and development properties includes $18.9 million in gains from the sale of 41 out-parcels for proceeds of $60.4 million and $20.5 million for properties sold to joint ventures. During 2003, the gains from the sale of operating and development properties included $11.6 million from the sale of 45 out-parcels for proceeds of $53.0 million and $37.1 million for properties sold. These gains are included in continuing operations rather than discontinued operations because they were either properties that had no operating income, or they were properties sold to joint ventures where we have continuing involvement through our minority investment.

 

We review our real estate portfolio for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that we may not be able to recover the carrying amount of an asset. We determine whether impairment has occurred by comparing the property’s carrying value to an estimate of fair value based upon methods described in our Critical Accounting Policies. In the event a property is impaired, we write down the asset to fair value for “held-and-used” assets and to fair value less costs to sell for “held-for-sale” assets. During 2004 and 2003 we established provisions for loss of $810,000 and $2.0 million respectively, to adjust operating properties to their estimated fair values. Provisions for loss on properties subsequently sold are reclassified to discontinued operations; therefore the $2.0 million recorded in 2003 has been reclassified.

 

Income from discontinued operations was $23.4 million in 2004 related to 17 properties sold to unrelated parties for net proceeds of $130.5 million and one property classified as held-for-sale. Income from discontinued operations was $25.2 million in 2003 related to the operations of shopping centers in 2004 as well as 2003. In compliance with the adoption of Statement 144, if we sell an asset in the current year, we are required to reclassify its operating income into discontinued operations for all prior periods. This practice results in a reclassification of amounts previously reported as continuing operations into discontinued operations.

 

Preferred units distributions decreased $5.5 million in 2004 to $28.5 million as a result of redemptions in 2004 and 2003.

 

Net income for common unit holders was $130.3 million in 2004, compared with $129.7 million in 2003 or a .5% increase for the reasons described above. Diluted earnings per unit were $2.08 in 2004, compared with $2.12 in 2003, or 2% lower. Although net income for common unit holders increased $615,000 during 2004, the increase was diluted as a result of an increase in weighted average common units issued in association with the $67 million common stock offering completed by Regency in August 2004.

 

33


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Comparison of 2003 to 2002

 

At December 31, 2003, on a Combined Basis, we were operating or developing 265 shopping centers as compared to 262 shopping centers at the end of 2002. At December 31, 2003, on a Combined Basis, we were developing 36 properties, as compared to 34 properties at the end of 2002.

 

Our revenues increased by $23.4 million, or 7%, to $363.2 million in 2003. This increase was related to changes in occupancy from 91.5% to 92.2% in the portfolio of stabilized and development properties, growth in re-leasing rental rates, and revenues from new developments commencing operations in 2003, net of a reduction in revenues from properties sold. In 2003, our minimum rent increased by $12.4 million, or 5%, and our recoveries from tenants increased $4.3 million, or 6%. Percentage rent was $4.5 million in 2003, compared with $5.2 million in 2002. The reduction was primarily related to renewing anchor tenant leases with minimum rent increases, which had a corresponding reduction to percentage rent.

 

Our operating expenses increased by $20.3 million, or 12%, to $189.4 million in 2003. Our combined operating, maintenance, and real estate taxes increased by $5.3 million, or 6%, during 2003 to $88.2 million. This increase was primarily due to new developments that incurred operating expenses for only a portion of the previous year and general increases in operating expenses on the stabilized properties. Our general and administrative expenses were $24.2 million during 2003, compared with $22.8 million in 2002, or 6% higher, a result of general salary and benefit increases. Our depreciation and amortization expense increased $6.7 million related to new development properties placed in service during 2003.

 

Our net interest expense decreased to $83.6 million in 2003 from $84.5 million in 2002. Average interest rates on our outstanding debt declined to 6.64% at December 31, 2003, compared with 6.93% at December 31, 2002, primarily due to reductions in the LIBOR rate. Our average fixed interest rates were 7.54% at December 31, 2003, compared with 7.51%, at December 31, 2002. Our weighted average outstanding debt during 2003 and 2002 was $1.4 billion.

 

Gains from the sale of operating and development properties were $48.7 million in 2003 related to the sale of 16 properties for $299.9 million and 45 out-parcels for $53 million. During 2002, we recorded gains of $20.9 million related to the sale of 12 properties for $164.8 million and 35 out-parcels for $27.5 million. These gains are included in continuing operations rather than discontinued operations because they were either development properties that had no operating income, or they were sold to joint ventures where we have a continuing minority investment.

 

During 2003 and 2002, we recorded provisions for loss on shopping centers related to impairments in value of approximately $2.0 million and $4.4 million, respectively, of which $2.0 million and $3.4 million, respectively, were reclassified to operating income from discontinued operations after the related properties were sold.

 

Income from discontinued operations was $25.2 million in 2003 related to the sale of shopping centers and properties held for sale in 2004 and 2003. Income from discontinued operations was $38.7 million in 2002 related to the sale of shopping centers in 2004, 2003 and 2002. As discussed above, if we sell an asset in any reported year, we are required to reclassify its operating income into discontinued operations for all reported prior years.

 

Net income for common unit holders was $129.7 million in 2003, compared with $113.3 million in 2002, or a 14% increase for the reasons described above. Diluted earnings per unit were $2.12 in 2003, compared with $1.84 in 2002, or 15% higher, related to the increase in net income offset by an increase in weighted average common units of 803,719.

 

34


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Environmental Matters

 

We are subject to numerous environmental laws and regulations and we are primarily concerned with dry cleaning plants that currently operate or have operated at our shopping centers in the past. We believe that the tenants who currently operate plants do so in accordance with current laws and regulations. Generally, we use all legal means to cause tenants to remove dry cleaning plants from our shopping centers or convert them to environmentally approved systems. Where available, we have applied and been accepted into state-sponsored environmental programs. We have a blanket environmental insurance policy that covers us against third-party liabilities and remediation costs on shopping centers that currently have no known environmental contamination. We have also placed environmental insurance, where possible, on specific properties with known contamination, in order to mitigate our environmental risk. We believe that the ultimate disposition of currently known environmental matters will not have a material effect on RCLP’s financial position, liquidity, or operations; however, we can give no assurance that existing environmental studies with respect to our shopping centers have revealed all potential environmental liabilities; that any previous owner, occupant or tenant did not create any material environmental condition not known to us; that the current environmental condition of the shopping centers will not be affected by tenants and occupants, by the condition of nearby properties, or by unrelated third parties; or that changes in applicable environmental laws and regulations or their interpretation will not result in additional environmental liability to us.

 

Inflation

 

Inflation has remained relatively low and has had a minimal impact on the operating performance of our shopping centers; however, substantially all of our long-term leases contain provisions designed to mitigate the adverse impact of inflation. Such provisions include clauses enabling us to receive percentage rent based on tenants’ gross sales, which generally increase as prices rise; and/or escalation clauses, which generally increase rental rates during the terms of the leases. Such escalation clauses are often related to increases in the consumer price index or similar inflation indices. In addition, many of our leases are for terms of less than ten years, which permits us to seek increased rents upon re-rental at market rates. Most of our leases require tenants to pay their share of operating expenses, including common-area maintenance, real estate taxes, insurance and utilities, thereby reducing our exposure to increases in costs and operating expenses resulting from inflation.

 

35


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Item 7a. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk

 

Market Risk

 

We are exposed to interest-rate changes primarily related to the variable interest rate on the Line and the refinancing of long-term debt, which currently contain fixed interest rates. Our interest-rate risk management objective is to limit the impact of interest-rate changes on earnings and cash flows and to lower our overall borrowing costs. To achieve these objectives, we borrow primarily at fixed interest rates and may enter into derivative financial instruments such as interest-rate swaps, caps and treasury locks in order to mitigate our interest-rate risk on a related financial instrument. We have no plans to enter into derivative or interest-rate transactions for speculative purposes.

 

Our interest-rate risk is monitored using a variety of techniques. The table below presents the principal cash flows (in thousands), weighted average interest rates of remaining debt, and the fair value of total debt (in thousands), by year of expected maturity to evaluate the expected cash flows and sensitivity to interest-rate changes.

 

     2005

    2006

    2007

    2008

    2009

    Thereafter

    Total

   Fair Value

Fixed rate debt

   $ 147,737     24,858     29,859     23,005     56,547     939,133     1,221,139    1,305,081

Average interest rate for all fixed rate debt

     6.91 %   6.90 %   6.87 %   6.87 %   6.81 %   6.45 %   —      —  

Variable rate LIBOR debt

   $ 32,480     —       235,938     —       —       —       268,418    268,418

Average interest rate for all variable rate debt

     2.15 %   —       2.15 %   —       —       —       —      —  

 

As the table incorporates only those exposures that exist as of December 31, 2004, it does not consider those exposures or positions that could arise after that date. Moreover, because firm commitments are not presented in the table above, the information presented above has limited predictive value. As a result, our ultimate realized gain or loss with respect to interest-rate fluctuations will depend on the exposures that arise during the period, our hedging strategies at that time, and actual interest rates.

 

Item 8. Consolidated Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

 

The Consolidated Financial Statements and supplementary data included in this Report are listed in Part IV, Item 15(a).

 

Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure

 

None.

 

36


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Item 9a. Controls and Procedures

 

Conclusion Regarding the Effectiveness of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

 

Under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our chief executive officer, chief operating officer and chief financial officer, we conducted an evaluation of our disclosure controls and procedures, as such term is defined under Rule 13a-15(e) promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act). Based on this evaluation, our chief executive officer, chief operating officer and our chief financial officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of the end of the period covered by this annual report. There were no significant changes in our internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect these controls subsequent to the date of their evaluation.

 

Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting

 

Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, as such term is defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f). Under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our chief executive officer, chief operating officer and chief financial officer, we conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting based on the framework in Internal Control - Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on our evaluation under the framework in Internal Control — Integrated Framework, our management concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2004.

 

The Partnership’s independent auditors, KPMG LLP, a registered public accounting firm, have issued a report on management’s assessment of the Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting as stated in their report which is included herein.

 

RCLP’s internal control system was designed to provide reasonable assurance to the Partnership’s management and the Company’s Board of Directors regarding the preparation and fair presentation of published financial statements. All internal control systems, no mater how well designed, have inherent limitations. Therefore, even those systems determined to be effective can provide only reasonable assurance with respect to financial statement preparation and presentation.

 

Item 9b. Other Information

 

Not applicable

 

PART III

 

Item 10. Directors and Executive Officers of the Registrant

 

Information concerning the directors of Regency is incorporated herein by reference to Regency’s definitive proxy statement to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after the end of the fiscal year covered by this Form 10-K with respect to its 2005 Annual Meeting of Shareholders. Information concerning the executive officers of Regency is provided below.

 

MARTIN E. STEIN, JR. Mr. Stein, age 52, is Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of Regency Centers. He served as President of Regency from its initial public offering in October 1993 until December 31, 1998. He also served as President of Regency’s predecessor real estate division since 1981, and as a Vice President from 1976 to 1981. Mr. Stein is a Director of Patriot Transportation Holding, Inc., a publicly held transportation and real estate company, and Stein Mart, Inc., a publicly held upscale discount retailer. He also serves on the Board of EverBank, a federal savings bank and EverBank Financial Corp, a privately held savings and loan company. He serves on the Board of Governors and the Executive Committee of the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts and is a member of the International Council of Shopping Centers, the Urban Land Institute, and the Real Estate Roundtable.

 

37


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

MARY LOU FIALA. Mrs. Fiala, age 53, became President and Chief Operating Officer of Regency Centers in January 1999. Before joining Regency, Mrs. Fiala was Managing Director — Security Capital U.S. Realty Strategic Group from March 1997 to January 1999. She was Senior Vice President and Director of Stores, New England — Macy’s East/Federated Department Stores from 1994 to March 1997. From 1976 to 1994, Mrs. Fiala held various merchandising and store operations positions with Macy’s/Federated Department Stores. She is a member of the Board of Trustees of the International Council of Shopping Centers, a National Trustee for Boys & Girls Clubs of America, serves on the University of North Florida Foundation Board, and serves on the Board of Build-A-Bear Workshop, Inc.

 

BRUCE M. JOHNSON. Mr. Johnson, age 57, has been Regency Centers’ Chief Financial Officer and a Managing Director since 1993. From 1979 to 1993, he served as Executive Vice President of Regency’s predecessor real estate division. Prior to joining Regency, he was Vice President of Barnett Winston Trust, an equity and mortgage real estate investment trust. Mr. Johnson is Chairman of Brooks Rehabilitation Hospital, a private not-for-profit rehabilitation hospital, and he is on the Board and the Executive Committee of its private parent company, Brooks Health Systems.

 

Audit Committee, Independence, Financial Experts. Incorporated herein by reference to Regency’s definitive proxy statement to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after the end of the fiscal year covered by this Form 10-K with respect to its 2005 Annual Meeting of Shareholders.

 

Compliance with Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act. Information concerning filings under Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act by the directors or executive officers of Regency is incorporated herein by reference to Regency’s definitive proxy statement to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after the end of the fiscal year covered by this Form 10-K with respect to its 2005 Annual Meeting of Shareholders.

 

Code of Ethics. We have adopted a code of ethics applicable to our principal executive officers, principal financial officer, principal accounting officer and persons performing similar functions. The text of this code of ethics may be found on our web site at “www.regencycenters.com.” We intend to post notice of any waiver from, or amendment to, any provision of our code of ethics on our web site.

 

Item 11. Executive Compensation

 

Incorporated herein by reference to Regency’s definitive proxy statement to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after the end of the fiscal year covered by this Form 10-K with respect to its 2005 Annual Meeting of Shareholders.

 

38


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters

 

Equity Compensation Plan Information

 

     (a)

   (b)

   (c)

 

Plan Category


   Number of
securities to be
issued upon
exercise of
outstanding
options, warrants
and rights


   Weighted-average
exercise price of
outstanding options,
warrants and rights(1)


   Number of securities
remaining available for
future issuance under
equity compensation
plans (excluding
securities reflected in
column (a))


 

Equity compensation plans approved by security holders

   1,675,163    $ 44.32    4,283,239 (2)

Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders

   N/A      N/A    8,772  
    
  

  

Total

   1,675,163    $ 44.32    4,292,011  
    
  

  


(1) The weighted average exercise price excludes stock rights awards, which we sometimes refer to as unvested restricted stock.
(2) Our Long Term Omnibus Plan, as amended and approved by shareholders at our 2003 annual meeting, provides for the issuance of up to 5.0 million shares of common stock or stock options for stock compensation; however, outstanding unvested grants plus vested but unexercised options cannot exceed 12% of our outstanding common stock and common stock equivalents (excluding options and other stock equivalents outstanding under the plan). The plan permits the grant of any type of share-based award but limits restricted stock awards, stock rights awards, performance shares, dividend equivalents settled in stock and other forms of stock grants to 2,750,000 shares, of which 2,033,239 shares were available at December 31, 2004 for future issuance.

 

Our Stock Grant Plan for non-key employees is the only equity compensation plan that our shareholders have not approved. This Plan provides for the award of a stock bonus of a specified value to each non-key employee on the 1st anniversary date and every 5th anniversary date of their employment. For example, each non-manager employee receives $500 in shares at the specified anniversary dates based on the average fair market value of Regency’s common stock for the most recent quarter prior to the anniversary date. A total of 30,000 shares of common stock have been reserved for issuance under this Plan, of which 8,772 shares were available at December 31, 2004 for future issuance.

 

Information about security ownership is incorporated herein by reference to Regency’s definitive proxy statement to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after the end of the fiscal year covered by this Form 10-K with respect to its 2005 Annual Meeting of Shareholders.

 

Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions

 

Incorporated herein by reference to Regency’s definitive proxy statement to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after the end of the fiscal year covered by this Form 10-K with respect to its 2005 Annual Meeting of Shareholders.

 

39


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Item 14. Principal Accounting Fees and Services

 

Incorporated herein by reference to Regency’s definitive proxy statement to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after the end of the fiscal year covered by this Form 10-K with respect to its 2005 Annual Meeting of Shareholders.

 

40


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

PART IV

 

Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules

 

     (a)    Financial Statements and Financial Statement Schedules:
          RCLP’s 2004 financial statements and financial statement schedule, together with the report of KPMG LLP are listed on the index immediately preceding the financial statements at the end of this report.
     (b)    Exhibits:
3.    Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws
          (i)    Restated Certificate of Limited Partnership of Regency Centers, L.P.
          (ii)    Fourth Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of Regency Centers, L.P., as amended (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10(l) of Regency Centers Corporation’s Form 10-K filed March 12, 2004).
4.    (a)    See Exhibit 3(ii) for provisions of the Partnership Agreement of Regency Centers, L.P. defining rights of security holders.
     (b)    Indenture dated July 20, 1998 between Regency Centers, L.P., the guarantors named therein and First Union National Bank, as trustee (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the registration statement on Form S-4 of Regency Centers, L.P., No. 333-63723).
     (c)    Indenture dated March 9, 1999 between Regency Centers, L.P., the guarantors named therein and First Union National Bank, as trustee (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the registration statement on Form S-3 of Regency Centers, L.P., No. 333-72899).
     (d)    Indenture dated December 5, 2001 between Regency Centers, L.P., the guarantors named therein and First Union National Bank, as trustee (incorporated by referenced to Exhibit 4.4 of Form 8-K of Regency Centers, L.P. filed December 10, 2001, File No. 0-24763).
10.    Material Contracts
     (a)    Credit Agreement dated as of March 26, 2004 by and among Regency Centers, L.P., Regency, each of the financial institutions initially a signatory thereto, and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Form 10-Q filed May 10, 2004).

 

41


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements
21. Subsidiaries of the Registrant.

 

23. Consent of KPMG LLP.

 

31.1 Rule 15d-14 Certification of Chief Executive Officer.

 

31.2 Rule 15d-14 Certification of Chief Financial Officer.

 

31.3 Rule 15d-14 Certification of Chief Operating Officer.

 

32.1 Section 1350 Certification of Chief Executive Officer.

 

32.2 Section 1350 Certification of Chief Financial Officer.

 

32.3 Section 1350 Certification of Chief Operating Officer.

 

42


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

SIGNATURES

 

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, duly authorized.

 

REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.

By:

 

REGENCY CENTERS CORPORATION,

General Partner

By:

 

/s/ Martin E. Stein, Jr.


   

Martin E. Stein, Jr.,

Chairman of the Board and

Chief Executive Officer

Date: March 14, 2005

 

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.

 

March 14, 2005

 

/s/ Martin E. Stein, Jr.


   

Martin E. Stein, Jr.,

Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer

March 14, 2005

 

/s/ Mary Lou Fiala


   

Mary Lou Fiala,

President, Chief Operating Officer and Director

March 14, 2005

 

/s/ Bruce M. Johnson


   

Bruce M. Johnson,

Managing Director, Chief Financial Officer

(Principal Financial Officer) and Director

March 14, 2005

 

/s/ J. Christian Leavitt


   

J. Christian Leavitt,

Senior Vice President, Secretary and

Treasurer (Principal Accounting Officer)

March 14, 2005

 

/s/ Raymond L. Bank


   

Raymond L. Bank,

Director

March 14, 2005

 

/s/ C. Ronald Blankenship


   

C. Ronald Blankenship,

Director

 

43


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

March 14, 2005

 

/s/ A. R. Carpenter


   

A. R. Carpenter,

Director

March 14, 2005

 

/s/ J. Dix Druce


   

J. Dix Druce,

Director

March 14, 2005

 

/s/ Douglas S. Luke


   

Douglas S. Luke,

Director

March 14, 2005

 

/s/ John C. Schweitzer


   

John C. Schweitzer,

Director

March 14, 2005

 

/s/ Thomas G. Wattles


   

Thomas G. Wattles,

Director

March 14, 2005

 

/s/ Terry N. Worrell


   

Terry N. Worrell,

Director

 

44


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Regency Centers, L.P.

 

Index to Financial Statements

 

Regency Centers, L.P.

    

Reports of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

   F-2

Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2004 and 2003

   F-5

Consolidated Statements of Operations for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002

   F-6

Consolidated Statements of Changes in Partners’ Capital and Comprehensive Income (Loss) for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002

   F-7

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002

   F-8

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

   F-10

Financial Statement Schedule

    

Schedule III - Regency Centers, L.P. Combined Real Estate and Accumulated Depreciation - December 31, 2004

   S-1

 

All other schedules are omitted because they are not applicable or because information required therein is shown in the consolidated financial statements or notes thereto.

 

F-1


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

 

The Unit holders of Regency Centers, L.P. and the Board of Directors of Regency Centers Corporation:

 

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Regency Centers, L.P. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2004 and 2003, and the related consolidated statements of operations, changes in partners’ capital and comprehensive income (loss), and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2004. In connection with our audits of the consolidated financial statements, we also have audited financial statement schedule III. These consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedule are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedule based on our audits.

 

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

 

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Regency Centers, L.P. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2004 and 2003, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2004 in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. Also in our opinion, the related financial statement schedule, when considered in relation to the basic consolidated financial statements taken as a whole, presents fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein.

 

We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the effectiveness of Regency Centers L.P.’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2004, based on criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO), and our report dated March 14, 2005 expressed an unqualified opinion on management’s assessment of, and the effective operation of, internal control over financial reporting.

 

 

 

 

/s/ KPMG LLP

 

 

 

 

 

Jacksonville, Florida

March 14, 2005

 

F-2


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

 

The Unit holders of Regency Centers, L.P. and the Board of Directors of Regency Centers Corporation:

 

We have audited management’s assessment, included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting, that Regency Centers, L.P. maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2004, based on criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Regency Centers, L.P.’s management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management’s assessment and an opinion on the effectiveness of the Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audit.

 

We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, evaluating management’s assessment, testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control, and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

 

A Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the Partnership; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the Partnership are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the Partnership; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the Partnership’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

 

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

 

In our opinion, management’s assessment that Regency Centers, L.P. maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2004, is fairly stated, in all material respects, based on criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Also, in our opinion, Regency Centers, L.P. maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2004, based on criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).

 

F-3


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheets of Regency Centers, L.P. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2004 and 2003, and the related consolidated statements of operations, changes in partners’ capital and comprehensive income (loss), and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2004, and related Financial Statements Schedule and our report dated March 14, 2005 expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated financial statements and related Financial Statements Schedule.

 

 

 

 

/s/ KPMG LLP

 

 

 

 

 

Jacksonville, Florida

March 14, 2005

 

F-4


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.

Consolidated Balance Sheets

December 31, 2004 and 2003

(in thousands, except unit data)

 

     2004

    2003

Assets

            

Real estate investments at cost (notes 2, 4 and 11):

            

Land

   $ 806,207     738,101

Buildings and improvements

     1,915,655     1,914,075
    


 
       2,721,862     2,652,176

Less: accumulated depreciation

     338,609     285,665
    


 
       2,383,253     2,366,511

Properties in development

     426,216     369,474

Operating properties held for sale

     4,916     4,200

Investments in real estate partnerships (note 4)

     179,677     140,496
    


 

Net real estate investments

     2,994,062     2,880,681

Cash and cash equivalents

     95,320     29,869

Notes receivable

     25,646     70,782

Tenant receivables, net of allowance for uncollectible accounts of $3,393 and $3,353 at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively

     60,911     57,041

Deferred costs, less accumulated amortization of $25,735 and $29,493 at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively

     41,002     35,804

Acquired lease intangible assets, net (note 5)

     14,172     10,205

Other assets

     12,711     13,847
    


 
     $ 3,243,824     3,098,229
    


 

Liabilities and Partners’ Capital

            

Liabilities:

            

Notes payable (note 6)

     1,293,090     1,257,777

Unsecured line of credit (note 6)

     200,000     195,000

Accounts payable and other liabilities

     102,443     94,280

Acquired lease intangible liabilities, net (note 5)

     5,161     6,115

Tenants’ security and escrow deposits

     10,049     9,358
    


 

Total liabilities

     1,610,743     1,562,530
    


 

Limited partners’ interest in consolidated partnerships

     1,827     4,651
    


 

Partners’ Capital (notes 7, 8, 9 and 10):

            

Series B preferred units, par value $100: 850,000 units issued and outstanding at December 31, 2003

     —       82,800

Series C preferred units, par value $100: 750,000 units issued, 400,000 units outstanding at December 31, 2003

     —       38,964

Series D preferred units, par value $100: 500,000 units issued and outstanding at December 31, 2004 and 2003

     49,158     49,158

Series E preferred units, par value $100: 700,000 units issued, 300,000 units outstanding at December 31, 2004 and 2003

     29,238     29,238

Series F preferred units, par value $100: 240,000 units issued and outstanding at December 31, 2004 and 2003

     23,366     23,366

Preferred units, par value $0.01: 800,000 and 300,000 units issued and outstanding at December 31, 2004 and 2003 respectively; liquidation preference $250

     200,000     75,000

General partner; 62,808,979 and 59,907,957 units outstanding at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively

     1,304,008     1,205,803

Limited partners; 1,488,364 and 1,318,625 units outstanding at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively

     30,775     26,544

Accumulated other comprehensive (loss) income

     (5,291 )   175
    


 

Total partners’ capital

     1,631,254     1,531,048
    


 

Commitments and contingencies (notes 11 and 12)

            
     $ 3,243,824     3,098,229
    


 

 

See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.

 

F-5


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.

Consolidated Statements of Operations

For the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002

(in thousands, expect per unit data)

 

     2004

    2003

    2002

 

Revenues:

                    

Minimum rent (note 11)

   $ 286,081     264,721     252,273  

Percentage rent

     4,083     4,534     5,170  

Recoveries from tenants

     80,927     76,250     71,985  

Management fees and commissions

     10,663     6,419     4,617  

Equity in income of investments in real estate partnerships

     10,194     11,276     5,765  
    


 

 

Total revenues

     391,948     363,200     339,810  
    


 

 

Operating expenses:

                    

Depreciation and amortization

     81,125     71,926     65,257  

Operating and maintenance

     53,863     50,746     47,339  

General and administrative

     30,282     24,229     22,757  

Real estate taxes

     40,403     37,474     35,562  

Other expenses

     8,043     4,993     (1,802 )
    


 

 

Total operating expenses

     213,716     189,368     169,113  
    


 

 

Other expense (income)

                    

Interest expense, net of interest income of $3,128, $2,357, and $2,333 in 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively

     81,196     83,553     84,472  

Gain on sale of operating properties and properties in development

     (39,387 )   (48,717 )   (20,905 )

Provision for loss on operating properties

     810     —       950  

Other income

     —       —       (2,383 )
    


 

 

Total other expense

     42,619     34,836     62,134  
    


 

 

Income before minority interests

     135,613     138,996     108,563  

Minority interest of limited partners

     (319 )   (501 )   (492 )
    


 

 

Income from continuing operations

     135,294     138,495     108,071  

Discontinued operations:

                    

Operating income from discontinued operations

     4,221     8,809     22,226  

Gain on sale of operating properties and properties in development

     19,220     16,355     16,499  
    


 

 

Income from discontinued operations

     23,441     25,164     38,725  
    


 

 

Net income

     158,735     163,659     146,796  

Preferred unit distributions

     (28,462 )   (34,001 )   (33,475 )
    


 

 

Net income for common unit holders

   $ 130,273     129,658     113,321  
    


 

 

Income per common unit - basic (note 9):

                    

Continuing operations

   $ 1.71     1.72     1.20  

Discontinued operations

     0.37     0.41     0.65  
    


 

 

Net income for common unit holders per unit

   $ 2.08     2.13     1.85  
    


 

 

Income per common unit - diluted (note 9):

                    

Continuing operations

   $ 1.71     1.71     1.20  

Discontinued operations

     0.37     0.41     0.64  
    


 

 

Net income for common unit holders per unit

   $ 2.08     2.12     1.84  
    


 

 

 

See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.

 

F-6


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.

Consolidated Statements of Changes in Partners’ Capital and Comprehensive Income (Loss)

For the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002

(in thousands)

 

     Preferred Units

    General Partner
Preferred and
Common Units


    Limited
Partner


    Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income (Loss)


    Total
Partners’
Capital


 

Balance at December 31, 2001

   $ 375,404     1,219,051     32,108     —       1,626,563  

Net income

     33,475     110,524     2,797     —       146,796  

Cash distributions for dividends

     —       (121,828 )   (3,157 )   —       (124,985 )

Preferred unit distributions

     (33,475 )   —       —       —       (33,475 )

Purchase of Regency stock and corresponding units

     —       (2,725 )   —       —       (2,725 )

Units converted for cash

     —       —       (83 )   —       (83 )

Common Units issued as a result of common stock issued by Regency, net of repurchases

     —       15,663     —       —       15,663  

Common Units exchanged for common stock of Regency

     —       1,288     (1,288 )   —       —    

Reallocation of limited partners’ interest

     —       (253 )   253     —       —    
    


 

 

 

 

Balance at December 31, 2002

   $ 375,404     1,221,720     30,630     —       1,627,754  

Comprehensive income (note 7):

                                

Net income

     29,826     130,789     3,044     —       163,659  

Change in fair value of derivative instruments

                       175     175  
                              

Total comprehensive income

     —       —       —       —       163,834  

Redemption of preferred units

     (151,878 )         —       —       (151,878 )

Cash distributions for dividends

           (124,878 )   (2,901 )   —       (127,779 )

Preferred unit distributions

     (29,826 )   (4,175 )   —       —       (34,001 )

Purchase of Regency stock and corresponding units (note 8)

           (150,502 )   —       —       (150,502 )

Units converted for cash

     —       —       (1,794 )   —       (1,794 )

Series 3 Preferred units issued (note 8)

     —       75,000     —       —       75,000  

Common Units issued as a result of common stock issued by Regency, net of repurchases

     —       130,414     —       —       130,414  

Common Units exchanged for common stock of Regency

     —       3,616     (3,616 )   —       —    

Reallocation of limited partners’ interest

     —       (1,181 )   1,181     —       —    
    


 

 

 

 

Balance at December 31, 2003

   $ 223,526     1,280,803     26,544     175     1,531,048  

Comprehensive income (note 7):

                                

Net income

     19,829     136,327     2,579     —       158,735  

Loss on settlement of derivative instruments

                       (5,895 )   (5,895 )

Amortization of loss on derivative instruments

                       429     429  
                              

Total comprehensive income

     —       —       —       —       153,269  

Redemption of preferred units

     (121,764 )   —       —       —       (121,764 )

Cash distributions for dividends

           (129,470 )   (2,508 )   —       (131,978 )

Preferred unit distributions

     (19,829 )   (8,633 )   —       —       (28,462 )

Units converted for cash

     —       —       (20,402 )   —       (20,402 )

Series 4 Preferred units issued (note 8)

     —       125,000     —       —       125,000  

Common Units issued as a result of common stock issued by Regency, net of repurchases

     —       86,143     —       —       86,143  

Common Units exchanged for common stock of Regency

     —       7,154     (7,154 )   —       —    

Units issued for acquisition of real estate

     —       —       38,400     —       38,400  

Reallocation of limited partners’ interest

     —       6,684     (6,684 )   —       —    
    


 

 

 

 

Balance at December 31, 2004

   $ 101,762     1,504,008     30,775     (5,291 )   1,631,254  
    


 

 

 

 

 

See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.

 

F-7


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows

For the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002

(in thousands)

 

     2004

    2003

    2002

 

Cash flows from operating activities:

                    

Net income

   $ 158,735     163,659     146,796  

Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities:

                    

Depreciation and amortization

     81,936     75,023     74,417  

Deferred loan cost and debt premium amortization

     1,739     1,099     1,636  

Services provided by Regency in exchange for Common Units

     14,432     11,327     9,517  

Minority interest of limited partners

     319     501     492  

Equity in income of investments in real estate partnerships

     (10,194 )   (11,276 )   (5,765 )

Net gain on sale of properties

     (60,539 )   (65,877 )   (40,083 )

Provision for loss on operating properties

     810     1,969     4,369  

Other income

     —       —       (2,384 )

Distributions from operations of investments in real estate partnerships

     13,342     8,341     5,522  

Hedge settlement

     (5,720 )   —       —    

Changes in assets and liabilities:

                    

Tenant receivables

     (5,849 )   (6,590 )   (863 )

Deferred leasing costs

     (6,199 )   (11,021 )   (12,917 )

Other assets

     1,449     1,245     (10,885 )

Accounts payable and other liabilities

     (574 )   11,735     (15,795 )

Tenants’ security and escrow deposits

     214     510     699  
    


 

 

Net cash provided by operating activities

     183,901     180,645     154,756  
    


 

 

Cash flows from investing activities:

                    

Acquisition of real estate

     (60,358 )   (86,780 )   (57,056 )

Development of real estate

     (340,217 )   (328,920 )   (245,011 )

Proceeds from sale of real estate investments

     317,178     237,033     427,808  

Repayment of notes receivable, net

     64,009     117,643     37,363  

Investments in real estate partnerships

     (66,299 )   (14,881 )   (46,019 )

Distributions received from investments in real estate partnerships

     47,369     26,902     11,784  
    


 

 

Net cash (used in) provided by investing activities

     (38,318 )   (49,003 )   128,869  
    


 

 

Cash flows from financing activities:

                    

Net proceeds from the issuance of Regency stock and Common Units

     81,662     127,428     9,932  

Repurchase of Regency stock and corresponding Common Units

     —       (150,502 )   (2,725 )

Redemption of preferred units

     (125,000 )   (155,750 )   —    

Cash paid for conversion of Common Units by limited partner

     (20,402 )   (1,794 )   (83 )

Contributions (distributions) from limited partners in consolidated partnerships

     373     (10,676 )   (384 )

Distributions to preferred unit holders

     (25,226 )   (30,129 )   (36,333 )

Cash distributions for dividends

     (131,979 )   (127,778 )   (122,127 )

Net proceeds from issuance of preferred units

     120,712     72,295     —    

Repayment of fixed rate unsecured notes

     (200,000 )   —       —    

Proceeds from issuance of fixed rate unsecured notes, net

     148,646     —       249,625  

Proceeds (repayment) of unsecured line of credit, net

     5,000     115,000     (294,000 )

Proceeds from notes payable

     84,223     30,822     7,082  

Repayment of notes payable, net

     (8,176 )   (22,840 )   (58,306 )

Scheduled principal payments

     (5,711 )   (4,099 )   (5,630 )

Deferred loan costs

     (4,254 )   (197 )   (2,082 )
    


 

 

Net cash used in financing activities

     (80,132 )   (158,220 )   (255,031 )
    


 

 

Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents

     65,451     (26,578 )   28,594  

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of the year

     29,869     56,447     27,853  
    


 

 

Cash and cash equivalents at end of the year

   $ 95,320     29,869     56,447  
    


 

 

 

F-8


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows

For the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002

(in thousands)

 

Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information - cash paid for interest (net of capitalized interest of $11,228, $13,106 and $13,753 in 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively)

   $ 85,416    84,531    78,450
    

  
  

Supplemental disclosure of non-cash transactions:

                

Mortgage debt assumed by purchaser on sale of real estate

   $ 44,684    13,557    4,570
    

  
  

Common stock issued for partnership units exchanged

   $ 7,154    3,616    1,288
    

  
  

Mortgage loans assumed for the acquisition of real estate

   $ 61,717    15,342    46,747
    

  
  

Real estate contributed as investments in real estate partnerships

   $ 31,312    24,100    29,486
    

  
  

Exchangeable operating partnership units issued for the acquisition of real estate

   $ 38,400    —      —  
    

  
  

Notes receivable taken in connection with sales of operating properties, properties in development and out-parcels

   $ 3,255    131,794    61,489
    

  
  

Change in fair value of derivative instrument

   $ —      175    —  
    

  
  

Common stock redeemed to pay off stock loans

   $ —      —      6,089
    

  
  

 

See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.

 

F-9


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Regency Centers, L.P.

 

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

December 31, 2004

 

1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

 

  (a) Organization and Principles of Consolidation

 

Regency Centers, L.P. (“RCLP” or the “Partnership”) is the primary entity through which Regency Centers Corporation (“Regency” or the “Company”), a self-administered and self-managed real estate investment trust (“REIT”), conducts all of its business and owns all of its assets.

 

The Partnership was formed in 1996 for the purpose of acquiring certain real estate properties. At December 31, 2004, Regency owns approximately 98% of the outstanding common units of the Partnership.

 

The Partnership’s ownership interests are represented by Units, of which there are i) five series of preferred Units, ii) common Units owned by the limited partners and iii) common Units owned by Regency which serves as the general partner. Each outstanding common Unit owned by a limited partner is exchangeable, on a one share per one Unit basis, for the common stock of Regency or for cash at Regency’s election.

 

The accompanying consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Partnership, its wholly owned subsidiaries, and also partnerships in which it has voting control. All significant intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated in the consolidated financial statements.

 

  (b) Revenues

 

The Partnership leases space to tenants under agreements with varying terms. Leases are accounted for as operating leases with minimum rent recognized on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease regardless of when payments are due. Accrued rents are included in tenant receivables.

 

Substantially all of the lease agreements contain provisions that grant additional rents based on tenants’ sales volume (contingent or percentage rent) and reimbursement of the tenants’ share of real estate taxes, insurance and common area maintenance (“CAM”) costs. Percentage rents are recognized when the tenants achieve the specified targets as defined in their lease agreements. Recovery of real estate taxes, insurance and CAM costs are recognized as the respective costs are incurred in accordance with the lease agreements.

 

The Partnership accounts for profit recognition on sales of real estate in accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) Statement No. 66, “Accounting for Sales of Real Estate.” In summary, profits from sales will not be recognized by the Partnership unless a sale has been consummated; the buyer’s initial and continuing investment is adequate to demonstrate a commitment to pay for the property; the Partnership has transferred to the buyer the usual risks and rewards of ownership; and the Partnership does not have substantial continuing financial involvement with the property.

 

The Partnership has been engaged by joint ventures to provide asset and property management services for their shopping centers. The fees are market based and generally calculated as a percentage of either revenues earned or the estimated values of the properties and are recognized as services are provided.

 

F-10


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Regency Centers, L.P.

 

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

December 31, 2004

 

  (c) Real Estate Investments

 

Land, buildings and improvements are recorded at cost. All specifically identifiable costs related to development activities are capitalized into properties in development on the consolidated balance sheet. The capitalized costs include pre-development costs essential to the development of the property, development costs, construction costs, interest costs, real estate taxes, direct employee costs, and other costs incurred during the period of development.

 

The Partnership incurs costs prior to land acquisition including acquisition contract deposits, as well as legal, engineering and other external professional fees related to evaluating the feasibility of developing a shopping center. These pre-acquisition development costs are included in properties in development. If the Partnership determines that the development of a shopping center is no longer probable, any pre-development costs previously incurred are immediately expensed. At December 31, 2004 and 2003, the Partnership had capitalized pre-development costs of $10.5 million and $8.8 million, respectively.

 

The Partnership’s method of capitalizing interest is based upon applying its weighted average borrowing rate to that portion of the actual development costs expended. The Partnership ceases cost capitalization when the property is available for occupancy upon substantial completion of tenant improvements. In no event would the Partnership capitalize interest on the project beyond 12 months after substantial completion of the building shell.

 

Maintenance and repairs that do not improve or extend the useful lives of the respective assets are reflected in operating and maintenance expense.

 

Depreciation is computed using the straight-line method over estimated useful lives of up to 40 years for buildings and improvements, term of lease for tenant improvements, and three to seven years for furniture and equipment.

 

The Partnership allocates the purchase price of assets acquired (net tangible and identifiable intangible assets) and liabilities assumed based on their relative fair values at the date of acquisition pursuant to the provisions SFAS No. 141, “Business Combinations” (“Statement 141”). Statement 141 provides guidance on allocating a portion of the purchase price of a property to intangible assets. The Partnership’s methodology for this allocation includes estimating an “as-if vacant” fair value of the physical property, which is allocated to land, building and improvements. The difference between the purchase price and the “as-if vacant” fair value is allocated to intangible assets. There are three categories of intangible assets to be considered, (i) value of in-place leases, (ii) above and below-market value of in-place leases and (iii) customer relationship value.

 

The value of in-place leases is estimated based on the value associated with the costs avoided in originating leases comparable to the acquired in-place leases as well as the value associated with lost rental and recovery revenue during the assumed lease-up period. The value of in-place leases is amortized to expense over the estimated weighted-average remaining lease lives.

 

F-11


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Regency Centers, L.P.

 

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

December 31, 2004

 

  (c) Real Estate Investments (continued)

 

Above-market and below-market in-place lease values for acquired properties are recorded based on the present value of the difference between (i) the contractual amounts to be paid pursuant to the in-place leases and (ii) management’s estimates of fair market lease rates for the comparable in-place leases, measured over a period equal to the remaining non-cancelable term of the lease. The value of above-market leases is amortized as a reduction of base rental revenue over the remaining terms of the respective leases. The value of below-market leases is accreted as an increase to base rental revenue over the remaining terms of the respective leases including renewal options.

 

The Partnership allocates no value to customer relationship intangibles if it has pre-existing business relationships with the major retailers in the acquired property because the customer relationships associated with the acquired property provide no incremental value over the Partnership’s existing relationships.

 

The Partnership follows the provisions of SFAS No. 144, “Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets” (“Statement 144”). In accordance with Statement 144, operating properties held for sale includes only those properties available for immediate sale in their present condition and for which management believes it is probable that a sale of the property will be completed within one year. Operating properties held-for-sale are carried at the lower of cost or fair value less costs to sell. Depreciation and amortization are suspended during the held- for-sale period.

 

The Partnership reviews its real estate portfolio for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount may not be recoverable based upon expected undiscounted cash flows from the property. The Partnership determines impairment by comparing the property’s carrying value to an estimate of fair value based upon varying methods such as i) estimating future cash flows, ii) determining resale values by market, or iii) applying a capitalization rate to net operating income using prevailing rates in a given market. These methods of determining fair value can fluctuate significantly as a result of a number of factors, including changes in the general economy of those markets in which the Partnership operates, tenant credit quality and demand for new retail stores. In the event a property is permanently impaired, the Partnership will write down the asset to fair value for “held-and-used” assets and to fair value less costs to sell for “held-for-sale” assets. During 2004, 2003 and 2002 the Partnership recorded a provision for loss of approximately $810,000, $2.0 million and $4.4 million, based upon the criteria described above. The provision for loss on properties subsequently sold to third parties is included as part of discontinued operations.

 

The Partnership’s properties generally have operations and cash flows that can be clearly distinguished from the rest of the Partnership. In accordance with Statement 144, the operations and gains on sales reported in discontinued operations include those operating properties and properties in development that were sold and for which operations and cash flows can be clearly distinguished. The operations from these properties have been eliminated from ongoing operations and the Partnership will not have continuing involvement after disposition. Prior periods have been restated to reflect the operations of these properties as discontinued operations. The operations and gains on sales of operating properties sold to real estate partnerships in which the Partnership has continuing involvement are included in income from continuing operations.

 

F-12


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Regency Centers, L.P.

 

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

December 31, 2004

 

  (d) Income Taxes

 

The Company believes it qualifies, and intends to continue to qualify, as a REIT under the Internal Revenue Code (the “Code”). As a REIT, the Company is allowed to reduce taxable income by all or a portion of its distributions to stockholders. As distributions have exceeded taxable income, no provision for federal income taxes has been made in the accompanying consolidated financial statements (except as required for the Partnership’s Taxable REIT Subsidiary as discussed below).

 

Earnings and profits, which determine the taxability of dividends to stockholders, differs from net income reported for financial reporting purposes primarily because of differences in depreciable lives and cost bases of the shopping centers, as well as other timing differences.

 

The net book basis of real estate assets exceeds the tax basis by approximately $103.9 million and $113.2 million at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively, primarily due to the difference between the cost basis of the assets acquired and their carryover basis recorded for tax purposes.

 

The following summarizes the tax status of dividends paid during the respective years:

 

     2004

    2003

    2002

 

Dividend per share

   $ 2.12     2.08     2.04  

Ordinary income

     82.00 %   74.04 %   71.00 %

Capital gain

     6.00 %   .49 %   1.00 %

Return of capital

     3.00 %   12.84 %   22.00 %

Unrecaptured Section 1250 gain

     9.00 %   7.16 %   4.00 %

Qualified 5-year gain

     —       —       2.00 %

Post-May 5 gain

     —       5.47 %   —    

 

Regency Realty Group, Inc. (“RRG”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of RCLP, is a Taxable REIT Subsidiary as defined in Section 856(l) of the Code. RRG is subject to federal and state income taxes and files separate tax returns. Income tax expense consists of the following for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 which is included in either other expenses or discontinued operations (in thousands):

 

     2004

    2003

    2002

 

Income tax expense (benefit)

                    

Current

   $ 10,730     4,179     4,054  

Deferred

     (1,978 )   (1,230 )   (4,445 )
    


 

 

Total income tax expense (benefit)

   $ 8,752     2,949     (391 )
    


 

 

 

F-13


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Regency Centers, L.P.

 

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

December 31, 2004

 

  (d) Income Taxes (continued)

 

Income tax expense differed from the amounts computed by applying the U.S. Federal income tax rate of 34% to pretax income as follows for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 (in thousands):

 

     2004

   2003

    2002

 

Computed expected tax expense (benefit)

   $ 5,759    3,539     (84 )

Increase in income taxes resulting from state taxes

     913    308     (41 )

All other items

     2,080    (898 )   (266 )
    

  

 

Total income tax expense (benefit)

   $ 8,752    2,949     (391 )
    

  

 

 

RRG had net deferred tax assets of $8.9 million and $6.9 million at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. The majority of the deferred tax assets relate to deferred interest expense and tax costs capitalized on projects under development. No valuation allowance was provided and the Partnership believes it is more likely than not that the future benefits associated with these deferred assets will be realized.

 

  (e) Deferred Costs

 

Deferred costs include deferred leasing costs and deferred loan costs, net of accumulated amortization. Such costs are amortized over the periods through lease expiration or loan maturity. Deferred leasing costs consist of internal and external commissions associated with leasing the Partnership’s shopping centers. Net deferred leasing costs were $30.8 million and $28.0 million at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. Deferred loan costs consist of initial direct and incremental costs associated with financing activities. Net deferred loan costs were $10.2 million and $7.8 million at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively.

 

  (f) Earnings per Unit and Treasury Stock

 

Basic net income per unit is computed based upon the weighted average number of common units outstanding during the period. Diluted net income per unit also includes common unit equivalents for stock options and exchangeable operating partnership units. See note 9 for the calculation of earnings per unit (“EPU”).

 

Repurchases of the Company’s common stock (net of shares retired) are recorded at cost and are reflected as Treasury stock in the consolidated statements of stockholders’ equity. Outstanding shares do not include treasury shares. Concurrent with the Treasury stock repurchases by Regency, the Partnership repurchases the same amount of general partnership units from Regency.

 

  (g) Cash and Cash Equivalents

 

Any instruments which have an original maturity of 90 days or less when purchased are considered cash equivalents. Cash distributions of normal operating earnings from investments in real estate partnerships and cash received from the sales of development properties are included in cash flows from operations in the consolidated statements of cash flows.

 

F-14


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Regency Centers, L.P.

 

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

December 31, 2004

 

  (h) Estimates

 

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

 

  (i) Stock-Based Compensation

 

Regency is committed to contribute to the Partnership all proceeds from the exercise of options or other stock-based awards granted under Regency’s Stock Option and Incentive Plan. Regency’s ownership in the Partnership will be increased based on the amount of proceeds contributed to the Partnership.

 

The Partnership follows the provisions of SFAS No. 148, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation - Transition and Disclosure” (“Statement 148”). Statement 148 provides alternative methods of transition for a voluntary change to the fair value based method of accounting for stock-based employee compensation. In addition, Statement 148 amends the disclosure requirements of SFAS Statement No. 123, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation” (“Statement 123”), to require more prominent and frequent disclosures in financial statements about the effects of stock-based compensation. As permitted under Statement 123 and Statement 148, the Partnership currently follows the accounting guidelines pursuant to Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 25, “Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees” (“Opinion 25”), for stock-based compensation and furnishes the pro-forma disclosures as required under Statement 148.

 

On December 16, 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued SFAS No. 123 (revised 2004), “Share-Based Payment” (“Statement 123(R)”), which is a revision of Statement 123. Statement 123(R) supersedes Opinion 25. Generally, the approach in Statement 123(R) is similar to the approach described in Statement 123. However, Statement 123(R) requires all share-based payments to employees, including grants of employee stock options, to be recognized in the statement of operations based on their fair values. Pro-forma disclosure is no longer an alternative. Statement 123(R) must be adopted no later than July 1, 2005.

 

Statement 123(R) permits companies to adopt its requirements using one of two methods:

 

1. The “modified prospective” method in which compensation cost is recognized beginning with the effective date (a) based on the requirements of Statement 123(R) for all share-based payments granted after the effective date and (b) based on the requirements of Statement 123 for all awards granted to employees prior to the effective date of Statement 123(R) that remain unvested on the effective date.

 

2. The “modified retrospective” method includes the requirements of the modified prospective method described above, but also permits entities to restate based on the amounts previously recognized under Statement 123 for purposes of pro-forma disclosures either (a) all prior periods presented or (b) prior interim periods of the year of adoption.

 

The Partnership adopted Statement 123R using the modified prospective method on January 1, 2005.

 

F-15


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Regency Centers, L.P.

 

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

December 31, 2004

 

  (i) Stock-Based Compensation (continued)

 

As permitted by Statement 123, the Partnership currently accounts for share-based payments to employees using Opinion 25’s intrinsic value method and generally recognizes no compensation cost for employee stock options. Accordingly, the adoption of Statement 123(R)’s fair value method will have an impact on its results of operations in 2005. Had the Partnership adopted Statement 123(R) in prior periods, the impact of that standard would have approximated the impact of Statement 123 in the disclosure of pro-forma net income and earnings per unit described below.

 

The Company has a Long-Term Omnibus Plan (the “Plan”) under which the Board of Directors may grant stock options and other stock-based awards to officers, directors and other key employees. The Plan allows the Company to issue up to 5.0 million shares in the form of common stock or stock options, but limits the issuance of common stock excluding stock options to no more than 2.75 million shares. At December 31, 2004, there were approximately 4.3 million shares available for grant under the Plan either through options or restricted stock of which 2.0 million shares are limited to common stock awards other than stock options. The Plan also limits outstanding awards to no more than 12% of outstanding common stock.

 

Stock options are granted under the Plan with an exercise price equal to the stock’s fair market value at the date of grant. All stock options granted have ten year lives, contain vesting terms of one to five years from the date of grant and may have certain dividend equivalent and stock option “reload” rights. The “reload” rights allow for an option holder to receive new options each time existing options are exercised if the existing options are exercised under specific criteria provided for in the Plan. In January 2005, the Company offered to acquire the “reload” rights of existing stock options from the option holders by issuing them additional stock options that will vest 25% per year and be expensed over a four-year period beginning in 2005 in accordance with Statement 123(R). As a result of the offer, on January 18, 2005, the Company granted 771,645 options with an exercise price of $51.36, the fair value on the date of grant, and substantially all of the “reload” rights on existing stock options were cancelled.

 

Restricted stock granted under the Plan generally vests over a period of four years, although certain grants cliff-vest after eight years, but contain provisions that allow for accelerated vesting over a shorter term if certain performance criteria are met. Compensation expense is measured at the grant date and recognized ratably over the vesting period. The Company considers the likelihood of meeting the performance criteria in determining the amount to expense on a periodic basis. In general, such criteria have been met, thus expense is recognized at a rate commensurate with the actual vesting period. Restricted stock grants also have certain dividend rights under the Plan, which are expensed in a manner similar to the underlying stock.

 

F-16


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Regency Centers, L.P.

 

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

December 31, 2004

 

  (i) Stock-Based Compensation (continued)

 

The following table represents restricted stock granted in January 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively, for each of the following performance years:

 

     2004

   2003

   2002

Fair value of stock at date of grant

   $ 51.36    39.97    31.27
    

  
  

4-year vesting grant

     246,375    219,787    232,758

8-year vesting grant

     —      64,649    103,592
    

  
  

Total stock grants

     246,375    284,436    336,350
    

  
  

 

The 4-year stock grants vest at the rate of 25% per year and the 8-year stock grants cliff-vest after eight years, but have the ability for accelerated vesting under the terms described above. Based upon restricted stock vesting in 2004, 2003 and 2002, the Partnership recorded compensation expense of $11.8 million, $7.5 million and $5.6 million, respectively including the dividends vesting on restricted stock. During 2004, 2003 and 2002, the Partnership recorded compensation expense for dividend equivalents related to stock options of $2.2 million, $3.5 million and $3.2 million respectively, related to unexercised stock options. The Partnership also incurs stock based compensation related to fees paid to it Board of Directors, and non-exempt employee anniversaries.

 

The following table represents the assumptions used for the Black-Scholes option-pricing model for options granted in the respective year:

 

     2004

    2003

    2002

 

Per share weighted average fair value of stock options

   $ 4.75     2.23     1.94  

Expected dividend yield

     4.0 %   5.5 %   6.8 %

Risk-free interest rate

     2.9 %   2.2 %   2.0 %

Expected volatility

     19.0 %   16.0 %   19.1 %

Expected life in years

     2.1     2.4     2.5  

 

F-17


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Regency Centers, L.P.

 

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

December 31, 2004

 

  (i) Stock-Based Compensation (continued)

 

The Partnership applies Opinion 25 in accounting for its Plan, and accordingly, no compensation cost has been recognized for its stock options in the consolidated financial statements. Had the Partnership determined compensation cost based on the fair value at the grant date for its stock options under Statement 123, the Partnership’s net income for common stockholders would have been reduced to the pro-forma amounts indicated below (in thousands except per unit data):

 

     2004

   2003

   2002

Net income for common unit holders as reported:

   $ 130,273    129,658    113,321

Add: stock-based employee compensation expense included in reported net income

     14,425    11,327    9,517

Deduct: total stock-based employee compensation expense determined under fair value based methods for all awards

     21,067    15,455    13,470
    

  
  

Pro-forma net income

   $ 123,631    125,530    109,368
    

  
  

Earnings per unit:

                

Basic – as reported

   $ 2.08    2.13    1.85
    

  
  

Basic – pro-forma

   $ 1.98    2.06    1.78
    

  
  

Diluted – as reported

   $ 2.08    2.12    1.84
    

  
  

Diluted – pro-forma

   $ 1.97    2.05    1.77
    

  
  

 

  (j) Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities

 

In December 2003, the FASB issued Interpretation No. 46 (“FIN 46”) (revised December 2003 (“FIN 46R”)), “Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities”, which addresses how a business enterprise should evaluate whether it has a controlling financial interest in an entity through means other than voting rights and accordingly should consolidate the entity. FIN 46R replaces FIN 46, which was issued in January 2003. FIN 46R was applicable immediately to a variable interest entity created after January 31, 2003 and as of the first interim period ending after March 15, 2004 to those variable interest entities created before February 1, 2003 and not already consolidated under FIN 46 in previously issued financial statements. The Partnership did not create any variable interest entities after January 31, 2003. The Partnership has adopted FIN 46R, analyzed the applicability of this interpretation to its structures and determined that they are not party to any significant variable interest entities.

 

F-18


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Regency Centers, L.P.

 

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

December 31, 2004

 

  (k) Segment Reporting

 

The Partnership’s business is investing in retail shopping centers through direct ownership or through joint ventures. The Partnership actively manages its portfolio of retail shopping centers and may from time to time make decisions to sell lower performing properties, or developments not meeting its long-term investment objectives. The proceeds of sales are reinvested into higher quality retail shopping centers through acquisitions or new developments, which management believes will meet its planned rate of return. It is management’s intent that all retail shopping centers will be owned or developed for investment purposes. The Partnership’s revenue and net income are generated from the operation of its investment portfolio. The Partnership also earns incidental fees from third parties for services provided to manage and lease retail shopping centers owned through joint ventures.

 

The Partnership’s portfolio is located throughout the United States; however, management does not distinguish or group its operations on a geographical basis for purposes of allocating resources or measuring performance. The Partnership reviews operating and financial data for each property on an individual basis, therefore, the Partnership defines an operating segment as its individual properties. No individual property constitutes more than 10% of the Partnership’s combined revenue, net income or assets, and thus the individual properties have been aggregated into one reportable segment based upon their similarities with regard to both the nature of the centers, tenants and operational processes, as well as long-term average financial performance. In addition, no single tenant accounts for 10% or more of revenue and none of the shopping centers are located outside the United States.

 

  (l) Derivative Financial Instruments

 

The Partnership adopted SFAS No. 133 “Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities” as amended by SFAS No. 149 (“Statement 133”) on January 1, 2001. Statement 133 requires that all derivative instruments be recorded on the balance sheet at their fair value. Gains or losses resulting from changes in the values of those derivatives are accounted for depending on the use of the derivative and whether it qualifies for hedge accounting. The Partnership’s use of derivative financial instruments is normally to mitigate its interest rate risk on a related financial instrument or forecasted transaction through the use of interest rate swaps or rate locks.

 

Statement 133 requires that changes in fair value of derivatives that qualify as cash flow hedges be recognized in other comprehensive income (“OCI”) while the ineffective portion of the derivative’s change in fair value be recognized immediately in earnings. Upon the settlement of a hedge, gains and losses associated with the transaction are recorded in OCI and amortized over the underlying term of the hedge transaction. Historically all of the Partnership’s derivative instruments qualify for hedge accounting.

 

To determine the fair value of derivative instruments, the Partnership uses standard market conventions and techniques such as discounted cash flow analysis, option pricing models and termination costs at each balance sheet date. All methods of assessing fair value result in a general approximation of value, and such value may never actually be realized.

 

F-19


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Regency Centers, L.P.

 

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

December 31, 2004

 

  (m) Financial Instruments with Characteristics of Both Liabilities and Equity

 

In May 2003, the FASB issued SFAS No. 150, “Accounting for Certain Financial Instruments with Characteristics of both Liabilities and Equity” (“Statement 150”). Statement 150 affects the accounting for certain financial instruments, which requires companies having consolidated entities with specified termination dates to treat minority owners’ interests in such entities as liabilities in an amount based on the fair value of the entities. Although Statement 150 was originally effective July 1, 2003, the FASB has indefinitely deferred certain provisions related to classification and measurement requirements for mandatorily redeemable financial instruments that become subject to Statement 150 solely as a result of consolidation including minority interests of entities with specified termination dates. As a result, Statement 150 has no impact on the Partnership’s consolidated statements of operations for the year ended December 31, 2004.

 

At December 31, 2004, the Partnership held a majority interest in two consolidated entities with specified termination dates of 2017 and 2049. The minority owners’ interests in these entities are to be settled upon termination by distribution or transfer of either cash or specific assets of the underlying entities. The estimated fair value of minority interests in entities with specified termination dates was approximately $5.1 million at December 31, 2004 as compared to their carrying value of $851,088. The Partnership has no other financial instruments that are affected by Statement 150.

 

  (n) Reclassifications

 

Certain reclassifications have been made to the 2003 and 2002 amounts to conform to classifications adopted in 2004.

 

2. Real Estate Investments

 

During 2004, the Partnership acquired five operating properties from third parties for $164.4 million. The purchase price included the assumption of $61.7 million in debt, the issuance of 920,562 common units to limited partners valued at $38.4 million, and cash. During 2003, the Partnership acquired four operating properties from third parties for $75.4 million. The Partnership also acquired a redevelopment property for $26.4 million. In accordance with Statement 141, acquired lease intangible assets of $6.3 million and $7.9 million for in-place leases were recorded for the acquisitions in 2004 and 2003, respectively. The acquisitions were accounted for as purchases and the results of their operations are included in the consolidated financial statements from the respective dates of acquisition, and neither was considered significant to the Partnership’s operations in the current or preceding periods.

 

F-20


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Regency Centers, L.P.

 

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

December 31, 2004

 

3. Discontinued Operations

 

During 2004, the Partnership sold 100% of its interest in 17 properties for net proceeds of $130.5 million. The combined operating income from these properties and from properties held for sale including related gains are included in discontinued operations. The revenues from properties included in discontinued operations, including properties sold in 2004, 2003 and 2002, as well as operating properties held for sale, were $9.9 million, $23.1 million and $48.6 million for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. The operating income from these properties was $4.2 million, $8.8 million and $22.2 million for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.

 

4. Investments in Real Estate Partnerships

 

The Partnership accounts for all investments in which it owns 50% or less and does not have a controlling financial interest using the equity method. The Partnership’s combined investment in these partnerships was $179.7 million and $140.5 million at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. Any difference between the carrying amount of these investments and the underlying equity in net assets is amortized to equity in income of investments in real estate partnerships over the depreciable lives of the properties and other intangible assets which range in lives from 10 to 40 years. Net income, which includes all operating results, as well as gains and losses on sales of properties within the joint ventures, is allocated to the Partnership in accordance with the respective partnership agreements. Such allocations of net income are recorded in equity in income of investments in real estate partnerships in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations. Investments in real estate partnerships are primarily comprised of joint ventures where RCLP invests with three co-investment partners, as further described below. In addition to earning its pro-rata share of net income in each of the partnerships, these co-investment partners pay the Partnership fees for asset management, property management, and acquisition and disposition services. During 2004, 2003 and 2002, the Partnership received fees from these joint ventures of $9.3 million, $5.6 million, and $3.5 million, respectively.

 

The Partnership co-invests with the Oregon Public Employees Retirement Fund in three joint ventures (collectively “Columbia”) in which it has ownership interests of 20% or 30%. As of December 31, 2004, Columbia owned 18 shopping centers, had total assets of $496.9 million, and net income of $23.8 million. The Partnership’s share of Columbia’s total assets and net income was $111.5 million and $4.1 million, respectively. During 2004, Columbia acquired eight shopping centers from unrelated parties for a purchase price of $250.8 million. The Partnership contributed $31.9 million for its proportionate share of the purchase price. Columbia sold three shopping centers during 2004 for $74.0 million to unrelated parties with a gain of $10.0 million. During 2003, Columbia acquired two shopping centers for $39.1 million from unrelated parties and sold one shopping center to an unrelated party for $46.2 million with a gain of $9.3 million. There were no properties sold by Columbia during 2002.

 

F-21


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Regency Centers, L.P.

 

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

December 31, 2004

 

4. Investments in Real Estate Partnerships (continued)

 

The Partnership co-invests with Macquarie CountryWide Trust of Australia (“MCW”), in two joint ventures (collectively, “MCWR”) in which it has an ownership interest of 25%. As of December 31, 2004, MCWR owned 51 shopping centers, had total assets of $734.6 million, and net income of $12.1 million. RCLP’s share of MCWR’s total assets and net income was $183.6 million and $3.5 million, respectively. During 2004, MCWR acquired 23 shopping centers from unrelated parties for a purchase price of $274.5 million. The Partnership contributed $34.8 million for its proportionate share of the purchase price. In addition, MCWR acquired three properties from the Partnership valued at $69.7 million, for which it received cash of $63.7 million. MCWR sold one shopping center during 2004 to an unrelated party for $12.8 million with a gain of $190,559.

 

During 2003, MCWR acquired 12 shopping centers from the Partnership valued at $232.9 million, for which it received cash of $79.4 million, and short-term notes receivable of $95.3 million. MCWR repaid the notes during 2003 and 2004. During 2003, MCWR sold two shopping centers to third parties for $20.1 million. There were no properties sold by MCWR during 2002.

 

On February 14, 2005, RCLP and MCW entered into a contract with CalPERS/First Washington to acquire 101 shopping centers operating in 17 states, located primarily in the Washington D.C./Baltimore metro area as well as northern and southern California (“FW Portfolio”). The contract purchase price is $2.74 billion. The portfolio of shopping centers will be owned in a new joint venture (“MCWR II”) between RCLP and MCW in which the Partnership will have an ownership interest of 35%. The acquisition is expected to close during the second quarter of 2005. The Partnership expects to account for its investment in the venture as an unconsolidated investment in real estate partnerships. The Partnership has executed a bank commitment to provide the financing for its share of the purchase price discussed further in note 6.

 

In December 2004, the Partnership formed a new joint venture with the California State Teachers’ Retirement System (“RegCal”) in which it has a 25% ownership interest. As of December 31, 2004, RegCal owned four shopping centers, had total assets of $126.4 million, and net income of $70,608. RCLP’s share of RegCal’s total assets and net income was $31.6 million and $17,652, at December 31, 2004, respectively. During 2004, RegCal acquired four properties from the Partnership valued at $124.5 million, assumed debt of $34.8 million and the Partnership received net proceeds of $73.9 million.

 

Recognition of gains from sales to joint ventures is recorded on only that portion of the sales not attributable to the Partnership’s ownership interest. The gains and operations are not recorded as discontinued operations because of RCLP’s continuing involvement in these shopping centers. Columbia, MCWR and RegCal intend to continue to acquire retail shopping centers, some of which they may acquire directly from the Partnership. For those properties acquired from third parties, the Partnership is required to contribute its pro-rata share of the purchase price to the partnerships.

 

With the exception of Columbia, MCWR, and RegCal, all of which intend to continue expanding their investments in shopping centers, the investments in real estate partnerships represent single asset entities formed for the purpose of developing and owning retail shopping centers.

 

F-22


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Regency Centers, L.P.

 

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

December 31, 2004

 

4. Investments in Real Estate Partnerships (continued)

 

On November 30, 2004, the Partnership sold a 50% interest in Valleydale, LLC, a single asset entity, to an affiliate of Publix Supermarkets for $12.8 million and transferred its residual 50% investment interest to unconsolidated investments in real estate partnerships.

 

In August 2004, RCLP sold its membership interest in the Hermosa Venture 2002, LLC to the partner. In March 2004, the only two shopping centers owned by the OTR/Regency Texas Realty Holdings, L.P., an unconsolidated joint venture in which RCLP had a 30% equity interest, were sold to an unrelated party for $28.3 million resulting in a gain of $8.2 million. The Partnership received $17.2 million which represents a $4.3 million distribution for the Partnership’s 30% equity interest and $12.9 million for the repayment of a loan. The Partnership recognized a $1.2 million gain included in equity in income of investments in real estate partnerships in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations. The Partnership has no remaining investment or commitment in either of these two joint ventures.

 

The Partnership’s investments in real estate partnerships as of December 31, 2004 and 2003 consist of the following (in thousands):

 

     Ownership

   2004

   2003

Macquarie CountryWide-Regency (MCWR)

   25%    $ 65,134    30,347

Macquarie Countrywide Direct (MCWR)

   25%      8,001    8,724

Columbia Regency Retail Partners (Columbia)

   20%      41,380    40,267

Cameron Village LLC (Columbia)

   30%      21,612    —  

Columbia Regency Partners II (Columbia)

   20%      3,107    —  

RegCal, LLC (RegCal)

   25%      13,232    —  

Other investments in real estate partnerships

   27% - 50%      27,211    61,158
         

  
          $ 179,677    140,496
         

  

 

Summarized financial information for the unconsolidated investments on a combined basis, is as follows (in thousands):

 

     December 31,
2004


   December 31,
2003


Balance Sheet:

           

Investment in real estate, net

   $ 1,325,850    727,530

Acquired lease intangibles, net

     74,261    45,252

Other assets

     39,506    39,408
    

  

Total assets

   $ 1,439,617    812,190
    

  

Notes payable

   $ 665,517    322,238

Other liabilities

     24,471    14,102

Partners’ equity

     749,629    475,850
    

  

Total liabilities and equity

   $ 1,439,617    812,190
    

  

 

Unconsolidated investments in real estate partnerships had notes payable of $665.5 million as of December 31, 2004 and the Partnership’s proportionate share of these loans was $168.1 million. The Partnership does not guarantee any debt of these partnerships and is responsible for only its share based upon its ownership percentage.

 

 

F-23


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Regency Centers, L.P.

 

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

December 31, 2004

 

4. Investments in Real Estate Partnerships (continued)

 

The revenues and expenses for the unconsolidated investments on a combined basis are summarized as follows for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 (in thousands):

 

     2004

   2003

   2002

Statements of Operations:

                

Total revenues

   $ 110,939    76,157    42,073

Total expenses

     82,127    50,315    25,151

Gain on sale of real estate

     18,977    13,760    3,844
    

  
  

Net income

   $ 47,789    39,602    20,766
    

  
  

 

5. Acquired Lease Intangibles:

 

Acquired lease intangible assets are net of accumulated amortization of $2.6 million and $405,327 at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. These assets have a remaining weighted average amortization period of six years. The aggregate amortization expense from acquired leases was $2.2 million, $368,231 and $37,096 for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. Acquired lease intangible liabilities are net of previously accreted minimum rent of $1.9 million and $953,964 at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively and have a remaining weighted average amortization period of six years.

 

The estimated aggregate amortization and accretion amounts from acquired lease intangibles for each of the next five years are as follows (in thousands):

 

Year Ending December 31,


   Amortization
Expense


   Minimum
Rent


2005

   $ 3,569    954

2006

     3,569    954

2007

     2,404    954

2008

     1,070    954

2009

     981    954

 

6. Notes Payable and Unsecured Line of Credit

 

The Partnership’s outstanding debt at December 31, 2004 and 2003 consists of the following (in thousands):

 

     2004

   2003

Notes Payable:

           

Fixed rate mortgage loans

   $ 275,726    217,001

Variable rate mortgage loans

     68,418    41,629

Fixed rate unsecured loans

     948,946    999,147
    

  

Total notes payable

     1,293,090    1,257,777

Unsecured line of credit

     200,000    195,000
    

  

Total

   $ 1,493,090    1,452,777
    

  

 

F-24


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Regency Centers, L.P.

 

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

December 31, 2004

 

6. Notes Payable and Unsecured Line of Credit (continued)

 

On April 1, 2004, RCLP completed the sale of $150 million of ten-year senior unsecured notes. The 4.95% notes are due April 15, 2014 and were priced at 99.747% to yield 4.982%. The proceeds of the offering were used to partially repay the $200 million of 7.4% notes maturing on April 1, 2004 and the remaining balance due was funded from the unsecured line of credit. As a result of two forward-starting interest rate swaps totaling $144.2 million initiated in 2003 in anticipation of this transaction, the effective interest rate is 5.47%. On March 31, 2004, the interest rate swaps were settled for $5.7 million, which is recorded in OCI and will be amortized over the ten-year term of the notes to interest expense. The swaps qualified for hedge accounting under Statement 133; therefore, the change in fair value and its settlement was recorded in OCI.

 

On March 26, 2004, the Partnership closed on the amended and restated unsecured revolving line of credit (the “Line”). Under the new agreement, the Partnership reduced the Line commitment from $600 million to $500 million. The Line has a three-year term with a one-year extension option at an interest rate of LIBOR plus .75% which is a reduction of 10 basis points from the prior agreement. At December 31, 2004, the balance on the Line was $200 million. Interest rates paid on the Line, which are based on LIBOR plus .75%, were 3.1875% at December 31, 2004 and LIBOR plus .85% or 1.975% at December 31, 2003. The spread paid on the Line is dependent upon the Partnership maintaining specific investment-grade ratings. The Partnership is also required to comply, and is in compliance, with certain financial covenants such as Minimum Net Worth, Total Liabilities to Gross Asset Value (“GAV”) and Secured Indebtedness to GAV and other covenants customary with this type of unsecured financing. The Line is used primarily to finance the development of real estate, but is also available for general working-capital purposes.

 

On February 15, 2005, the Partnership executed a commitment letter related to the Line which will temporarily modify certain Line covenants related to borrowing capacity and leverage, and will also add a temporary bridge loan for $275 million (“Bridge Commitment”). The temporary modifications will expire and the Bridge Commitment will mature nine months after the closing of the FW Portfolio into MCWR II. The Bridge Commitment combined with existing borrowing capacity under the Line will provide sufficient cash for RCLP’s equity investment into MCWR II. These borrowings will raise the Partnership’s debt to assets leverage ratio above current levels, which could exceed currently allowable Line covenants. The temporary modification to the leverage covenant is intended to keep RCLP from defaulting on the Line during the term that the Bridge Commitment is outstanding. The Partnership intends to payoff the Bridge Commitment within the nine month term through a combination of issuing equity and selling shopping centers under our capital recycling program.

 

Mortgage loans are secured by certain real estate properties and may be prepaid, but could be subject to a yield-maintenance premium. Mortgage loans are generally due in monthly installments of interest and principal and mature over various terms through 2017. Variable interest rates on mortgage loans are currently based on LIBOR plus a spread in a range of 125 to 150 basis points. Fixed interest rates on mortgage loans range from 5.01% to 9.50%.

 

F-25


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Regency Centers, L.P.

 

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

December 31, 2004

 

6. Notes Payable and Unsecured Line of Credit (continued)

 

The fair value of the Partnership’s notes payable and Line are estimated based on the current rates available to the Partnership for debt of the same remaining maturities. Notes payable with variable interest rates and the Line are considered to be at fair value, since the interest rates on such instruments reprice based on current market conditions. Fixed rate loans assumed in connection with real estate acquisitions are recorded in the accompanying financial statements at fair value.

 

Based on the borrowing rates currently available to the Partnership for loans with similar terms and average maturities, the fair value of long-term debt is $1.6 billion.

 

As of December 31, 2004, scheduled principal repayments on notes payable and the Line were as follows (in thousands):

 

Scheduled Payments by Year


   Scheduled
Principal
Payments


   Term Loan
Maturities


   Total
Payments


2005

   $ 4,042    176,175    180,217

2006

     3,775    21,083    24,858

2007 (includes the Line)

     3,542    262,255    265,797

2008

     3,388    19,617    23,005

2009

     3,458    53,089    56,547

Beyond 5 Years

     17,795    921,338    939,133

Unamortized debt premiums

     —      3,533    3,533
    

  
  

Total

   $ 36,000    1,457,090    1,493,090
    

  
  

 

7. Derivative Financial Instruments

 

The Partnership is exposed to capital market risk, such as changes in interest rates. In order to manage the volatility relating to interest rate risk, the Partnership may enter into interest rate hedging arrangements from time to time. The Partnership does not utilize derivative financial instruments for trading or speculative purposes.

 

During 2003, the Partnership entered into two forward-starting interest rate swaps of $96.5 million and $47.7 million. The Partnership designated the $144.2 million swaps as cash flow hedges to fix the rate on a refinancing in April 2004. On March 31, 2004, the Partnership settled the swaps with a payment to the counter-party for $5.7 million. The swaps qualify for hedge accounting under Statement 133, therefore the losses associated with the swaps have been included in OCI. The unamortized balance of OCI is being amortized over the ten year term of the loan hedged as additional interest expense.

 

F-26


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Regency Centers, L.P.

 

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

December 31, 2004

 

8. Regency’s Stockholders’ Equity and Partners’ Capital

 

  (a) Preferred Stock

 

On August 31, 2004, the Company received proceeds from a $125 million offering of 5 million depositary shares representing 500,000 shares of Series 4 Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock. The depositary shares are perpetual preferred stock, not convertible into common stock of the Company, are redeemable at par upon Regency’s election on or after August 31, 2009, pay a 7.25% annual dividend, and have a liquidation value of $25 per depositary share. The proceeds from this offering were used to redeem $85 million of Series B 8.75% Preferred Units and $40 million of Series C 9.0% Preferred Units.

 

On April 3, 2003, the Company received proceeds from a $75 million offering of 3 million depositary shares representing 300,000 shares of Series 3 Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock. The depositary shares are perpetual preferred stock, are not convertible into common stock of the Company, are redeemable at par upon Regency’s election on or after April 3, 2008, pay a 7.45% annual dividend, and have a liquidation value of $25 per depositary share.

 

The terms of the Series 3 and Series 4 Preferred Stock do not contain any unconditional obligations that would require the Company to redeem the securities at any time or for any purpose.

 

The proceeds from these transactions were contributed to the Partnership in exchange for 300,000 shares of Series 3 Preferred Units and 500,000 of Series 4 Preferred Units issued to and held by Regency with terms exactly the same as the Series 3 and Series 4 Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock.

 

During 2003, the holder of the Series 2 preferred stock converted all of its remaining 450,400 preferred shares into common stock at a conversion ratio of 1:1.

 

  (b) Common Stock

 

On August 24, 2004, the Company sold 1.5 million shares of common stock in an underwritten public offering and the net proceeds of approximately $67 million were used to reduce the balance of the Line.

 

On August 18, 2003, the Company issued 3.6 million shares of common stock at $35.96 per share in an underwritten public offering. The net proceeds of $123.5 million were used to redeem the $80 million Series A Preferred Units and the remainder was used to reduce the balance of the Line.

 

Prior to June 24, 2003, Security Capital Group Incorporated owned 34,273,236 shares, representing 56.6% of Regency’s outstanding common stock. On June 24, 2003 Security Capital (1) sold Regency common stock through (a) an underwritten public offering and (b) the sale of 4,606,880 shares to Regency at the public offering price of $32.56 per share and (2) agreed to sell the balance of its Regency shares pursuant to forward sales contracts with underwriters. Security Capital settled all of the forward sales contracts in September and December 2003, and as a result, Security Capital no longer owns any Regency shares. Security Capital terminated its Stockholders Agreement with Regency on June 24, 2003 and is now subject to the same 7% ownership limit in Regency’s articles of incorporation that applies to other shareholders.

 

F-27


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Regency Centers, L.P.

 

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

December 31, 2004

 

  (c) Preferred Units

 

RCLP has issued Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units (“Preferred Units”) in various amounts since 1998. The issues were sold primarily to institutional investors in private placements for $100 per unit. The Preferred Units, which may be called by RCLP at par after certain dates, have no stated maturity or mandatory redemption, and pay a cumulative, quarterly dividend at fixed rates. At any time after ten years from the date of issuance, the Preferred Units may be exchanged by the holder for Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock (“Preferred Stock”) at an exchange rate of one share for one unit. The Preferred Units and the related Preferred Stock are not convertible into common stock of the Company. At December 31, 2004 and 2003, the face value of total Preferred Units issued was $104 million and $229 million with an average fixed distribution rate of 8.13% and 8.88%, respectively.

 

On November 11, 2004, the Partnership renegotiated the distribution rate on the $50 million Series D Preferred Units from 9.125% to 7.45%. On September 3, 2004, the Partnership redeemed $85 million of Series B 8.75% Preferred Units and $40 million of Series C 9.0% Preferred Units from proceeds of the Series 4 Preferred stock offering described above. At the time of the redemptions, $3.2 million of previously deferred costs related to the original preferred units’ issuance were recognized in the consolidated statements of operations as a component of minority interest of preferred units.

 

During 2003, the Partnership redeemed $80 million of Series A 8.125% Preferred Units which was funded from proceeds from the stock offering completed on August 18, 2003 and described above. At the time of the redemption, $1.2 million of costs related to the preferred units were recognized in the consolidated statements of operations as a component of minority interest of preferred units. Also during 2003, the Partnership redeemed $35 million of Series C 9% Preferred Units and $40 million of Series E 8.75% Preferred Units. The redemptions were portions of each series and the Partnership paid a 1% premium on the face value of the redeemed units totaling $750,000. At the time of redemption, the premium and $1.9 million of previously deferred costs related to their original issuance were recognized in the consolidated statements of operations as a component of minority interest of preferred units. The redemption of the Series C and E units was funded from proceeds from the Line.

 

Terms and conditions of the Preferred Units outstanding as of December 31, 2004 are summarized as follows:

 

Series

  Units
Outstanding


  Issue
Price


  Amount
Outstanding


  Distribution
Rate


    Callable by
Partnership


  Exchangeable
by Unit holder


Series D   500,000   $ 100.00     50,000,000   7.450 %   09/29/09   01/01/14
Series E   300,000   $ 100.00     30,000,000   8.750 %   05/25/05   05/25/10
Series F   240,000   $ 100.00     24,000,000   8.750 %   09/08/05   09/08/10
   
       

             
    1,040,000         $ 104,000,000              
   
       

             

 

F-28


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Regency Centers, L.P.

 

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

December 31, 2004

 

9. Earnings per Unit

 

The following summarizes the calculation of basic and diluted earnings per unit for the three years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively (in thousands except per unit data):

 

     2004

   2003

   2002

Numerator:

                

Income from continuing operations

   $ 135,294    138,495    108,071

Discontinued operations

     23,441    25,164    38,725
    

  
  

Net income

     158,735    163,659    146,796

Less: Preferred unit distributions and original issuance costs

     28,462    34,001    33,475
    

  
  

Net income for common unit holders

     130,273    129,658    113,321

Less: Preferred stock dividends

     —      —      2,276
    

  
  

Net income for common unit holders - basic and diluted

     130,273    129,658    111,045
    

  
  

Denominator:

                

Weighted average common units outstanding for basic EPU

     62,417    60,847    59,716

Incremental units to be issued under the Company’s common stock options using the Treasury method

     217    395    378

Convertible series 2 preferred stock

     —      —      344
    

  
  

Weighted average common units outstanding for diluted EPU

     62,634    61,242    60,438
    

  
  

Income per common unit – basic

                

Income from continuing operations

   $ 1.71    1.72    1.20

Discontinued operations

     0.37    0.41    0.65
    

  
  

Net income for common unit holders per unit

   $ 2.08    2.13    1.85
    

  
  

Income per common unit – diluted

                

Income from continuing operations

   $ 1.71    1.71    1.20

Discontinued operations

     0.37    0.41    0.64
    

  
  

Net income for common unit holders per unit

   $ 2.08    2.12    1.84
    

  
  

 

F-29


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Regency Centers, L.P.

 

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

December 31, 2004

 

10. Stock Option Plan

 

Under the Plan, the Company may grant stock options to its officers, directors and other key employees. Options are granted at fair market value on the date of grant, vest 25% per year, and expire after ten years. Stock option grants also receive dividend equivalents for a specified period of time equal to the Company’s dividend yield less the average dividend yield of the S&P 500 as of the grant date. Dividend equivalents are funded in Regency common stock, and vest at the same rate as the options upon which they are based.

 

The following table reports stock option activity during the periods indicated:

 

     Number of
Shares


    Weighted
Average
Exercise Price


Outstanding, December 31, 2001

   3,682,962     $ 23.94
    

 

Granted

   1,710,093       30.19

Forfeited

   (177,819 )     24.07

Exercised

   (2,117,376 )     23.68
    

 

Outstanding, December 31, 2002

   3,097,860       27.47
    

 

Granted

   1,622,143       34.97

Forfeited

   (7,789 )     22.95

Exercised

   (2,215,924 )     27.73
    

 

Outstanding, December 31, 2003

   2,496,290       32.13
    

 

Granted

   1,904,373       45.89

Forfeited

   (6,493 )     28.63

Exercised

   (2,719,007 )     34.27
    

 

Outstanding, December 31, 2004

   1,675,163     $ 44.32
    

 

 

The following table presents information regarding all options outstanding at December 31, 2004:

 

Number of
Options
Outstanding


  Weighted
Average
Remaining
Contractual
Life (in years)


 

Range of Exercise

Prices


  Weighted
Average
Exercise
Price


101,984   5.86   $ 19.81 – 29.45   $ 25.05
603,650   4.58     29.90 – 44.40     39.53
969,529   4.18     44.94 – 54.52     49.32

 
 

 

1,675,163   4.43   $ 19.81 – 54.52   $ 44.32

 
 

 

 

F-30


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Regency Centers, L.P.

 

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

December 31, 2004

 

10. Stock Option Plan (continued)

 

The following table presents information regarding options currently exercisable at December 31, 2004:

 

Number of
Options
Exercisable


 

Range of
Exercise

Prices


  Weighted
Average
Exercise
Price


57,882   $ 19.81 – 29.45   $ 24.30
588,650     29.90 – 44.40     39.78
969,529     44.94 – 54.52     49.32

 

 

1,616,061   $ 19.81 – 54.52   $ 44.95

 

 

 

11. Operating Leases

 

The Partnership’s properties are leased to tenants under operating leases with expiration dates extending to the year 2031. Future minimum rents under noncancelable operating leases as of December 31, 2004, excluding tenant reimbursements of operating expenses and excluding additional contingent rentals based on tenants’ sales volume are as follows (in thousands):

 

Year Ending December 31,


   Amount

                2005

   $ 283,876

                2006

     266,018

                2007

     232,843

                2008

     198,000

                2009

     159,719

            Thereafter

     1,041,260
    

                Total

   $ 2,181,716
    

 

The shopping centers’ tenant base includes primarily national and regional supermarkets, drug stores, discount department stores and other retailers and, consequently, the credit risk is concentrated in the retail industry. There were no tenants that individually represented 10% or more of the Partnership’s combined minimum rent.

 

The Partnership has shopping centers that are subject to non-cancelable long-term ground leases where a third party owns and has leased the underlying land to RCLP to construct and/or operate a shopping center. In addition, the Partnership has non-cancelable operating leases pertaining to office space where it conducts its business. The following table summarizes the obligations under non-cancelable operating leases as of December 31, 2004 (in thousands):

 

Year Ending December 31,


   Amount

                2005

   $ 2,944

                2006

     2,791

                2007

     1,814

                2008

     1,339

                2009

     998

 

F-31


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Regency Centers, L.P.

 

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

December 31, 2004

 

12. Contingencies

 

The Partnership is involved in litigation on a number of matters and is subject to certain claims which arise in the normal course of business, none of which, in the opinion of management, is expected to have a material adverse effect on the Partnership’s consolidated financial position, results of operations or liquidity.

 

13. Market and Dividend Information (Unaudited)

 

The Company’s common stock is traded on the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) under the symbol “REG”. The Company currently has approximately 18,000 shareholders. The following table sets forth the high and low prices and the cash dividends declared on the Company’s common stock by quarter for 2004 and 2003:

 

     2004

   2003

Quarter Ended


   High
Price


   Low
Price


   Cash
Dividends
Declared


   High
Price


   Low
Price


   Cash
Dividends
Declared


March 31

   $ 46.73    38.90    .53    33.53    30.40    .52

June 30

     47.35    34.52    .53    35.72    32.41    .52

September 30

     47.70    41.98    .53    36.95    34.09    .52

December 31

     55.40    46.03    .53    40.43    35.56    .52

 

F-32


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Regency Centers, L.P.

 

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 

December 31, 2004

 

14. Summary of Quarterly Financial Data (Unaudited)

 

Presented below is a summary of the consolidated quarterly financial data for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003 (in thousands except per unit data):

 

     First
Quarter


    Second
Quarter


    Third
Quarter


    Fourth
Quarter


 

2004:

                          

Revenues as originally reported

   $ 95,810     95,935     98,991     107,024  

Reclassified to discontinued operations

     (2,784 )   (2,569 )   (459 )   —    
    


 

 

 

Adjusted revenues

   $ 93,026     93,366     98,532     107,024  
    


 

 

 

Net income for common unit holders

   $ 21,805     25,501     36,159     46,808  
    


 

 

 

Net income per unit:

                          

Basic

   $ .36     .41     .58     .73  
    


 

 

 

Diluted

   $ .35     .41     .58     .73  
    


 

 

 

2003:

                          

Revenues as originally reported

   $ 95,119     94,041     94,847     99,226  

Reclassified to discontinued operations

     (6,365 )   (5,296 )   (4,770 )   (3,602 )
    


 

 

 

Adjusted revenues

   $ 88,754     88,745     90,077     95,624  
    


 

 

 

Net income for common unit holders

   $ 18,361     26,287     30,519     54,491  
    


 

 

 

Net income per unit:

                          

Basic

   $ .30     .43     .52     .89  
    


 

 

 

Diluted

   $ .30     .42     .51     .89  
    


 

 

 

 

F-33


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

REGENCY CENTERS L.P.

 

Combined Real Estate and Accumulated Depreciation

December 31, 2004

 

    Initial Cost

  Cost
Capitalized
Subsequent to
Acquisition (a)


    Total Cost

  Accumulated
Depreciation


  Total Cost
Net of
Accumulated
Depreciation


  Mortgages

    Land

  Building &
Improvements


    Land

  Building &
Improvements


  Properties
held for
Sale


  Total

     

ALDEN BRIDGE

  12,937   10,146   1,902     13,810   11,175   —     24,985   1,311   23,674   10,105

ANTHEM MARKETPLACE

  6,846   13,563   (111 )   6,846   13,452   —     20,298   596   19,702   14,870

ASHBURN FARM MARKET CENTER

  9,869   4,747   (11 )   9,835   4,770   —     14,605   791   13,814   —  

ASHFORD PLACE

  2,804   9,944   (399 )   2,584   9,765   —     12,349   2,577   9,772   3,883

AVENTURA SHOPPING CENTER

  2,751   9,318   961     2,751   10,279   —     13,030   5,262   7,768   —  

BECKETT COMMONS

  1,625   5,845   4,839     1,625   10,684   —     12,309   1,486   10,823   —  

BELLEVIEW SQUARE

  8,132   8,610   8     8,132   8,618   —     16,750   192   16,558   9,894

BENEVA VILLAGE SHOPS

  2,484   8,851   887     2,484   9,738   —     12,222   1,596   10,626   —  

BERKSHIRE COMMONS

  2,295   8,151   281     2,295   8,432   —     10,727   2,529   8,198   —  

BETHANY PARK PLACE

  4,605   5,792   (230 )   4,290   5,877   —     10,167   1,864   8,303   —  

BLOOMINGDALE

  3,862   14,101   615     3,862   14,716   —     18,578   2,746   15,832   —  

BLOSSOM VALLEY

  7,804   10,321   419     7,804   10,740   —     18,544   1,623   16,921   —  

BOLTON PLAZA

  2,660   6,209   1,821     2,635   8,055   —     10,690   2,448   8,242   —  

BOULEVARD CENTER

  3,659   9,658   661     3,659   10,319   —     13,978   1,607   12,371   —  

BOYNTON LAKES PLAZA

  2,783   10,043   1,376     2,783   11,419   —     14,202   2,089   12,113   —  

BRIARCLIFF LA VISTA

  694   2,463   775     694   3,238   —     3,932   1,166   2,766   —  

BRIARCLIFF VILLAGE

  4,597   16,304   8,125     4,597   24,429   —     29,026   6,185   22,841   12,069

BUCKHEAD COURT

  1,738   6,163   1,778     1,628   8,051   —     9,679   2,052   7,627   —  

BUCKLEY SQUARE

  2,970   5,126   376     2,970   5,502   —     8,472   1,003   7,469   —  

CAMBRIDGE SQUARE SHOPPING CTR

  792   2,916   1,391     792   4,307   —     5,099   949   4,150   —  

CARMEL COMMONS

  2,466   8,903   3,538     2,466   12,441   —     14,907   2,367   12,540   —  

CARRIAGE GATE

  741   2,495   1,872     741   4,367   —     5,108   1,859   3,249   —  

CASA LINDA PLAZA

  4,515   30,809   640     4,515   31,449   —     35,964   4,780   31,184   —  

CENTERPLACE OF GREELEY

  378   —     —       378   —     —     378   —     378   —  

CHAMPIONS FOREST

  2,666   8,679   (20 )   2,584   8,741   —     11,325   1,358   9,967   —  

CHASEWOOD PLAZA

  1,675   11,391   12,153     4,612   20,607   —     25,219   5,998   19,221   —  

CHERRY GROVE

  3,533   12,710   2,472     3,533   15,182   —     18,715   2,629   16,086   —  

CHESHIRE STATION

  10,182   8,443   (421 )   9,896   8,308   —     18,204   1,528   16,676   —  

COCHRAN’S CROSSING

  13,154   10,066   2,194     13,154   12,260   —     25,414   1,377   24,037   —  

COOPER STREET

  2,079   10,682   84     2,079   10,766   —     12,845   1,605   11,240   —  

COSTA VERDE

  12,740   25,261   473     12,740   25,734   —     38,474   5,165   33,309   —  

COURTYARD SHOPPING CENTER

  1,762   4,187   (82 )   5,867   —     —     5,867   —     5,867   —  

CROMWELL SQUARE

  1,772   6,285   507     1,772   6,792   —     8,564   1,702   6,862   —  

CUMMING 400

  2,375   8,421   1,277     2,375   9,698   —     12,073   2,301   9,772   —  

DELK SPECTRUM

  2,985   11,049   338     2,985   11,387   —     14,372   2,054   12,318   —  

DIABLO PLAZA

  5,300   7,536   425     5,300   7,961   —     13,261   1,317   11,944   —  

DICKSON TN

  675   1,568   —       675   1,568       2,243   204   2,039    

DUNWOODY HALL

  1,819   6,451   5,705     2,529   11,446   —     13,975   2,488   11,487   —  

DUNWOODY VILLAGE

  2,326   7,216   8,425     3,336   14,631   —     17,967   2,911   15,056   —  

EAST POINTE

  1,868   6,743   172     1,730   7,053   —     8,783   1,495   7,288   4,316

EAST PORT PLAZA

  3,257   11,611   (1,718 )   3,257   9,893   —     13,150   996   12,154   —  

EAST TOWNE SHOPPING CENTER

  2,957   4,881   —       2,957   4,881   —     7,838   274   7,564   —  

EL CAMINO

  7,600   10,852   544     7,600   11,396   —     18,996   1,851   17,145   —  

EL CERRITO PLAZA

  2,109   —     —       2,109   —     —     2,109   —     2,109   —  

EL NORTE PKWY PLAZA

  2,834   6,332   745     2,834   7,077   —     9,911   1,108   8,803   —  

ENCINA GRANDE

  5,040   10,379   612     5,040   10,991   —     16,031   1,706   14,325   —  

FENTON MARKETPLACE

  3,020   10,153   (350 )   2,615   10,208   —     12,823   882   11,941   —  

FLEMING ISLAND

  3,077   6,292   4,920     3,077   11,212   —     14,289   1,608   12,681   2,668

FOLSOM PRAIRIE CITY CROSSING

  3,944   11,258   1,753     4,164   12,791   —     16,955   1,079   15,876   —  

FORT BEND CENTER

  6,966   4,197   (308 )   6,690   4,165   —     10,855   522   10,333   —  

 

S-1


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

REGENCY CENTERS L.P.

 

Combined Real Estate and Accumulated Depreciation

December 31, 2004

 

    Initial Cost

  Cost
Capitalized
Subsequent to
Acquisition (a)


    Total Cost

  Accumulated
Depreciation


  Total Cost
Net of
Accumulated
Depreciation


  Mortgages

    Land

  Building &
Improvements


    Land

  Building &
Improvements


  Properties
held for
Sale


  Total

     

FRANKFORT CROSSING SHPG CTR

  8,325   6,067   905     7,874   7,423   —     15,297   811   14,486   —  

FRIARS MISSION

  6,660   27,277   431     6,660   27,708   —     34,368   4,009   30,359   15,827

GARDEN SQUARE

  2,074   7,615   608     2,136   8,161   —     10,297   1,568   8,729   —  

GARNER

  5,591   19,897   1,911     5,591   21,808   —     27,399   3,438   23,961   —  

GATEWAY SHOPPING CENTER

  51,719   4,545   73     51,765   4,572   —     56,337   153   56,184   22,615

GELSON’S WESTLAKE MARKET PLAZA

  2,332   8,316   3,265     3,145   10,768   —     13,913   530   13,383   —  

GILROY

  18,735   31,679   —       18,735   31,679   —     50,414   788   49,626   49,000

GLENWOOD VILLAGE

  1,194   4,235   709     1,194   4,944   —     6,138   1,251   4,887   —  

GRANDE OAK

  5,569   5,900   (609 )   4,976   5,884       10,860   720   10,140    

KROGER NEW ALBANY CENTER

  2,770   6,379   1,231     3,844   6,536   —     10,380   1,431   8,949   7,479

HANCOCK

  8,232   24,249   3,186     8,232   27,435   —     35,667   4,305   31,362   —  

HARPETH VILLAGE FIELDSTONE

  2,284   5,559   3,747     2,284   9,306   —     11,590   1,616   9,974   —  

HERITAGE LAND

  12,390   —     —       12,390   —     —     12,390   —     12,390   —  

HERITAGE PLAZA

  —     23,676   1,736     —     25,412   —     25,412   4,049   21,363   —  

HERSHEY

  7   807   1     7   808   —     815   83   732   —  

HILLCREST VILLAGE

  1,600   1,798   78     1,600   1,876   —     3,476   278   3,198   —  

HILLTOP VILLAGE

  3,867   5,036   —       3,867   5,036   —     8,903   398   8,505   —  

HINSDALE

  4,218   15,040   2,099     5,734   15,623   —     21,357   2,548   18,809   —  

HYDE PARK

  9,240   33,340   5,442     9,768   38,254   —     48,022   7,313   40,709   —  

INGLEWOOD PLAZA

  1,300   1,862   176     1,300   2,038   —     3,338   343   2,995   —  

KELLER TOWN CENTER

  2,294   12,239   424     2,294   12,663       14,957   1,816   13,141   —  

KERNERSVILLE PLAZA

  1,742   6,081   552     1,742   6,633   —     8,375   1,134   7,241   4,678

KINGSDALE SHOPPING CENTER

  3,867   14,020   5,833     4,028   19,692   —     23,720   3,708   20,012   —  

LAKE PINE PLAZA

  2,008   6,909   641     2,008   7,550   —     9,558   1,297   8,261   5,274

LAKESHORE

  1,618   5,371   312     1,618   5,683   —     7,301   1,037   6,264   3,285

LEBANON/LEGACY CENTER

  3,906   7,391   —       3,906   7,391   —     11,297   557   10,740   —  

LEETSDALE MARKETPLACE

  3,420   9,934   128     3,420   10,062   —     13,482   1,510   11,972   —  

LITTLETON SQUARE

  2,030   8,255   125     2,030   8,380   —     10,410   1,239   9,171   —  

LLOYD KING CENTER

  1,779   8,855   229     1,779   9,084   —     10,863   1,430   9,433   —  

LOEHMANNS PLAZA GEORGIA

  3,982   14,118   1,264     3,982   15,382   —     19,364   3,955   15,409   —  

LOEHMANNS PLAZA CALIFORNIA

  5,420   8,679   406     5,420   9,085   —     14,505   1,494   13,011   —  

MACARTHUR PARK REPURCHASE

  1,930   —     —       1,930   —     —     1,930   —     1,930   —  

MAINSTREET SQUARE

  1,274   4,492   (850 )   —     —     4,916   4,916   —     4,916   —  

MARINERS VILLAGE

  1,628   5,908   2,757     1,751   8,542   —     10,293   1,513   8,780   —  

MARKET AT PRESTON FOREST

  4,400   10,753   92     4,400   10,845   —     15,245   1,566   13,679   —  

MARKET AT ROUND ROCK

  2,000   9,676   158     2,000   9,834   —     11,834   1,500   10,334   6,507

MARKETPLACE ST PETE

  1,287   4,663   636     1,287   5,299   —     6,586   1,275   5,311   —  

MARTIN DOWNS VILLAGE CENTER

  2,000   5,133   4,352     2,438   9,047   —     11,485   3,222   8,263   —  

MARTIN DOWNS VILLAGE SHOPPES

  700   1,208   3,643     817   4,734   —     5,551   1,444   4,107   —  

MAXTOWN ROAD (NORTHGATE)

  1,753   6,244   111     1,753   6,355   —     8,108   1,150   6,958   4,712

MAYNARD CROSSING

  4,066   14,084   1,336     4,066   15,420   —     19,486   2,646   16,840   10,498

MCMINNVILLE MARKET CENTER

  1,511   5,775   —       1,511   5,775   —     7,286   95   7,191    

MEMORIAL BEND SHOPPING CENTER

  3,256   11,547   2,660     3,366   14,097   —     17,463   3,853   13,610   6,517

MILLHOPPER

  1,073   3,594   1,717     1,073   5,311   —     6,384   2,420   3,964   —  

MOCKINGBIRD COMMON

  3,000   9,676   458     3,000   10,134   —     13,134   1,662   11,472   —  

MONUMENT JACKSON CREEK

  2,999   6,476   12     2,999   6,488   —     9,487   1,369   8,118   —  

MORNINGSIDE PLAZA

  4,300   13,120   223     4,300   13,343   —     17,643   2,065   15,578   —  

MURRAY LANDING

  3,655   4,587   —       3,655   4,587   —     8,242   335   7,907    

MURRAYHILL MARKETPLACE

  2,600   15,753   2,086     2,670   17,769   —     20,439   2,954   17,485   9,000

NASHBORO

  1,824   7,168   474     1,824   7,642   —     9,466   1,110   8,356   —  

 

S-2


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.

 

Combined Real Estate and Accumulated Depreciation

December 31, 2004

 

    Initial Cost

  Cost
Capitalized
Subsequent to
Acquisition (a)


    Total Cost

  Accumulated
Depreciation


  Total Cost
Net of
Accumulated
Depreciation


  Mortgages

    Land

  Building &
Improvements


    Land

  Building &
Improvements


  Properties
held for
Sale


  Total

     

NEWBERRY SQUARE

  2,341   8,467   1,507     2,341   9,974   —     12,315   3,344   8,971   —  

NEWLAND CENTER

  12,500   12,221   (1,974 )   12,500   10,247   —     22,747   2,148   20,599   —  

NORTH HILLS

  4,900   18,972   191     4,900   19,163   —     24,063   2,835   21,228   6,982

NORTHLAKE VILLAGE I

  2,662   9,685   757     2,662   10,442   —     13,104   1,176   11,928   6,378

OAKBROOK PLAZA

  4,000   6,366   172     4,000   6,538   —     10,538   1,174   9,364   —  

OCEAN BREEZE

  1,250   3,341   4,293     1,527   7,357   —     8,884   2,348   6,536   —  

OLD ST AUGUSTINE PLAZA

  2,047   7,355   1,576     2,107   8,871   —     10,978   2,264   8,714   —  

PACES FERRY PLAZA

  2,812   9,968   2,265     2,812   12,233   —     15,045   3,035   12,010   —  

PALM TRAILS PLAZA

  2,439   5,819   (142 )   2,022   6,094   —     8,116   1,067   7,049   —  

PANTHER CREEK

  14,414   12,079   2,134     14,414   14,213   —     28,627   1,587   27,040   10,315

PARK PLACE SHOPPING CENTER

  2,232   7,974   403     2,232   8,377   —     10,609   1,328   9,281   —  

PASEO VILLAGE

  2,550   7,780   562     2,559   8,333   —     10,892   1,385   9,507   —  

PEACHLAND PROMENADE

  1,285   5,144   309     1,285   5,453   —     6,738   1,575   5,163   —  

PEARTREE VILLAGE

  5,197   8,733   10,768     5,197   19,501   —     24,698   3,884   20,814   11,547

PHENIX CROSSING

  1,544   —     —       1,544   —     —     1,544   —     1,544   —  

PIKE CREEK

  5,077   18,860   1,170     5,077   20,030   —     25,107   3,594   21,513   —  

PIMA CROSSING

  5,800   24,892   1,136     5,800   26,028   —     31,828   3,852   27,976   —  

PINE LAKE VILLAGE

  6,300   10,522   139     6,300   10,661   —     16,961   1,584   15,377   —  

PINE TREE PLAZA

  539   1,996   3,504     539   5,500   —     6,039   954   5,085   —  

PLAZA HERMOSA

  4,200   9,370   609     4,200   9,979   —     14,179   1,508   12,671   —  

POWELL STREET PLAZA

  8,248   29,279   226     8,248   29,505       37,753   2,250   35,503   —  

POWERS FERRY SQUARE

  3,608   12,791   4,499     3,608   17,290   —     20,898   4,278   16,620   —  

POWERS FERRY VILLAGE

  1,191   4,224   287     1,191   4,511   —     5,702   1,162   4,540   2,682

PRESTONBROOK

  4,704   10,762   (2,704 )   4,200   8,562   —     12,762   1,879   10,883   —  

PRESTON PARK

  6,400   46,896   2,652     6,400   49,548   —     55,948   7,276   48,672   —  

PRESTONWOOD PARK

  8,077   14,938   182     8,077   15,120   —     23,197   2,316   20,881   —  

REGENCY COURT

  3,571   12,664   (456 )   3,571   12,208   —     15,779   1,159   14,620   —  

REGENCY SQUARE BRANDON

  578   18,157   10,505     4,770   24,470   —     29,240   10,695   18,545   —  

RIVERMONT STATION

  2,887   10,445   164     2,887   10,609   —     13,496   2,034   11,462   —  

RONA PLAZA

  1,500   4,356   72     1,500   4,428   —     5,928   649   5,279   —  

RUSSELL RIDGE

  2,153   —     6,695     2,215   6,633   —     8,848   1,739   7,109   5,900

SAMMAMISH HIGHLAND

  9,300   7,553   136     9,300   7,689   —     16,989   1,174   15,815   —  

SAN LEANDRO

  1,300   7,891   225     1,300   8,116   —     9,416   1,286   8,130   —  

SANTA ANA DOWNTOWN

  4,240   7,319   837     4,240   8,156   —     12,396   1,406   10,990   —  

SEQUOIA STATION

  9,100   17,900   162     9,100   18,062   —     27,162   2,687   24,475   —  

SHERWOOD CROSSROADS

  2,731   3,612   1,692     2,731   5,304   —     8,035   388   7,647   —  

SHERWOOD MARKET CENTER

  3,475   15,898   92     3,475   15,990   —     19,465   2,489   16,976   —  

SHILOH SPRINGS

  4,968   7,859   4,461     5,739   11,549   —     17,288   3,733   13,555   —  

SHOPPES AT MASON

  1,577   5,358   64     1,577   5,422   —     6,999   949   6,050   3,458

SOUTH MOUNTAIN

  934   —     —       934   —     —     934   —     934   —  

SOUTH POINT PLAZA

  5,000   10,086   144     5,000   10,230   —     15,230   1,539   13,691   —  

SOUTHPOINT CROSSING

  4,399   11,116   957     4,399   12,073   —     16,472   1,903   14,569   —  

SOUTHCENTER

  1,300   12,251   210     1,300   12,461   —     13,761   1,812   11,949   —  

STARKE

  71   1,674   9     71   1,683   —     1,754   170   1,584   —  

STATLER SQUARE PHASE I

  2,228   7,480   783     2,228   8,263   —     10,491   1,506   8,985   4,842

STERLING RIDGE

  12,846   10,085   1,924     12,846   12,009   —     24,855   1,344   23,511   10,569

STRAWFLOWER VILLAGE

  4,060   7,233   352     4,060   7,585   —     11,645   1,194   10,451   —  

STROH RANCH

  4,138   7,111   968     4,280   7,937   —     12,217   1,587   10,630   —  

SUNNYSIDE 205

  1,200   8,703   281     1,200   8,984   —     10,184   1,394   8,790   —  

TALL OAKS VILLAGE CENTER

  1,858   6,736   75     1,858   6,811   —     8,669   479   8,190   6,261

 

S-3


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.

 

Combined Real Estate and Accumulated Depreciation

December 31, 2004

 

    Initial Cost

    Cost
Capitalized
Subsequent to
Acquisition (a)


    Total Cost

  Accumulated
Depreciation


  Total Cost
Net of
Accumulated
Depreciation


  Mortgages

    Land

  Building &
Improvements


      Land

  Building &
Improvements


    Properties
held for
Sale


  Total

     

TASSAJARA CROSSING

  8,560   14,900     166     8,560   15,066     —     23,626   2,223   21,403   —  

THE MARKET AT OPITZ CROSSING

  9,902   8,339     803     9,903   9,141     —     19,044   748   18,296   12,352

THE SHOPS

  3,293   2,320     822     3,293   3,142     —     6,435   200   6,235   4,714

THE SHOPS OF SANTA BARBARA

  9,477   1,323     6     9,477   1,329     —     10,806   354   10,452   7,916

THOMAS LAKE

  6,000   10,302     205     6,000   10,507     —     16,507   1,543   14,964   —  

TOWN CENTER AT MARTIN DOWNS

  1,364   4,985     145     1,364   5,130     —     6,494   1,046   5,448   —  

TOWN SQUARE

  438   1,555     6,948     883   8,058     —     8,941   1,293   7,648   —  

TRACE CROSSING

  4,356   4,896     —       4,356   4,896     —     9,252   417   8,835   8,438

TROPHY CLUB

  2,595   10,467     161     2,595   10,628     —     13,223   1,344   11,879   —  

TWIN PEAKS

  5,200   25,120     182     5,200   25,302     —     30,502   3,795   26,707   —  

UNION SQUARE SHOPPING CENTER

  1,579   5,934     454     1,579   6,388     —     7,967   1,452   6,515   —  

UNIVERSITY COLLECTION

  2,530   8,972     771     2,530   9,743     —     12,273   2,185   10,088   —  

VALENCIA CROSSROADS

  17,913   17,357     —       17,913   17,357     —     35,270   1,479   33,791   —  

VALLEY RANCH CENTRE

  3,021   10,728     35     3,021   10,763     —     13,784   1,610   12,174   —  

VENTURA VILLAGE

  4,300   6,351     223     4,300   6,574     —     10,874   990   9,884   —  

VILLAGE CENTER 6

  3,885   10,799     1,042     3,885   11,841     —     15,726   2,924   12,802   —  

VILLAGE IN TRUSSVILLE

  974   3,261     486     1,142   3,579     —     4,721   1,184   3,537   —  

VINEYARD SHOPPING CENTER

  2,802   3,916     —       2,802   3,916     —     6,718   426   6,292   —  

WALKER CENTER

  3,840   6,418     405     3,840   6,823     —     10,663   1,057   9,606   —  

WATERFORD TOWNE CENTER

  5,650   6,844     1,927     6,493   7,928     —     14,421   1,806   12,615   —  

WELLEBY

  1,496   5,372     2,223     1,496   7,595     —     9,091   2,289   6,802   —  

WELLINGTON TOWN SQUARE

  1,914   7,198     4,472     2,150   11,434     —     13,584   1,867   11,717   —  

WEST PARK PLAZA

  5,840   4,992     311     5,840   5,303     —     11,143   802   10,341   —  

WESTBROOK COMMONS

  3,366   11,928     863     3,366   12,791     —     16,157   1,208   14,949   —  

WESTCHESTER PLAZA

  1,857   6,456     871     1,857   7,327     —     9,184   1,656   7,528   5,052

WESTRIDGE

  9,516   10,789     —       9,516   10,789     —     20,305   453   19,852    

WESTLAKE VILLAGE CENTER

  7,043   25,744     888     7,043   26,632     —     33,675   4,463   29,212   —  

WHITE OAK - DOVER, DE

  2,147   2,927     138     2,143   3,069     —     5,212   366   4,846   —  

WILLA SPRINGS SHOPPING CENTER

  2,004   9,266     (117 )   2,143   9,010     —     11,153   1,086   10,067   —  

WINDMILLER PLAZA PHASE I

  2,620   11,190     1,338     2,619   12,529     —     15,148   2,046   13,102   —  

WOODCROFT SHOPPING CENTER

  1,418   5,211     547     1,418   5,758     —     7,176   1,369   5,807   —  

WOODMAN VAN NUYS

  5,499   6,834     346     5,499   7,180     —     12,679   1,132   11,547   4,806

WOODMEN PLAZA

  6,013   10,077     (40 )   6,644   9,406     —     16,050   2,651   13,399   —  

WOODSIDE CENTRAL

  3,499   8,845     117     3,499   8,962     —     12,461   1,326   11,135   —  

WORTHINGTON PARK CENTRE

  3,345   10,053     1,037     3,345   11,090     —     14,435   2,666   11,769   —  
                                  —     —     —      

OPERATING BUILD TO SUIT PROPERTIES

  4,315   (202 )   —       4,315   (202 )       4,113   3,810   303   —  
   
 

 

 
 

 
 
 
 
 
    788,453   1,719,495     218,830     806,207   1,915,655     4,916   2,726,778   338,609   2,388,169   315,409
   
 

 

 
 

 
 
 
 
 

(a) The negative balance for costs capitalized subsequent to acquisiton could include out-parcels sold, provision for loss recorded and development transfers subsequent to the initial costs.

 

S-4


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

REGENCY CENTERS, L.P.

 

Combined Real Estate and Accumulated Depreciation

December 31, 2004

 

Depreciation and amortization of the Partnership’s investment in buildings and improvements reflected in the statements of operation is calculated over the estimated useful lives of the assets as follows:

 

Buildings and improvements                      up to 40 years

 

The aggregate cost for Federal income tax purposes was approximately $2.7 billion at December 31, 2004.

 

The changes in total real estate assets for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002:

 

     2004

    2003

    2002

 

Balance, beginning of year

   $ 2,656,376     2,692,503     2,673,164  

Developed or acquired properties

     322,659     238,964     402,035  

Sale of properties

     (261,098 )   (287,547 )   (397,203 )

Provision for loss on operating properties

     (810 )   (1,969 )   (4,369 )

Reclass accumulated depreciation to adjust building basis

     (1,010 )   440     (7,021 )

Reclass accumulated depreciation related to properties held for sale

     (997 )   (2,537 )   (3,409 )

Reclass accumulated depreciation related to properties held for sale recharacterized in 2002 to properties to be held and used

     —       —       10,772  

Improvements

     11,658     16,522     18,534  
    


 

 

Balance, end of year

   $ 2,726,778     2,656,376     2,692,503  
    


 

 

 

The changes in accumulated depreciation for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002:

 

     2004

    2003

    2002

 

Balance, beginning of year

   $ 285,665     244,596     202,325  

Sale of properties

     (16,152 )   (23,708 )   (23,593 )

Reclass accumulated depreciation to adjust building basis

     (1,010 )   440     (7,021 )

Reclass accumulated depreciation related to properties held for sale

     (997 )   (2,537 )   (3,409 )

Reclass accumulated depreciation related to properties held for sale recharacterized in 2002 to properties to be held and used

     —       —       10,772  

Depreciation for year

     71,103     66,874     65,522  
    


 

 

Balance, end of year

   $ 338,609     285,665     244,596  
    


 

 

 

S-5