Attached files
file | filename |
---|---|
EX-21 - AGREE REALTY CORP | v177141_ex21.htm |
EX-23 - AGREE REALTY CORP | v177141_ex23.htm |
EX-31.2 - AGREE REALTY CORP | v177141_ex31-2.htm |
EX-32.2 - AGREE REALTY CORP | v177141_ex32-2.htm |
EX-12.1 - AGREE REALTY CORP | v177141_ex12-1.htm |
EX-31.1 - AGREE REALTY CORP | v177141_ex31-1.htm |
EX-32.1 - AGREE REALTY CORP | v177141_ex32-1.htm |
UNITED
STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON,
D.C. 20549
FORM
10-K
ANNUAL
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934
For
the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009
Commission
File Number 1-12928
AGREE
REALTY CORPORATION
(Exact
name of Registrant as specified in its charter)
Maryland
|
38-3148187
|
|
(State
or other jurisdiction of
|
(I.R.S.
Employer
|
|
incorporation
or organization)
|
Identification
No.)
|
|
31850
Northwestern Highway
|
48334
|
|
Farmington
Hills, Michigan
|
(Zip
code)
|
|
(Address
of principal executive offices)
|
|
(248)
737-4190
(Registrant’s
telephone number, including area code)
Securities
Registered Pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Title of each class
|
Name of each exchange on which registered
|
|
Common
Stock, $.0001 par value
|
|
New
York Stock Exchange
|
Securities Registered Pursuant to
Section 12(g) of the Act: None
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in
Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ¨ No x
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to
Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes ¨ No x
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be
filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the
preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required
to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for
the past 90 days. Yes x No ¨
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on
its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be
submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding
12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit
and post such files). Yes ¨ No ¨
Indicate
by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best
of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements
incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this
Form 10-K. ¨
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an
accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting
company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,”
“accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act. (Check one):
Large
accelerated filer ¨
|
Accelerated
filer x
|
Non-accelerated
filer ¨
|
Smaller
reporting company ¨
|
|||
|
|
(Do not check if a smaller
reporting company)
|
|
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule
12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes ¨ No x
The
aggregate market value of the Registrant’s shares of common stock held by
non-affiliates was approximately $150,151,551 as of June 30, 2009, based on the
closing price of $18.33 on the New York Stock Exchange on that
date.
At
February 26, 2010, there were 8,271,464 shares of common stock, $.0001 par value
per share, outstanding.
DOCUMENTS
INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Portions
of the registrant’s definitive proxy statement for the annual stockholder
meeting to be held in 2010 are incorporated by reference into Part III of this
Form 10-K as noted herein.
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
Part
I
|
||||
Item 1.
|
Business
|
1
|
||
Item 1A.
|
Risk Factors
|
4
|
||
Item 1B.
|
Unresolved Staff Comments
|
17
|
||
Item 2.
|
Properties
|
17
|
||
Item 3.
|
Legal Proceedings
|
24
|
||
Item 4.
|
Reserved
|
24
|
||
Part
II
|
||||
Item 5.
|
Market for Registrant’s Common
Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases
of
|
|||
Equity Securities
|
24
|
|||
Item 6.
|
Selected
Financial Data
|
26
|
||
Item 7.
|
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations
|
27
|
||
Item 7A
|
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about
Market Risk
|
32
|
||
Item 8
|
Financial Statements and Supplementary
Data
|
33
|
||
Item 9
|
Changes in and Disagreements With Accountants on
Accounting and Financial Disclosure
|
33
|
||
Item 9A
|
Controls and Procedures
|
33
|
||
Item 9B
|
Other Information
|
34
|
||
Part
III
|
||||
Item 10.
|
Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate
Governance
|
34
|
||
Item 11.
|
Executive Compensation
|
34
|
||
Item 12.
|
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners
and Management and Related Stockholder
|
|||
Matters
|
34
|
|||
Item 13.
|
Certain Relationships and Related Transactions,
and Director Independence
|
35
|
||
Item 14.
|
Principal Accountant Fees and
Services
|
35
|
||
Part IV
|
||||
Item 15.
|
Exhibits and Financial Statement
Schedules
|
36
|
||
Signatures
|
|
39
|
PART
I
FORWARD
LOOKING STATEMENTS
Management
has included herein certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of
Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E
of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Securities Exchange
Act”). These forward-looking statements represent our expectations, plans or
beliefs concerning future events and may be identified by terminology such as
“anticipate,” “estimate,” “should,” “expect,” “believe,” “intend” and similar
expressions. Although the forward-looking statements made in this report are
based on good faith beliefs, reasonable assumptions and our best judgment
reflecting current information, certain factors could cause actual results to
differ materially from such forward–looking statements, including but not
limited to: the ongoing U.S. recession, the existing global credit and
financial crisis and other changes in general economic, financial and real
estate market conditions; risks that our acquisition and development projects
will fail to perform as expected; financing risks, such as the inability to
obtain debt or equity financing on favorable terms or at all; the level and
volatility of interest rates; loss or bankruptcy of one or more of our major
retail tenants; a failure of our properties to generate additional income to
offset increases in operating expenses; and other factors discussed in Item
1A. “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this report and in subsequent filings with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). Given these
uncertainties, you should not place undue reliance on our forward-looking
statements. Except as required by law, we assume no obligation to
update these forward–looking statements, even if new information becomes
available in the future.
Item
1.
|
BUSINESS
|
General
Agree
Realty Corporation, a Maryland corporation, is a fully-integrated,
self-administered and self-managed real estate investment trust
(“REIT”). The terms “Registrant”, “Company”, “we”, “our” or “us”
refer to Agree Realty Corporation and/or its majority owned operating
partnership, Agree Limited Partnership (“Operating Partnership”), and/or its
majority owned and controlled subsidiaries, including its qualified taxable REIT
subsidiaries (“TRS”), as the context may require. Our assets are held
by and all of our operations are conducted through, directly or indirectly, the
Operating Partnership, of which we are the sole general partner and in which we
held a 95.93% interest as of December 31, 2009. Under the partnership
agreement of the Operating Partnership, we, as the sole general partner, have
exclusive responsibility and discretion in the management and control of the
Operating Partnership.
We are
focused primarily on the ownership, development, acquisition and management of
retail properties net leased to national tenants. We were
incorporated in December 1993 to continue and expand the business founded in
1971 by our current Chief Executive Officer and Chairman, Richard
Agree. We specialize in developing retail properties for national
tenants who have executed long-term net leases prior to the commencement of
construction. As of December 31, 2009, approximately 89% of our
annualized base rent was derived from national tenants. As of
December 31, 2009, approximately 70% of our annualized base rent was derived
from our top three tenants: Walgreen Co. (“Walgreen”) – 30%; Borders
Group, Inc. (“Borders”) – 29%; and Kmart Corporation (“Kmart”) - 11%.
At
December 31, 2009, our portfolio consisted of 73 properties, located in 16
states containing an aggregate of approximately 3.5 million square feet of gross
leasable area (“GLA”). As of December 31, 2009, our portfolio
included 61 freestanding net leased properties and 12 community shopping centers
that were 98.1% leased with a weighted average lease term of approximately 10.3
years remaining. All of our freestanding property tenants and the
majority of our community shopping center tenants have triple-net leases, which
require the tenant to be responsible for property operating expenses including
property taxes, insurance and maintenance. We believe this strategy
provides a generally consistent source of income and cash for
distributions. See Item 2. “Properties” for a summary of our
developments and acquisitions in 2009, as well as other information regarding
our tenants, leases and properties as of December 31, 2009.
We expect
to continue to grow our asset base primarily through the development of retail
properties that are pre-leased on a long-term basis to national
tenants. We focus on development because we believe, based on our
historical returns we have been able to achieve, it generally provides us a
higher return on investment than the acquisition of similarly located properties
and does not entail the risk associated with speculative development. Since our
initial public offering in 1994, we have developed 60 of our 73 properties,
including 48 of our 61 freestanding properties and all 12 of our community
shopping centers. As of December 31, 2009, the properties that we
developed accounted for approximately 84% of our annualized base
rent. We expect to continue to expand our tenant relationships and
diversify our tenant base to include other quality national
tenants.
Growth
Strategy
Development. Our
growth strategy is to develop retail properties pre-leased on a long-term
basis to national tenants. We believe that this strategy produces
superior risk adjusted returns. Our development process commences
with the identification of a land parcel we believe is situated in an attractive
retail location. The location must be in a concentrated retail corridor and have
high traffic counts, good visibility and demographics compatible with the needs
of a particular retail tenant. After assessing the feasibility of
development, we propose to the tenants that we execute long-term net leases for
the finished development on that site.
Upon the
execution of the leases, we purchase the land and pursue all the necessary
approvals to begin development. We direct all aspects of the
development, including construction, design, leasing and
management. Property management and the majority of the leasing
activities are handled directly by our personnel. We believe that
this approach enhances our ability to maximize the long-term value of our
properties and results in an efficient use of our capital
resources.
Acquisitions. We
selectively acquire single tenant properties when we have determined that a
potential acquisition meets our return on investment criteria and such
acquisition will diversify our rental income.
Financing
Strategy
The
majority of our mortgage indebtedness is fixed rate, non-recourse and long-term
in nature. Whenever feasible, we enter into long-term financing for
our properties to match the underlying long-term leases. We intend to
limit our floating rate debt to borrowings under our credit facilities, which
are primarily used to finance new development and acquisitions. Once
development of a project is completed, we typically consider refinancing this
floating rate debt with fixed rate, non-recourse debt. As of December
31, 2009, our total mortgage debt was approximately $75.6 million with a
weighted average maturity of 8.8 years. Of this total mortgage
indebtedness, approximately $51.4 million is fixed rate, self–amortizing debt
with a weighted average interest rate of 6.56% and a weighted average maturity
of 11.3 years. The remaining mortgage debt of approximately $24.2
million bears interest at 150 basis points over LIBOR or 1.74% as of December
31, 2009 and has a maturity date of July 14, 2013, which can be extended at our
option for two additional years. In January 2009, we entered into an
interest rate swap agreement that fixes the interest rate during the initial
term of the variable interest mortgage at 3.744%. In addition
to our mortgage debt, we had $29.0 million outstanding under our credit
facilities as of December 31, 2009 with a weighted average interest rate of
1.26%. We intend to maintain a ratio of total indebtedness (including
construction and acquisition financing) to market capitalization of 65% or
less. At December 31, 2009, our ratio of indebtedness to market
capitalization assuming the conversion of our operating partnership units, was
approximately 52.5%. The decrease in our ratio of indebtedness to
market capitalization from 2008 to 2009 was primarily the result of an increase
in the market price of our common stock.
We are
evaluating our borrowing policies on an on-going basis in light of current
economic conditions, relative costs of debt and equity capital, market value of
properties, growth and acquisition opportunities and other
factors. There is no contractual limit or any limit in our
organizational documents on our ratio of total indebtedness to total market
capitalization, and accordingly, we may modify our borrowing policy and may
increase or decrease our ratio of debt to market capitalization without
stockholder approval.
2
Property
Management
We
maintain a proactive leasing and capital improvement program that, combined with
the quality and locations of our properties, has made our properties attractive
to tenants. We intend to continue to hold our properties for
long-term investment and, accordingly, place a strong emphasis on quality
construction and an on-going program of regular maintenance. Our
properties are designed and built to require minimal capital improvements other
than renovations or expansions paid for by tenants. At our 12
community shopping centers properties, we sub-contract on-site functions such as
maintenance, landscaping, snow removal and sweeping and the cost of these
functions is generally reimbursed by our tenants. Personnel from our
corporate headquarters conduct regular inspections of each property and maintain
regular contact with major tenants.
We have a
management information system designed to provide management with the operating
data necessary to make informed business decisions on a timely
basis. This computer system provides us rapid access to store
availability, lease data, tenants’ sales history, cash flow budgets and
forecasts, and enables us to maximize cash flow from operations and closely
monitor corporate expenses.
Major
Tenants
As of
December 31, 2009, approximately 69% of our GLA was leased to Walgreen, Borders,
and Kmart and approximately 70% of our total annualized base rents were
attributable to these tenants. At December 31, 2009, Walgreen
occupied approximately 12% of our GLA and accounted for approximately 30% of the
annualized base rent. At December 31, 2009, Borders occupied
approximately 28% of our GLA and accounted for approximately 29% of the
annualized base rent. At December 31, 2009, Kmart occupied
approximately 29% of our GLA and accounted for approximately 11% of the
annualized base rent. No other tenant accounted for more than 10% of
gross leasable area or annualized base rent in 2009. The loss of any
of these anchor tenants or a significant number of their stores, or the
inability of any of them to pay rent, would have a material adverse effect on
our business.
Tax
Status
We have
operated and intend to operate in a manner to qualify as a REIT under Sections
856 through 860 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Internal
Revenue Code”). In order to maintain qualification as a REIT, we
must, among other things, distribute at least 90% of our REIT taxable income and
meet certain asset and income tests. Additionally, our charter limits
ownership of our Company, directly or constructively, by any single person to
9.8% of the value of our outstanding common stock and preferred stock, subject
to certain exceptions. As a REIT, we are not subject to federal
income tax with respect to that portion of our income that meets certain
criteria and is distributed annually to the stockholders.
We
established TRS entities pursuant to the provisions of the REIT Modernization
Act. Our TRS entities are able to engage in activities resulting in
income that previously would have been disqualified from being eligible REIT
income under the federal income tax regulations. As a result, certain
activities of our Company which occur within our TRS entities are subject to
federal and state income taxes.
Competition
The U.S.
commercial real estate investment market continues to be highly
competitive. We actively compete with many other entities engaged in
the development, acquisition and operation of commercial
properties. As such, we compete for a limited supply of properties
and financing for these properties. Investors include large
institutional investors, insurance companies, credit companies, pension funds,
private individuals, investment companies and other REITs, many of which have
greater financial and other resources than we do. There can be no
assurance that we will be able to compete successfully with such entities in our
development, acquisition and leasing activities in the future.
3
Potential
Environmental Risks
Investments
in real property create a potential for environmental liability on the part of
the owner or operator of such real property. If hazardous substances
are discovered on or emanating from a property, the owner or operator of the
property may be held strictly liable for all costs and liabilities relating to
such hazardous substances. We have obtained a Phase I environmental
study (which involves inspection without soil sampling or ground water analysis)
conducted by independent environmental consultants on each of our
properties. Furthermore, we have adopted a policy of conducting a
Phase I environmental study on each property we acquire and if necessary
conducting additional investigation as warranted.
We
conducted Phase I environmental studies on the five properties we developed in
2009. The results of the Phase I studies indicated that in three of our
developments no further action was required, including no further soil sampling
or ground water analysis. On the remaining two developments, in
addition to the Phase I environmental study, we conducted additional
investigation including in one instance a Phase II environmental assessment and
in two instances base line environmental assessments were
performed. In addition, we have no knowledge of any hazardous
substances existing on any of our properties in violation of any applicable
laws; however, no assurance can be given that such substances are not located on
any of the properties. We carry no insurance coverage for the types
of environmental risks described above.
We
believe that we are in compliance, in all material respects, with all federal,
state and local ordinances and regulations regarding hazardous or toxic
substances. Furthermore, we have not been notified by any
governmental authority of any noncompliance, liability or other claim in
connection with any of the properties.
Employees
As of
February 26, 2010, we employed 10 persons. Employee responsibilities
include accounting, construction, leasing, property coordination and
administrative functions for the properties. Our employees are not
covered by a collective bargaining agreement, and we consider our employee
relations to be satisfactory.
Financial
Information About Industry Segments
We are in
the business of development, acquisition and management of freestanding net
leased properties and community shopping centers. We consider our
activities to consist of a single industry segment. See the
Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes thereto included in this Annual
Report on Form 10-K.
Available
Information
Our
headquarters are located at 31850 Northwestern Highway, Farmington Hills,
MI 48334 and our telephone number is (248) 737-4190. Our
web site address is www.agreerealty.com. Our
reports electronically filed with or furnished to the SEC pursuant to Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act can be accessed through this site,
free of charge, as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file
or furnish such reports. These filings are also available on the
SEC’s website at www.sec.gov.
ITEM
1A.
|
RISK
FACTORS
|
Risks
Related to Our Business and Operations
The
recent global economic and financial market crisis has had and may continue to
have a negative effect on our business and operations.
The
recent global economic and financial market crisis has caused, among other
things, a general tightening in the credit markets, lower levels of liquidity,
increases in the rates of default and bankruptcy, lower consumer and business
spending, and lower consumer confidence and net worth, all of which has had and
may continue to have a negative effect on our business, results of operations,
financial condition and liquidity. Many of our tenants have been affected
by the current economic turmoil. Current or potential tenants may delay or
postpone entering into long-term net leases with us which could continue to lead
to reduced demand for commercial real estate. We are also limited in
our ability to reduce costs to offset the results of a prolonged or severe
economic downturn given certain fixed costs and commitments associated with our
operations.
4
The
timing and nature of any recovery in the credit and financial markets remains
uncertain, and there can be no assurance that market conditions will improve in
the near future or that our results will not continue to be materially and
adversely affected. Such conditions make it very difficult to forecast
operating results, make business decisions and identify and address material
business risks. The foregoing conditions may also impact the valuation of
certain long-lived or intangible assets that are subject to impairment testing,
potentially resulting in impairment charges which may be material to our
financial condition or results of operations.
Capital
markets are currently experiencing a period of dislocation and instability,
which has had and could continue to have a negative impact on the availability
and cost of capital.
The
general disruption in the U.S. capital markets has impacted the broader
worldwide financial and credit markets and reduced the availability of debt and
equity capital for the market as a whole. These conditions could persist
for a prolonged period of time or worsen in the future. Our ability to
access the capital markets may be restricted at a time when we would like, or
need, to access those markets, which could have an impact on our flexibility to
react to changing economic and business conditions. The resulting lack of
available credit, lack of confidence in the financial sector, increased
volatility in the financial markets and reduced business activity could
materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of
operations and our ability to obtain and manage our liquidity. In
addition, the cost of debt financing and the proceeds of equity financing may be
materially adversely impacted by these market conditions.
Single tenant leases involve
significant risks of tenant default.
We focus
our development and investment activities on ownership of real properties that
are leased to a single tenant. Therefore, the financial failure of,
or other default in payment by, a single tenant under its lease is likely to
cause a significant reduction in our operating cash flows from that property and
a significant reduction in the value of the property, and could cause a
significant reduction in our revenues and a significant impairment
loss. We may also experience difficulty or a significant delay in
re-leasing such property. The current economic conditions and the
credit crisis may put financial pressure on and increase the likelihood of the
financial failure of, or other default in payment by, one or more of the tenants
to whom we have exposure.
Failure
by any major tenant with leases in multiple locations to make rental payments to
us, because of a deterioration of its financial condition or otherwise, would
have a material adverse effect on us.
We derive
substantially all of our revenue from tenants who lease space from us at our
properties. Therefore, our ability to generate cash from operations
is dependent on the rents that we are able to charge and collect from our
tenants. At any time, our tenants may experience a downturn in their
business that may significantly weaken their financial condition, particularly
during periods of economic uncertainty. As a result, our tenants may delay
lease commencements, decline to extend or renew leases upon expiration, fail to
make rental payments when due, close a number of stores or declare
bankruptcy. Any of these actions could result in the termination of
the tenant’s leases and the loss of rental income attributable to the terminated
leases. In addition, lease terminations by a major tenant or a
failure by that major tenant to occupy the premises could result in lease
terminations or reductions in rent by other tenants in the same shopping centers
under the terms of some leases. In that event, we may be unable to
re-lease the vacated space at attractive rents or at all. The
occurrence of any of the situations described above would have a material
adverse effect on our results of operations and our financial
condition.
We rely significantly on three major
tenants, and therefore,
are subject to tenant credit concentrations that make us more susceptible to
adverse events with respect to those tenants.
As of
December 31, 2009, we derived approximately 70% of our annualized base rent from
three major tenants:
5
|
·
|
approximately
30% of our annualized base rent was from
Walgreen;
|
|
·
|
approximately
29% of our annualized base rent was from Borders;
and
|
|
·
|
approximately
11%, of our annualized base rent was from
Kmart.
|
In
addition, a significant portion of our 2008 and 2009 development projects were
for Walgreen Co. In the event of a default by any of these tenants
under their leases, we may experience delays in enforcing our rights as lessor
and may incur substantial costs in protecting our investment. Any
bankruptcy, insolvency or failure to make rental payments by, or any adverse
change in the financial condition of, one or more of these tenants, or any other
tenant to whom we may have a significant credit concentration now or in the
future, would likely result in a material reduction of our cash flows or
material losses to our company.
As
discussed in more detail below under Item 2. “Properties—Development and
Acquisition Summary,” Borders reported its annual net (loss) for its 2008 fiscal
year ended January 31, 2009 was approximately ($187 million).
Bankruptcy
laws will limit our remedies if a tenant becomes bankrupt and rejects the
lease.
If a
tenant becomes bankrupt or insolvent, that could diminish the income we receive
from that tenant’s leases. We may not be able to evict a tenant
solely because of its bankruptcy. On the other hand, a bankruptcy
court might authorize the tenant to terminate its leases with us. If
that happens, our claim against the bankrupt tenant for unpaid future rent would
be an unsecured prepetition claim subject to statutory limitations, and
therefore such amounts received in bankruptcy are likely to be substantially
less than the remaining rent we otherwise were owed under the
leases. In addition, any claim we have for unpaid past rent could be
substantially less than the amount owed. Circuit City, a tenant who
occupied one location in our portfolio filed for bankruptcy protection in
December 2008 and is in the process of liquidation.
Certain of our tenants at our
community shopping centers have the right to terminate their leases if other
tenants cease to occupy a property.
In the
event that certain tenants cease to occupy a property, although under most
circumstances such a tenant would remain liable for its lease payments, such an
action may result in certain other tenants at our community shopping centers
having the right to terminate their leases at the affected property, which could
adversely affect the future income from that property. As of December
31, 2009, each of our 12 community shopping centers had tenants with those
provisions in their leases.
Our portfolio has limited geographic
diversification, which
makes us more susceptible to adverse events in these areas.
Our
properties are located primarily in the Midwestern United States and in
particular, the State of Michigan (with 42 properties). An economic
downturn or other adverse events or conditions such as terrorist attacks or
natural disasters in these areas, or any other area where we may have
significant concentration now or in the future, could result in a material
reduction of our cash flows or material losses to our company.
Risks associated with our
development and acquisition activities.
We intend
to continue development of new properties and to consider possible acquisitions
of existing properties. We anticipate that our new developments will
be financed under lines of credit or other forms of construction financing that
will result in a risk that permanent financing on newly developed projects might
not be available or would be available only on disadvantageous
terms. In addition, new project development is subject to a number of
risks, including risks of construction delays or cost overruns that may increase
project costs, risks that the properties will not achieve anticipated occupancy
levels or sustain anticipated rent levels, and new project commencement risks
such as receipt of zoning, occupancy and other required governmental permits and
authorizations and the incurrence of development costs in connection with
projects that are not pursued to completion. If permanent debt or
equity financing is not available on acceptable terms to refinance new
development or acquisitions undertaken without permanent financing, further
development activities or acquisitions might be curtailed or cash available for
distribution might be adversely affected. Acquisitions entail risks
that investments will fail to perform in accordance with expectations and that
judgments with respect to the costs of improvements to bring an acquired
property up to standards established for the market position intended for that
property will prove inaccurate, as well as general investment risks associated
with any new real estate investment.
6
Properties
that we acquire or develop may be located in new markets where we may face risks
associated with investing in an unfamiliar market.
We may
acquire or develop properties in markets that are new to us. When we
acquire or develop properties located in these markets, we may face risks
associated with a lack of market knowledge or understanding of the local
economy, forging new business relationships in the area and unfamiliarity with
local government and permitting procedures.
We
own several of our properties subject to ground leases that expose us to the
loss of such properties upon breach or termination of the ground leases and may
limit our ability to sell these properties.
We own
several of our properties through leasehold interests in the land underlying the
buildings and we may acquire additional buildings in the future that are subject
to similar ground leases. As lessee under a ground lease, we are
exposed to the possibility of losing the property upon termination, or an
earlier breach by us, of the ground lease, which may have a material adverse
effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations, our
ability to make distributions to our stockholders and the trading price of our
common stock.
Our
ground leases contain certain provisions that may limit our ability to sell
certain of our properties. In order to assign or transfer our rights
and obligations under certain of our ground leases, we generally must obtain the
consent of the landlord which, in turn, could adversely impact the price
realized from any such sale.
Joint
venture investments will expose us to certain risks.
We may
from time to time enter into joint venture transactions for portions of our
existing or future real estate assets. Investing in this manner
subjects us to certain risks, among them the following:
|
·
|
We
will not exercise sole decision-making authority regarding the joint
venture’s business and assets and, thus, we may not be able to take
actions that we believe are in our company’s best
interests.
|
|
·
|
We
may be required to accept liability for obligations of the joint venture
(such as recourse carve-outs on mortgage loans) beyond our economic
interest.
|
|
·
|
Our
returns on joint venture assets may be adversely affected if the assets
are not held for the long-term.
|
The
availability and timing of cash distributions is uncertain.
We expect
to continue to pay quarterly distributions to our
stockholders. However, we bear all expenses incurred by our
operations, and our funds generated by operations, after deducting these
expenses, may not be sufficient to cover desired levels of distributions to our
stockholders. In addition, our board of directors, in its discretion,
may retain any portion of such cash for working capital. We cannot
assure our stockholders that sufficient funds will be available to pay
distributions.
7
We depend on our key
personnel.
Our
success depends to a significant degree upon the continued contributions of
certain key personnel including, but not limited to, our executive officers,
each of whom would be difficult to replace. If any of our key
personnel were to cease employment with us, our operating results could suffer.
Our ability to retain our executive officers or to attract suitable replacements
should any members of the management group leave is dependent on the competitive
nature of the employment market. The loss of services from key
members of the management group or a limitation in their availability could
adversely impact our future development or acquisition operations, our financial
condition and cash flows. Further, such a loss could be negatively
perceived in the capital markets. We have not obtained and do not
expect to obtain key man life insurance on any of our key
personnel.
We face significant competition.
We face
competition in seeking properties for acquisition and tenants who will lease
space in these properties from insurance companies, credit companies, pension or
private equity funds, private individuals, investment companies, other REITs and
other industry participants, many of which have greater financial and other
resources than we do. There can be no assurance that we will be able
to successfully compete with such entities in our development, acquisition and
leasing activities in the future.
General
Real Estate Risk
Our
performance and value are subject to general economic conditions and risks
associated with our real estate assets.
There are
risks associated with owning and leasing real estate. Although many
of our leases contain terms that obligate the tenants to bear substantially all
of the costs of operating our properties, investing in real estate involves a
number of risks. Income from and the value of our properties may be
adversely affected by:
|
·
|
changes
in general or local economic
conditions;
|
|
·
|
the
attractiveness of our properties to potential
tenants;
|
|
·
|
changes
in supply of or demand for similar or competing properties in an
area;
|
|
·
|
bankruptcies,
financial difficulties or lease defaults by our
tenants;
|
|
·
|
changes
in operating costs and expense and our ability to control
rents;
|
|
·
|
our
ability to lease properties at favorable rental
rates;
|
|
·
|
our
ability to sell a property when we desire to do so at a favorable
price;
|
|
·
|
unanticipated
changes in costs associated with known adverse environmental conditions or
retained liabilities for such
conditions;
|
|
·
|
changes
in or increased costs of compliance with governmental rules, regulations
and fiscal policies, including changes in tax, real estate, environmental
and zoning laws, and our potential liability thereunder;
and
|
|
·
|
unanticipated
expenditures to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and other
similar regulations.
|
The
global economic and financial market crisis has exacerbated many of the
foregoing risks. If a tenant fails to perform on its lease covenants,
that would not excuse us from meeting any mortgage debt obligation secured by
the property and could require us to fund reserves in favor of our mortgage
lenders, thereby reducing funds available for payment of cash dividends on our
shares of common stock.
8
The fact that real estate investments are
relatively illiquid may
reduce economic returns to investors.
We may
desire to sell a property in the future because of changes in market conditions
or poor tenant performance or to avail ourselves of other
opportunities. We may also be required to sell a property in the
future to meet secured debt obligations or to avoid a secured debt loan
default. Real estate properties cannot always be sold quickly, and we
cannot assure you that we could always obtain a favorable price, especially in
light of the current global economic and financial market crisis. We
may be required to invest in the restoration or modification of a property
before we can sell it. This lack of liquidity may limit our ability
to vary our portfolio promptly in response to changes in economic or other
conditions and, as a result, could adversely affect our financial condition,
results of operations, cash flows and our ability to pay distributions on our
common stock.
Our ability to renew leases or
re-lease space on favorable terms as leases expire significantly affects our
business.
We are
subject to the risks that, upon expiration of leases for space located in our
properties, the premises may not be re-let or the terms of re-letting (including
the cost of concessions to tenants) may be less favorable than current lease
terms. If a tenant does not renew its lease or if a tenant defaults
on its lease obligations, there is no assurance we could obtain a substitute
tenant on acceptable terms. If we cannot obtain another tenant with
comparable structural needs, we may be required to modify the property for a
different use, which may involve a significant capital expenditure and a delay
in re-leasing the property. Further, if we are unable to re-let promptly
all or a substantial portion of our retail space or if the rental rates upon
such re-letting were significantly lower than expected rates, our net income and
ability to make expected distributions to stockholders would be adversely
affected. There can be no assurance that we will be able to retain
tenants in any of our properties upon the expiration of their
leases.
A
property that incurs a vacancy could be difficult to sell or
re-lease.
A
property may incur a vacancy either by the continued default of a tenant under
its lease or the expiration of one of our leases. Certain of our
properties may be specifically suited to the particular needs of a
tenant. We may have difficulty obtaining a new tenant for any vacant
space we have in our properties. If the vacancy continues for a long
period of time, we may suffer reduced revenues resulting in less cash available
to be distributed to stockholders. In addition, the resale value of a
property could be diminished because the market value of a particular property
will depend principally upon the value of the leases of such
property.
Potential liability for
environmental contamination could result in substantial
costs.
Under
federal, state and local environmental laws, we may be required to investigate
and clean up any release of hazardous or toxic substances or petroleum products
at our properties, regardless of our knowledge or actual responsibility, simply
because of our current or past ownership or operation of the real
estate. If unidentified environmental problems arise, we may have to
make substantial payments, which could adversely affect our cash flow and our
ability to make distributions to our stockholders. This potential
liability results from the following:
|
·
|
As
owner we may have to pay for property damage and for investigation and
clean-up costs incurred in connection with the
contamination.
|
|
·
|
The
law may impose clean-up responsibility and liability regardless of whether
the owner or operator knew of or caused the
contamination.
|
|
·
|
Even
if more than one person is responsible for the contamination, each person
who shares legal liability under environmental laws may be held
responsible for all of the clean-up
costs.
|
|
·
|
Governmental
entities and third parties may sue the owner or operator of a contaminated
site for damages and costs.
|
These
costs could be substantial and in extreme cases could exceed the value of the
contaminated property. The presence of hazardous substances or
petroleum products or the failure to properly remediate contamination may
adversely affect our ability to borrow against, sell or lease an affected
property. In addition, some environmental laws create liens on
contaminated sites in favor of the government for damages and costs it incurs in
connection with a contamination.
9
A
majority of our leases require our tenants to comply with environmental laws and
to indemnify us against environmental liability arising from the operation of
the properties. However, we could be
subject to strict liability under environmental laws because we own the
properties. There is also a risk that tenants may not satisfy their
environmental compliance and indemnification obligations under the
leases. Any of these events could substantially increase our cost of
operations, require us to fund environmental indemnities in favor of our secured
lenders and reduce our ability to service our secured debt and pay dividends to
stockholders and any debt security interest payments. Environmental
problems at any properties could also put us in default under loans secured by
those properties, as well as loans secured by unaffected
properties.
Uninsured losses relating to real
property may adversely
affect our returns.
Our
leases require tenants to carry comprehensive liability and extended coverage
insurance on our properties. However, there are certain losses,
including losses from environmental liabilities, terrorist acts or catastrophic
acts of nature, that are not generally insured against or that are not generally
fully insured against because it is not deemed economically feasible or prudent
to do so. If there is an uninsured loss or a loss in excess of
insurance limits, we could lose both the revenues generated by the affected
property and the capital we have invested in the property. In the
event of a substantial unreimbursed loss, we would remain obligated to repay any
mortgage indebtedness or other obligations related to the property.
Risks
Related to Our Debt Financings
Leveraging our portfolio subjects us
to increased risk of
loss, including loss of
properties in the event of a foreclosure.
At
December 31, 2009, our ratio of indebtedness to market capitalization (assuming
conversion of Operating Partnership units) was approximately 53%. The use
of leverage presents an additional element of risk in the event that (1) the
cash flow from lease payments on our properties is insufficient to meet debt
obligations, (2) we are unable to refinance our debt obligations as necessary or
on as favorable terms or (3) there is an increase in interest
rates. If a property is mortgaged to secure payment of indebtedness
and we are unable to meet mortgage payments, the property could be foreclosed
upon with a consequent loss of income and asset value to us. Under
the “cross-default” provisions contained in mortgages encumbering some of our
properties, our default under a mortgage with a lender would result in our
default under mortgages held by the same lender on other properties resulting in
multiple foreclosures.
We intend
to maintain a ratio of total indebtedness (including construction or acquisition
financing) to market capitalization of 65% or less. Nevertheless, we
may operate with debt levels which are in excess of 65% of market capitalization
for extended periods of time. Our organization documents contain no
limitation on the amount or percentage of indebtedness which we may
incur. Therefore, our board of directors, without a vote of the
stockholders, could alter the general policy on borrowings at any
time. If our debt capitalization policy were changed, we could become
more highly leveraged, resulting in an increase in debt service that could
adversely affect our operating cash flow and our ability to make expected
distributions to stockholders, and could result in an increased risk of default
on our obligations.
Covenants
in our credit agreements could limit our flexibility and adversely affect our
financial condition.
The terms
of our credit facilities and other indebtedness require us to comply with a
number of customary financial and other covenants. These covenants
may limit our flexibility in our operations, and breaches of these covenants
could result in defaults under the instruments governing the applicable
indebtedness even if we have satisfied our payment obligations. Our
credit facility contains certain cross-default provisions which are triggered in
the event that our other indebtedness is in default. These
cross-default provisions may require us to repay or restructure the credit
facility in addition to any mortgage or other debt that is in default. If our properties were
foreclosed upon, or if we are unable to refinance our indebtedness at maturity
or meet our payment obligations, the amount of our distributable cash flows and
our financial condition would be adversely affected.
10
Credit
market developments may reduce availability under our credit
agreements.
Due to
the current volatile state of the credit markets, there is risk that lenders,
even those with strong balance sheets and sound lending practices, could fail or
refuse to honor their legal commitments and obligations under existing credit
commitments, including but not limited to: extending credit up to the maximum
permitted by a credit facility, allowing access to additional credit features
and/or honoring loan commitments. If our lender(s) fail to honor their
legal commitments under our credit facilities, it could be difficult in the
current environment to replace our credit facilities on similar
terms. The failure of any of the lenders under our credit facility
may impact our ability to finance our operating or investing
activities.
Risks
Related to Our Corporate Structure
Our
charter and Maryland law contain provisions that may delay, defer or prevent a
change of control transaction.
Our charter
contains a 9.8% ownership limit. Our charter, subject to
certain exceptions, authorizes our directors to take such actions as are
necessary and desirable to preserve our qualification as a REIT and to limit any
person to actual or constructive ownership of no more than 9.8% of the value of
our outstanding shares of common stock and preferred stock, except that the any
member of the Agree-Rosenberg Group (as defined in our charter) (the
“Agree-Rosenberg Group”) may own up to 24%. Our board of directors,
in its sole discretion, may exempt, subject to the satisfaction of certain
conditions, any person from the ownership limit. However, our board of directors
may not grant an exemption from the ownership limit to any person whose
ownership, direct or indirect, in excess of 9.8% of the value of our outstanding
shares of common stock and preferred stock could jeopardize our status as a
REIT. These restrictions on transferability and ownership will not
apply if our board of directors determines that it is no longer in our best
interests to attempt to qualify, or to continue to qualify, as a
REIT. The ownership limit may delay or impede, and we may use the
ownership limit deliberately to delay or impede, a transaction or a change of
control that might involve a premium price for our common stock or otherwise be
in the best interest of our stockholders.
We have a
staggered board. Our directors are divided into three classes
serving three-year staggered terms. The staggering of our board of
directors may discourage offers for our company or make an acquisition more
difficult, even when an acquisition is in the best interest of our
stockholders.
We have a
shareholder rights plan. Under the terms of this plan, we can in effect
prevent a person or group from acquiring more than 15% of the outstanding shares
of our common stock because, unless we approve of the acquisition, after the
person acquires more than 15% of our outstanding common stock, all other
stockholders will have the right to purchase securities from us at a price that
is less than their then fair market value. This would substantially
reduce the value and influence of the stock owned by the acquiring
person. Our board of directors can prevent the plan from operating by
approving the transaction in advance, which gives us significant power to
approve or disapprove of the efforts of a person or group to acquire a large
interest in our company.
We could issue
stock without stockholder approval. Our board of directors
could, without stockholder approval, issue authorized but unissued shares of our
common stock or preferred stock. In addition, our board of directors
could, without stockholder approval, classify or reclassify any unissued shares
of our common stock or preferred stock and set the preferences, rights and other
terms of such classified or reclassified shares. Our board of
directors could establish a series of stock that could, depending on the terms
of such series, delay, defer or prevent a transaction or change of control that
might involve a premium price for our common stock or otherwise be in the best
interest of our stockholders.
Provisions of
Maryland law may limit the ability of a third party to acquire control of our
company. Certain
provisions of Maryland law may have the effect of inhibiting a third party from
making a proposal to acquire us or of impeding a change of control under certain
circumstances that otherwise could provide the holders of shares of our common
stock with the opportunity to realize a premium over the then prevailing market
price of such shares, including:
11
|
·
|
“business
combination” provisions that, subject to limitations, prohibit certain
business combinations between us and an “interested stockholder” (defined
generally as any person who beneficially owns 10% or more of the voting
power of our shares or an affiliate thereof) for five years after the most
recent date on which the stockholder becomes an interested stockholder and
thereafter would require the recommendation of our board of directors and
impose special appraisal rights and special stockholder voting
requirements on these combinations;
and
|
|
·
|
“control
share” provisions that provide that “control shares” of our company
(defined as shares which, when aggregated with other shares controlled by
the stockholder, entitle the stockholder to exercise one of three
increasing ranges of voting power in electing directors) acquired in a
“control share acquisition” (defined as the direct or indirect acquisition
of ownership or control of “control shares”) have no voting rights except
to the extent approved by our stockholders by the affirmative vote of at
least two-thirds of all the votes entitled to be cast on the matter,
excluding all interested shares.
|
The
business combination statute permits various exemptions from its provisions,
including business combinations that are approved or exempted by the board of
directors before the time that the interested stockholder becomes an interested
stockholder. Our board of directors has exempted from the business
combination provisions of the MGCL any business combination with Mr. Richard
Agree or any other person acting in concert or as a group with Mr.
Agree.
In
addition, our bylaws contain a provision exempting from the control share
acquisition statute any members of the Agree-Rosenberg Group, our other
officers, our employees, any of the associates or affiliates of the foregoing
and any other person acting in concert of as a group with any of the
foregoing.
Additionally,
Title 3, Subtitle 8 of the Maryland General Corporation Law, or MGCL, permits
our board of directors, without stockholder approval and regardless of what is
currently provided in our charter or our bylaws, to implement takeover
defenses. These provisions may have the effect of inhibiting a third
party from making an acquisition proposal for our company or of delaying,
deferring or preventing a change in control of our company under circumstances
that otherwise could provide the holders of our common stock with the
opportunity to realize a premium over the then-current market
price.
Our
charter, our bylaws, the limited partnership agreement of our operating
partnership and Maryland law also contain other provisions that may delay, defer
or prevent a transaction or a change of control that might involve a premium
price for our common stock or otherwise be in the best interest of our
stockholders.
Our
board of directors can take many actions without stockholder
approval.
Our board
of directors has overall authority to oversee our operations and determine our
major corporate policies. This authority includes significant
flexibility. For example, our board of directors can do the
following:
|
·
|
change
our investment and financing policies and our policies with respect to
certain other activities, including our growth, debt capitalization,
distributions, REIT status and investment and operating
policies;
|
|
·
|
within
the limits provided in our charter, prevent the ownership, transfer and/or
accumulation of shares in order to protect our status as a REIT or for any
other reason deemed to be in the best interests of us and our
stockholders;
|
|
·
|
issue
additional shares without obtaining stockholder approval, which could
dilute the ownership of our then-current
stockholders;
|
|
·
|
classify
or reclassify any unissued shares of our common stock or preferred stock
and set the preferences, rights and other terms of such classified or
reclassified shares, without obtaining stockholder
approval;
|
12
|
·
|
employ
and compensate affiliates;
|
|
·
|
direct
our resources toward investments that do not ultimately appreciate over
time;
|
|
·
|
change
creditworthiness standards with respect to third-party tenants;
and
|
|
·
|
determine
that it is no longer in our best interests to attempt to qualify, or to
continue to qualify, as a REIT.
|
Any of
these actions could increase our operating expenses, impact our ability to make
distributions or reduce the value of our assets without giving our stockholders
the right to vote.
Future
offerings of debt and equity may not be available to us or may adversely affect
the market price of our common stock.
We expect
to continue to increase our capital resources by making additional offerings of
equity and debt securities in the future, which would include classes of
preferred stock, common stock and senior or subordinated notes. Our
ability to raise additional capital may be adversely impacted by market
conditions, and we do not know when market conditions will stabilize or
improve. All debt securities and other borrowings, as well as all
classes of preferred stock, will be senior to our common stock in a liquidation
of our company. Additional equity offerings could dilute our
stockholders’ equity, reduce the market price of shares of our common stock, or
be of preferred stock having a distribution preference that may limit our
ability to make distributions on our common stock. Continued market
dislocations could cause us to seek sources of potentially less attractive
capital. Our ability to estimate the amount, timing or nature of
additional offerings is limited as these factors will depend upon market
conditions and other factors.
The
market price of our stock may vary substantially.
The
market price of our common stock could be volatile, and investors in our common
stock may experience a decrease in the value of their shares, including
decreases unrelated to our operating performance or prospects. Among
the market conditions that may affect the market price of our common stock are
the following:
|
·
|
our
financial condition and operating performance and the performance of other
similar companies;
|
|
·
|
actual
or anticipated variations in our quarterly results of
operations;
|
|
·
|
the
extent of investor interest in our company, real estate generally or
commercial real estate
specifically;
|
|
·
|
the
reputation of REITs generally and the attractiveness of their equity
securities in comparison to other equity securities, including securities
issued by other real estate companies, and fixed income
securities;
|
|
·
|
changes
in expectations of future financial performance or changes in estimates of
securities analysts;
|
|
·
|
fluctuations
in stock market prices and volumes;
and
|
|
·
|
announcements
by us or our competitors of acquisitions, investments or strategic
alliances.
|
Certain
officers and directors may have interests that conflict with the interests of
stockholders.
Certain
of our officers and members of our board of directors own operating partnership
units in our Operating Partnership. These individuals may have
personal interests that conflict with the interests of our stockholders with
respect to business decisions affecting us and our Operating Partnership, such
as interests in the timing and pricing of property sales or refinancings in
order to obtain favorable tax treatment. As a result, the effect of
certain transactions on these unit holders may influence our decisions affecting
these properties.
13
Federal
Income Tax Risks
Complying
with REIT requirements may cause us to forgo otherwise attractive
opportunities.
To
qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes and to maintain our exemption
from the 1940 Act, we must continually satisfy numerous income, asset and other
tests, thus having to forgo investments we might otherwise make and hindering
our investment performance.
Failure
to qualify as a REIT could adversely affect our operations and our ability to
make distributions.
We will
be subject to increased taxation if we fail to qualify as a REIT for federal
income tax purposes. Although we believe that we are organized and
operate in such a manner so as to qualify as a REIT under the Internal Revenue
Code, no assurance can be given that we will remain so
qualified. Qualification as a REIT involves the application of highly
technical and complex Code provisions for which there are only limited judicial
or administrative interpretations. The complexity of these provisions
and applicable Treasury Regulations is also increased in the context of a REIT
that holds its assets in partnership form. The determination of
various factual matters and circumstances not entirely within our control may
affect our ability to qualify as a REIT. A REIT generally is not
taxed at the corporate level on income it distributes to its stockholders, as
long as it distributes annually at least 100% of its taxable income to its
stockholders. We have not requested and do not plan to request a
ruling from the Internal Revenue Service that we qualify as a REIT.
If we
fail to qualify as a REIT, we will face tax consequences that will substantially
reduce the funds available for payment of cash dividends:
|
·
|
We
would not be allowed a deduction for dividends paid to stockholders in
computing our taxable income and would be subject to federal income tax at
regular corporate rates.
|
|
·
|
We
could be subject to the federal alternative minimum tax and possibly
increased state and local taxes.
|
|
·
|
Unless
we are entitled to relief under statutory provisions, we could not elect
to be treated as a REIT for four taxable years following the year in which
we were disqualified.
|
In
addition, if we fail to qualify as a REIT, we will no longer be required to pay
dividends (other than any mandatory dividends on any preferred shares we may
offer). As a result of these factors, our failure to qualify as a
REIT could adversely effect the market price for our common stock.
Changes in tax laws may prevent us
from maintaining our
qualification as a
REIT.
As we
have previously described, we intend to maintain our qualification as a REIT for
federal income tax purposes. However, this intended qualification is based on
the tax laws that are currently in effect. We are unable to predict any future
changes in the tax laws that would adversely affect our status as a REIT. If
there is a change in the tax laws that prevent us from qualifying as a REIT or
that requires REITs generally to pay corporate level income taxes, we may not be
able to make the same level of distributions to our stockholders.
An investment in
our stock has various tax risks that could affect the value of your investment,
including the treatment of
distributions in excess of earnings and the inability to apply “passive losses”
against distributions.
An
investment in our stock has various tax risks. Distributions in excess of
current and accumulated earnings and profits, to the extent that they exceed the
adjusted basis of an investor’s stock, will be treated as long-term capital gain
(or short-term capital gain if the shares have been held for less than one
year). Any gain or loss realized upon a taxable disposition of shares by a
stockholder who is not a dealer in securities will be treated as a long-term
capital gain or loss if the shares have been held for more than one year, and
otherwise will be treated as short-term capital gain or loss. Distributions that
we properly designate as capital gain distributions will be treated as taxable
to stockholders as gains (to the extent that they do not exceed our actual net
capital gain for the taxable year) from the sale or disposition of a capital
asset held for greater than one year. Distributions we make and gain arising
from the sale or exchange by a stockholder of shares of our stock will not be
treated as passive income, meaning stockholders generally will not be able to
apply any “passive losses” against such income or gain.
14
Excessive non-real estate asset
values may jeopardize our REIT status.
In order
to qualify as a REIT, at least 75% of the value of our assets must consist of
investments in real estate, investments in other REITs, cash and cash
equivalents, and government securities. Therefore, the value of any
properties we own that are not considered real estate assets for federal
income tax purposes must represent in the aggregate less than 25% of our total
assets. In addition, under federal income tax law, we may not own securities in
any one issuer (other than a REIT, a qualified REIT subsidiary or a TRS) which
represent in excess of 10% of the voting securities or 10% of the value of all
securities of any one issuer, or which have, in the aggregate, a value in excess
of 5% of our total assets, and we may not own securities of one or more TRSs
which have, in the aggregate, a value in excess of 25% of our total
assets. We may invest in securities of another REIT, and our
investment may represent in excess of 10% of the voting securities or 10% of the
value of the securities of the other REIT. If the other REIT were to lose its
REIT status during a taxable year in which our investment represented in excess
of 10% of the voting securities or 10% of the value of the securities of the
other REIT as of the close of a calendar quarter, we may lose our REIT
status.
Compliance
with the asset tests is determined at the end of each calendar quarter. Subject
to certain mitigation provisions, if we fail to meet any such test at the end of
any calendar quarter, we will cease to qualify as a REIT.
We may have to borrow funds or sell
assets to meet our distribution requirements.
Subject
to some adjustments that are unique to REITs, a REIT generally must distribute
90% of its taxable income. For the purpose of determining taxable income,
we may be required to accrue interest, rent and other items treated as earned
for tax purposes but that we have not yet received. In addition, we may be
required not to accrue as expenses for tax purposes some items which actually
have been paid, including, for example, payments of principal on our debt, or
some of our deductions might be disallowed by the Internal Revenue Service. As a
result, we could have taxable income in excess of cash available for
distribution. If this occurs, we may have to borrow funds or liquidate some of
our assets in order to meet the distribution requirement applicable to a
REIT.
Future
distributions may include a significant portion as a return of
capital.
Our
distributions may exceed the amount of our income as a REIT. If so, the excess
distributions will be treated as a return of capital to the extent of the
stockholder’s basis in our stock, and the stockholder’s basis in our stock will
be reduced by such amount. To the extent distributions exceed a stockholder’s
basis in our stock, the stockholder will recognize capital gain, assuming the
stock is held as a capital asset.
Our ownership of and relationship
with any TRS which we recently formed or acquire in the future will be
limited, and a failure to comply with the limits would jeopardize our REIT
status and may result in the application of a 100% excise tax.
A REIT
may own up to 100% of the stock of one or more TRSs. A TRS may earn income that
would not be qualifying income if earned directly by the parent
REIT. Overall, no more than 25% of the value of a REIT’s assets may
consist of stock or securities of one or more TRSs. A TRS will
typically pay federal, state and local income tax at regular corporate rates on
any income that it earns. In addition, the TRS rules impose a 100%
excise tax on certain transactions between a TRS and its parent REIT that are
not conducted on an arm’s-length basis. The TRS that we recently
formed will pay federal, state and local income tax on its taxable income, and
its after-tax net income will be available for distribution to us but will not
be required to be distributed to us. There can be no assurance that
we will be able to comply with the 25% limitation discussed above or to avoid
application of the 100% excise tax discussed above.
15
Liquidation
of our assets may jeopardize our REIT qualification.
To
qualify as a REIT, we must comply with requirements regarding our assets and our
sources of income. If we are compelled to liquidate our investments to repay
obligations to our lenders, we may be unable to comply with these requirements,
ultimately jeopardizing our qualification as a REIT, or we may be subject to a
100% tax on any gain if we sell assets in transactions that are considered to be
“prohibited transactions,” which are explained in the risk factor
below.
We
may be subject to other tax liabilities even if we qualify as a
REIT.
Even if
we qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes, we will be required to pay
certain federal, state and local taxes on our income and
property. For example, we will be subject to income tax to the extent
we distribute less than 100% of our REIT taxable income (including capital
gains). Additionally, we will be subject to a 4% nondeductible excise
tax on the amount, if any, by which dividends paid by us in any calendar year
are less than the sum of 85% of our ordinary income, 95% of our capital gain net
income and 100% of our undistributed income from prior
years. Moreover, if we have net income from “prohibited
transactions,” that income will be subject to a 100% tax. In general,
prohibited transactions are sales or other dispositions of property held
primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of
business. The determination as to whether a particular sale is a
prohibited transaction depends on the facts and circumstances related to that
sale. While we will undertake sales of assets if those assets become
inconsistent with our long-term strategic or return objectives, we do not
believe that those sales should be considered prohibited transactions, but there
can be no assurance that the IRS would not contend otherwise. The
need to avoid prohibited transactions could cause us to forego or defer sales of
properties that might otherwise be in our best interest to sell.
In
addition, any net taxable income earned directly by our TRS, or through entities
that are disregarded for federal income tax purposes as entities separate from
our TRS, will be subject to federal and possibly state corporate income
tax. To the extent that we and our affiliates are required to pay
federal, state and local taxes, we will have less cash available for
distributions to our stockholders.
Dividends
payable by REITs do not qualify for the reduced tax rates on dividend income
from regular corporations.
The
maximum tax rate for dividends payable to domestic stockholders that are
individuals, trusts and estates were reduced in recent years to 15% (through
2010). Dividends payable by REITs, however, are generally not eligible for the
reduced rates. Although this legislation does not adversely affect the taxation
of REITs or dividends paid by REITs, the more favorable rates applicable to
regular corporate dividends could cause investors who are individuals, trusts
and estates to perceive investments in REITs to be relatively less attractive
than investments in the stocks of non-REIT corporations that pay dividends,
which could adversely affect the value of the stock of REITs, including our
stock.
Our
ownership limit contained in our charter may be ineffective to preserve our REIT
status.
In order
for us to qualify as a REIT for each taxable year, no more than 50% in value of
our outstanding capital stock may be owned, directly or indirectly, by five or
fewer individuals during the last half of any calendar year (the “5/50
Rule”). Individuals for this purpose include natural persons, private
foundations, some employee benefit plans and trusts, and some charitable trusts.
In order to preserve our REIT qualification, our charter generally
prohibits (i) any member of the Agree-Rosenberg Group from directly or
indirectly owning more than 24% of the value of our outstanding stock and (ii)
any other person from directly or indirectly owning more than 9.8% of the value
of our outstanding common stock and preferred stock, subject to certain
exceptions. Because of the way our ownership limit is written,
including because of the limit on persons other than a member of the
Agree-Rosenberg Group is not less than 9.8%, our charter limitation may be
ineffective to ensure that we do not violate the 5/50 Rule.
16
Complying
with REIT requirements may limit our ability to hedge effectively and may cause
us to incur tax liabilities.
The REIT
provisions of the Internal Revenue Code substantially limit our ability to hedge
our liabilities. Any income from a hedging transaction we enter into to manage
risk of interest rate changes, price changes or currency fluctuations with
respect to borrowings made or to be made to acquire or carry real estate assets
does not constitute qualifying income for purposes of income tests that apply to
us as a REIT. To the extent that we enter into other types of hedging
transactions, the income from those transactions is likely to be treated as
non-qualifying income for purposes of the income tests. As a result of
these rules, we may need to limit our use of advantageous hedging techniques or
implement those hedges through a TRS. This could increase the cost of our
hedging activities because our TRS would be subject to tax on gains or expose us
to greater risks associated with changes in interest rates than we would
otherwise want to bear. In addition, losses in our TRSs will generally not
provide any tax benefit, except for being carried forward against future taxable
income in the TRSs.
ITEM
1B.
|
UNRESOLVED
STAFF COMMENTS
|
None
ITEM
2.
|
PROPERTIES
|
Our
properties consist of 61 freestanding net leased properties and 12 community
shopping centers that, as of December 31, 2009, were 98.1% leased, with a
weighted average lease term of 10.3 years. Approximately 89% of our
annualized base rent was attributable to national retailers. Among
these retailers are Walgreen, Borders and Kmart which, at December 31, 2009,
collectively represented approximately 70% of our annualized base
rent. A majority of our properties were built for or are leased to
national tenants who require a high quality location with strong retail
characteristics. We developed 48 of our 61 freestanding properties
and all 12 of our community shopping centers. Properties we have
developed (including our community shopping centers) account for approximately
84% of our annualized base rent as of December 31, 2009. Our 61
freestanding properties are comprised of 60 retail locations and Borders’
corporate headquarters. See Notes 4 and 5 to the Consolidated
Financial Statements included herein for information regarding mortgage debt and
other debt related to our properties.
A
substantial portion of our income consists of rent received under net
leases. A majority of our leases provide for the payment of fixed
base rentals monthly in advance and for the payment by tenants of a pro rata
share of the real estate taxes, insurance, utilities and common area maintenance
of the shopping center as well as payment to us of a percentage of the tenant’s
sales. We received percentage rents of $15,366, $15,396 and $37,111
for the fiscal years 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Included in
those amounts were percentage rents from Kmart of $-0-, $-0- and $10,221 for
fiscal years 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Leases with Borders
do not contain percentage rent provisions. Leases with Walgreen do
contain percentage rent provisions; however, no percentage rent was received
from Walgreen during these periods. Some of our leases require us to
make roof and structural repairs, as needed.
Development
and Acquisition Summary
During
2009, we completed the following developments and redevelopments:
Tenant(s)
|
Location
|
Cost
|
||
Walgreen
(drug store)
|
Brighton,
Michigan
|
$4.2
million
|
||
Walgreen
(drug store)
|
Silver
Spring Shores, Florida
|
$4.5
million
|
||
Walgreen
(drug store)
|
Port
St John, Florida
|
$4.7
million
|
||
Walgreen
(drug store)
|
Lowell,
Michigan
|
$2.8
million
|
||
Chase
(retail bank)
|
Southfield,
Michigan
|
$1.3
million
|
17
During 2009, we commenced the following
developments:
Tenant(s)
|
Location
|
Budgeted
Cost
|
Anticipated
Completion
|
|||
Walgreen
(drug store)
|
Ann
Arbor, Michigan
|
$3.3
million
|
Third
quarter 2010
|
|||
Walgreen
(drug store)
|
St
Augustine Shores, Florida
|
$3.5
million
|
Fourth
quarter 2010
|
|||
Walgreen
(drug store)
|
Atlantic
Beach, Florida
|
$3.5million
|
Third
quarter 2010
|
We did
not complete or commence any acquisitions in 2009. We did not sell
any properties in 2009.
Major
Tenants
The
following table sets forth certain information with respect to our major
tenants:
Number
of Leases
|
Annualized Base
Rent as of
December 31, 2009
|
Percent of Total
Annualized Base Rent as
of December 31, 2009
|
||||||||||
Walgreen
|
28 | $ | 10,246,099 | 30 | % | |||||||
Borders
|
18 | 9,938,796 | 29 | |||||||||
Kmart
|
12 | 3,847,911 | 11 | |||||||||
Total
|
58 | $ | 24,032,806 | 70 | % |
Walgreen
is a leader of the U.S. chain drugstore industry and trades on the New York
Stock Exchange under the symbol “WAG”. Walgreen operated 7,496
locations in 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and Guam and had
total assets of approximately $25.1 billion as of August 31, 2009. As
of February 10, 2010, Walgreen’s long-term debt had a Standard and Poor’s rating
of A+ and a Moody’s rating of A2 . For its fiscal year ended August 31, 2009,
Walgreen reported that its annual net sales were $63.3 billion, its annual net
income was $2.0 billion and it had stockholders’ equity of $14.4
billion.
Borders
trades on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “BGP”. Borders
is the second largest operator of book, music and movie superstores and the
largest operator of mall-based bookstores in the world based upon both sales and
number of stores. At January 31, 2009, Borders operated 518
superstores under the Borders name, including 515 in the United
States. Borders also operated 386 mall-based and other bookstores,
including stores operated under the Waldenbooks, Borders Express and Borders
Outlet names as well as Borders-branded airport stores. Borders
employed approximately 25,600 people worldwide as of such
date. Borders has reported that its annual revenues for its 2008
fiscal year ended January 31, 2009 were approximately $3.3 billion, its annual
net (loss) for 2008 was approximately ($187 million) and its total stockholders’
equity at fiscal year end 2008 was approximately of $263 million.
Kmart is
a mass merchandising company that offers customers quality products through a
portfolio of brands and labels. As of October 31, 2009, Kmart operated
approximately 1,380 stores across 49 states, Guam, Puerto Rico and the U.S.
Virgin Islands. Kmart is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Sears Holdings
Corporation (“Sears”), which trades on the Nasdaq stock market under the symbol
“SHLD”. Sears is a broadline retailer with approximately 2,300
full-line and 1,200 specialty retail stores in the United States operating
through Kmart and Sears and approximately 380 full-line and specialty retail
stores in Canada operating through Sears Canada, Inc. (“Sears Canada”), a
70%-owned subsidiary. As of October 31, 2009, Sears had total assets
of $27.1 billion, total liabilities of $17.8 billion and stockholders equity of
$9.3 billion. All of our Kmart properties are in the traditional
Kmart format and these Kmart properties average 85,000 square feet per
property.
18
The
financial information set forth above with respect to Walgreen, Borders and
Kmart was derived from the annual reports on Form 10-K filed by Borders and
Walgreen with the SEC with respect to their 2008 fiscal years and the quarterly
report on form 10-Q filed by Sears Holdings Corporation with the SEC with
respect to the third quarter of 2009. Additional information
regarding Borders, Walgreen or Kmart may be found in their respective public
filings. These filings can be accessed at www.sec.gov. We
are unable to confirm, and make no representations with respect to, the accuracy
of these reports and therefore you should not place undue reliance on such
information as it pertains to our operations.
Location
of Properties in the Portfolio
State
|
Number
of
Properties
|
Total Gross
Leasable Area
(Sq. feet)
|
Percent of GLA Leased
on December 31, 2009
|
|||||||||
California
|
1
|
38,015 | 100 | % | ||||||||
Florida
|
7
|
298,458 | 89 | |||||||||
Georgia
|
1
|
14,820 | 100 | |||||||||
Illinois
|
1
|
20,000 | 90 | |||||||||
Indiana
|
2
|
15,844 | 100 | |||||||||
Kansas
|
2
|
45,000 | 100 | |||||||||
Kentucky
|
1
|
116,212 | 100 | |||||||||
Maryland
|
2
|
53,000 | 100 | |||||||||
Michigan
|
42
|
2,126,184 | 99 | |||||||||
Nebraska
|
2
|
55,000 | 100 | |||||||||
New
Jersey
|
1
|
10,118 | 100 | |||||||||
New
York
|
2
|
27,626 | 100 | |||||||||
Ohio
|
1
|
21,000 | 100 | |||||||||
Oklahoma
|
4
|
99,282 | 100 | |||||||||
Pennsylvania
|
1
|
28,604 | 100 | |||||||||
Wisconsin
|
3
|
523,036 | 98 | |||||||||
Total/Average
|
73
|
3,492,199 | 98 | % |
Lease
Expirations
The
following table shows lease expirations for our community shopping centers and
wholly-owned freestanding properties, assuming that none of the tenants exercise
renewal options.
December 31, 2009
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Gross Leasable Area
|
Annualized Base Rent
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Expiration Year
|
Number
of Leases
Expiring
|
Square
Footage
|
Percent
of Total
|
Amount
|
Percent
of Total
|
|||||||||||||||
2010
|
9
|
182,100 | 5.3 | % | $ | 1,017,912 | 3.0 | % | ||||||||||||
2011
|
23
|
136,636 | 4.0 | % | 1,110,428 | 3.2 | % | |||||||||||||
2012
|
28
|
267,986 | 7.8 | % | 1,375,067 | 4.0 | % | |||||||||||||
2013
|
20
|
314,713 | 9.2 | % | 1,662,241 | 4.8 | % | |||||||||||||
2014
|
9
|
190,458 | 5.6 | % | 985,856 | 2.9 | % | |||||||||||||
2015
|
18
|
768,841 | 22.4 | % | 5,443,351 | 15.8 | % | |||||||||||||
2016
|
7
|
124,841 | 3.6 | % | 1,922,928 | 5.6 | % |
19
December 31, 2009
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Gross Leasable Area
|
Annualized Base Rent
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Expiration Year
|
Number
of Leases
Expiring
|
Square
Footage
|
Percent
of Total
|
Amount
|
Percent
of Total
|
|||||||||||||||
2017
|
4
|
30,844 | 0.9 | % | 351,995 | 1.0 | % | |||||||||||||
2018
|
13
|
249,732 | 7.3 | % | 4,396,756 | 12.8 | % | |||||||||||||
2019
|
6
|
70,170 | 2.0 | % | 1,741,879 | 5.1 | % | |||||||||||||
Thereafter
|
41
|
1,090,336 | 31.9 | % | 14,341,431 | 41.8 | % | |||||||||||||
Total
|
178
|
3,426,657 | 100.0 | % | $ | 34,349,844 | 100.0 | % |
We have
made preliminary contact with the nine tenants whose leases expire in
2010. Of those tenants, three tenants, at their option, have the
right to extend their lease term and six tenants have leases expiring in
2010. We expect two tenants, to terminate their leases in 2010 and
seven tenants to extend their leases or enter into lease
extensions.
Annualized
Base Rent of our Properties
The
following is a breakdown of base rents in place at December 31, 2009 for each
type of retail tenant:
Type of Tenant
|
Annualized
Base Rent
|
Percent of
Annualized
Base Rent
|
||||||
National(1)
|
$ | 30,614,320 | 89 | % | ||||
Regional(2)
|
2,659,992 | 8 | ||||||
Local
|
1,075,532 | 3 | ||||||
Total
|
$ | 34,349,844 | 100 | % |
(1)
|
Includes
the following national tenants: Walgreen, Borders, Kmart,
Wal-Mart, Fashion Bug, Rite Aid, JC Penney, Avco Financial, GNC Group,
Radio Shack, Super Value, Maurices, Payless Shoes, Blockbuster Video,
Family Dollar, H&R Block, Sally Beauty, Jo Ann Fabrics, Staples, Best
Buy, Dollar Tree, TGI Friday’s and Pier 1
Imports.
|
(2)
|
Includes
the following regional tenants: Roundy’s Foods, Meijer, Dunham’s Sports,
Christopher Banks and Beall’s Department
Stores.
|
Freestanding
Properties
At
December 31, 2009, our 61 of freestanding properties were leased to Walgreen
(27), Borders (18), Rite Aid (7), Kmart (2), JP Morgan Chase (1),
Fajita Factory (1), Citizens Bank (1), Lake Lansing RA Associates, LLC
(1), Meijer (1), Wal-Mart (Sam’s Club) (1). Our freestanding
properties provided $24,264,289, or approximately 70.6%, of our annualized base
rent as of December 31, 2009, at an average base rent per square foot of
$14.90. These properties contain, in the aggregate, 1,629,543 square
feet of GLA or approximately 46.7% of our total GLA as of December 31,
2009. Our freestanding properties tend to have high traffic counts,
are generally located in densely populated areas and are leased to a single
tenant on a long term basis. Of our 61 freestanding properties, 48
were developed by us. As of December 31, 2009, we had one vacant free
standing property. Our freestanding properties had a weighted average
lease term of 12.6 years as of December 31, 2009.
Our
freestanding properties range in size from 4,426 to 458,729 square feet of GLA
and are located in the following states: California (1), Florida (6), Georgia
(1), Indiana (2), Kansas (2), Maryland (2), Michigan (36), Nebraska (2), New
Jersey (1), New York (2), Ohio (1), Oklahoma (4) and Pennsylvania
(1).
20
Freestanding
Properties
Tenant
|
Location
|
Year
Completed/
Expanded
|
Total GLA
|
Lease Expiration(2)
(Option expiration)
|
||||
Borders
(1)
|
Aventura,
FL
|
1996
|
30,000
|
Jan
31, 2016 (2036)
|
||||
Borders
|
Columbus,
OH
|
1996
|
21,000
|
Jan
23, 2016 (2036)
|
||||
Borders
|
Monroeville,
PA
|
1996
|
28,604
|
Nov
8, 2016 (2036)
|
||||
Borders
|
Norman,
OK
|
1996
|
24,641
|
Sep
20, 2016 (2036)
|
||||
Borders
(8)
|
Omaha,
NE
|
1995
|
30,000
|
Nov
3, 2015 (2035)
|
||||
Borders
|
Santa
Barbara, CA
|
1995
|
38,015
|
Nov
17, 2015 (2035)
|
||||
Borders
(8)
|
Wichita,
KS
|
1995
|
25,000
|
Nov
10, 2015 (2035)
|
||||
Borders
(8)
|
Lawrence,
KS
|
1997
|
20,000
|
Oct
16, 2022 (2042)
|
||||
Borders
|
Tulsa,
OK
|
1998
|
25,000
|
Sep
30, 2018 (2038)
|
||||
Borders
(8)
|
Oklahoma
City, OK
|
2002
|
24,641
|
Jan
31, 2018 (2038)
|
||||
Borders
(8)
|
Omaha,
NE
|
2002
|
25,000
|
Jan
31, 2018 (2038)
|
||||
Borders
(8)
|
Indianapolis,
IN
|
2002
|
15,844
|
Dec
31, 2017 (2038)
|
||||
Borders
(8)
|
Columbia,
MD
|
1999
|
28,000
|
Jan
31, 2018 (2038)
|
||||
Borders
(8)
|
Germantown,
MD
|
2000
|
25,000
|
Jan
31, 2018 (2038)
|
||||
Borders
Headquarters (8)
|
Ann
Arbor, MI
|
1996/1998
|
458,729
|
Jan
29, 2023 (2043)
|
||||
Borders
|
Tulsa,
OK
|
1996
|
25,000
|
Sep
30, 2018 (2038)
|
||||
Borders
(8)
|
Boynton
Beach, FL
|
1996
|
20,745
|
July
20, 2024 (2044)
|
||||
Borders
(8)
|
Ann
Arbor, MI
|
1996
|
110,000
|
Jan
31, 2025 (2045)
|
||||
Citizens
Bank
|
Flint,
MI
|
2003
|
4,426
|
Apr
15, 2023
|
||||
Rite
Aid (8)
|
Webster,
NY
|
2004
|
13,813
|
Feb
24, 2024 (2044)
|
||||
Rite
Aid (8)
|
Albion,
NY
|
2004
|
13,813
|
Oct
12, 2024 (2044)
|
||||
Fajita
Factory
|
Lansing,
MI
|
2004
|
Note
(3)
|
Aug
31, 2014 (2032)
|
||||
Lake
Lansing RA Associates, LLC
|
East
Lansing, MI
|
2004
|
Note
(4)
|
Dec
31, 2028 (2078)
|
||||
Kmart
|
Grayling,
MI
|
1984
|
52,320
|
Sep
30, 2009 (2059)
|
||||
Kmart
|
Oscoda,
MI
|
1984/1990
|
90,470
|
Sep
30, 2009 (2059)
|
||||
Meijer
|
Plainfield,
IN
|
2007
|
Note
(5)
|
Nov
5, 2027 (2047)
|
||||
Rite
Aid (8)
|
Canton
Twp, MI
|
2003
|
11,180
|
Oct
31, 2019 (2049)
|
||||
Rite
Aid (8)
|
Roseville,
MI
|
2005
|
11,060
|
June
30, 2025 (2050)
|
||||
Rite
Aid
|
Mt
Pleasant, MI
|
2005
|
11,095
|
Nov
30, 2025 (2065)
|
||||
Rite
Aid
|
N
Cape May, NJ
|
2005
|
10,118
|
Nov
30, 2025 (2065)
|
||||
Rite
Aid (8)
|
Summit
Twp, MI
|
2006
|
11,060
|
Oct
31, 2019 (2039)
|
||||
Sam’s
Club
|
Roseville,
MI
|
2002
|
Note
(6)
|
Aug
4, 2022 (2082)
|
||||
Walgreen
(8)
|
Waterford,
MI
|
1997
|
13,905
|
Feb
28, 2018 (2058)
|
||||
Walgreen
(8)
|
Chesterfield,
MI
|
1998
|
13,686
|
July
31, 2018 (2058)
|
||||
Walgreen
(8)
|
Pontiac,
MI
|
1998
|
13,905
|
Oct
31, 2018 (2058)
|
||||
Walgreen
(8)
|
Grand
Blanc, MI
|
1998
|
13,905
|
Feb
28, 2019 (2059)
|
||||
Walgreen
(8)
|
Rochester,
MI
|
1998
|
13,905
|
June
30, 2019 (2059)
|
||||
Walgreen
(8)
|
Ypsilanti,
MI
|
1999
|
15,120
|
Dec
31, 2019 (2059)
|
||||
Walgreen (1)
(8)
|
Petoskey,
MI
|
2000
|
13,905
|
Apr
30, 2020 (2060)
|
||||
Walgreen
(8)
|
Flint,
MI
|
2000
|
14,490
|
Dec
31, 2020
(2060)
|
21
Tenant
|
Location
|
Year
Completed/
Expanded
|
Total GLA
|
Lease Expiration(2)
(Option expiration)
|
||||
Walgreen
(8)
|
Flint,
MI
|
2001
|
15,120
|
Feb
28, 2021 (2061)
|
||||
Walgreen
(8)
|
N
Baltimore, MI
|
2001
|
14,490
|
Aug
31, 2021 (2061)
|
||||
Walgreen
(8)
|
Flint,
MI
|
2002
|
14,490
|
Apr
30, 2027 (2077)
|
||||
Walgreen
|
Big
Rapids, MI
|
2003
|
13,560
|
Apr
30, 2028 (2078)
|
||||
Walgreen
(8)
|
Flint,
MI
|
2004
|
14,560
|
Feb
28, 2029 (2079)
|
||||
Walgreen
(8)
|
Flint,
MI
|
2004
|
13,650
|
Oct
31, 2029 (2079)
|
||||
Walgreen
|
Midland,
MI
|
2005
|
14,820
|
July
31, 2030 (2080)
|
||||
Walgreen
(8)
|
Grand
Rapids, MI
|
2005
|
14,820
|
Aug
30, 2030 (2080)
|
||||
Walgreen
(8)
|
Delta
Township, MI
|
2005
|
14,559
|
Nov
30, 2030 (2080)
|
||||
Walgreen
and Retail space (8)
|
Livonia,
MI
|
2007
|
19,390
|
June
30, 2032 (2082)
|
||||
Walgreen
|
Barnesville,
GA
|
2007
|
14,820
|
Nov
30, 2032 (2082)
|
||||
Walgreen
and Chase Bank (8)
|
Macomb
Township, MI
|
2008
|
14,820
|
Mar
31, 2033 (2083)
|
||||
Walgreen
|
Ypsilanti,
MI
|
2008
|
13,650
|
Mar
31, 2032 (2082)
|
||||
Walgreen
|
Marion
County, FL
|
2008
|
14,820
|
Apr
30, 2032 (2082)
|
||||
Walgreen
(1) (8)
|
Shelby
Township, MI
|
2008
|
14,820
|
Jul
31, 2033 (2083)
|
||||
Walgreen
|
Brighton,
MI
|
2009
|
14,550
|
Jan
31, 2034 (2084)
|
||||
Walgreen
|
Silver
Springs Shores, FL
|
2009
|
14,550
|
Dec
31, 2033 (2083)
|
||||
Walgreen
|
Port
St John, FL
|
2009
|
14,550
|
Apr
30, 2034 (2084)
|
||||
Walgreen
|
Lowell,
MI
|
2009
|
13,650
|
Sep
30, 2034 (2084)
|
||||
Chase
Bank
|
Southfield,
MI
|
2009
|
Note
(7)
|
Oct
31, 2029 (2059)
|
||||
Vacant
space
|
Boynton
Beach, FL
|
32,459
|
||||||
Total
|
1,629,543
|
(1)
|
Properties
subject to long-term ground leases where a third party owns the underlying
land and has leased the land to us to construct or operate freestanding
properties. We pay rent for the use of the land and we are generally
responsible for all costs and expenses associated with the building and
improvements. At the end of the lease terms, as extended (Aventura, FL
2036, Petoskey, MI 2074 and Shelby Township, MI 2084), the land together
with all improvements revert to the land owner. We have an option to
purchase the Petoskey property after August 7, 2019 and the Shelby
property after July 5, 2018.
|
(2)
|
At
the expiration of tenant’s initial lease term, each tenant (except
Citizens Bank) has an option, subject to certain requirements, to extend
its lease for an additional period of
time.
|
(3)
|
This
2.03 acre property is leased from us by Fajita Factory, LLC pursuant to a
ground lease. The tenant occupies a 5,448 square foot
building.
|
(4)
|
This
11.3 acre property is leased from us by Lake Lansing RA Associates, LLC
pursuant to a ground lease. The land owner has constructed a
14,564 square foot building.
|
(5)
|
This
32.5 acre property is leased from us by Meijer pursuant to a ground
lease. Meijer expects to construct an estimated 210,000 square
foot super center.
|
(6)
|
This
12.68 acre property is leased from us by Wal-Mart pursuant to a ground
lease. Wal-Mart has constructed a Sam’s Club retail building
containing approximately 132,332 square
feet.
|
(7)
|
This
1.0 acre property is leased from us by JP Morgan Chase Bank pursuant to a
ground lease. JP Morgan Chase has constructed a retail bank
branch containing approximately 4,270 square
feet.
|
(8)
|
Properties
subject to a mortgage/debt or pledged pursuant to our credit
facilities
|
22
Community
Shopping Centers
Our 12
community shopping centers range in size from 20,000 to 241,458 square feet of
GLA. The community shopping centers are located in five states as follows:
Florida (1), Illinois (1), Kentucky (1), Michigan (6) and Wisconsin (3). Our
community shopping centers tend to be located in high traffic, market dominant
centers in which customers of our tenants purchase day-to-day necessities. Our
community shopping centers are anchored by national tenants.
The
location, general character and primary occupancy information with respect to
the community shopping centers as of December 31, 2009 are set forth
below:
Property Location
|
Location
|
Year
Completed/
Expanded
|
Gross
Leasable
Area
Sq. Ft.
|
Annualized
Base Rent (2)
|
Average
Base
Rent per
Sq. Ft.(3)
|
Percent
Occupied
at
December
31,
2009
|
Percent
Leased at
December
31,
2009 (4)
|
Anchor Tenants (Lease
expiration/Option period
expiration) (5)
|
||||||||||||||||||
Capital
Plaza,(1)
|
Frankfort,
KY
|
1978/
2006
|
116,212 | $ | 587,000 | $ | 5.05 | 100 | % | 100 | % |
Kmart(2013/2053)
|
||||||||||||||
Walgreen
(2031/2052)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Charlevoix
Commons
|
Charlevoix,
MI
|
1991
|
137,375 | 686,495 | 5.00 | 100 | % | 100 | % |
Kmart
(2015/2065)
|
||||||||||||||||
Roundy’s
(2011)
Family
Farm (2016)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chippewa
Commons (6)
|
Chippewa
Falls, WI
|
1991
|
168,311 | 979,023 | 5.82 | 100 | % | 100 | % |
Kmart
(2014/2064)
|
||||||||||||||||
Roundy’s
(2010/2030)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fashion
Bug (2011/2021)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ironwood
Commons
|
Ironwood,
MI
|
1991
|
185,535 | 907,793 | 5.01 | 98 | % | 98 | % |
Kmart
(2015/2065)
|
||||||||||||||||
Super
Value (2011/2036)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fashion
Bug (2011/2021)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Marshall
Plaza
|
Marshall,
MI
|
1990
|
119,279 | 690,959 | 5.79 | 100 | % | 100 | % |
Kmart
(2015/2065)
|
||||||||||||||||
Central
Michigan Commons
|
Mt.
Pleasant, MI
|
1973/
1997
|
241,458 | 988,562 | 5.03 | 96 | % | 96 | % |
Kmart
(2008/2048)
|
||||||||||||||||
J.C.
Penney Co. (2010/2020)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Staples,
Inc. (2010/2025)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
North
Lakeland Plaza (6)
|
Lakeland,
FL
|
1987
|
171,334 | 1,301,574 | 7.68 | 99 | % | 99 | % |
Best
Buy (2013/2028)
|
||||||||||||||||
Beall’s
(2020/2035)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Petoskey
Town Center (6)
|
Petoskey,
MI
|
1990
|
174,870 | 1,031,073 | 5.95 | 99 | % | 99 | % |
Kmart
(2015/2065)
|
||||||||||||||||
Roundy’s
(2010/2030)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fashion
Bug (2012/2022)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Plymouth
Commons
|
Plymouth,
WI
|
1990
|
162,031 | 792,369 | 5.09 | 96 | % | 96 | % |
Kmart
(2015/2065)
|
||||||||||||||||
Roundy’s
(2015/2030)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ferris
Commons
|
Big
Rapids, MI
|
1990
|
173,557 | 1,013,336 | 5.98 | 98 | % | 98 | % |
Kmart
(2015/2065)
|
||||||||||||||||
MC
Sports (2018/2033)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peebles
(2019/2039)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Shawano
Plaza (6)
|
Shawano,
WI
|
1990
|
192,694 | 983,371 | 5.21 | 98 | % | 98 | % |
Kmart
(2014/2064)
|
||||||||||||||||
Roundy’s
(2015/2030)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
J.C.
Penney Co. (2010/2025)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fashion
Bug (2010/2021)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
West
Frankfort Plaza
|
West
Frankfort, IL
|
1982
|
20,000 | 124,000 | 6.89 | 90 | % | 90 | % |
Fashion
Bug (2012)
|
||||||||||||||||
Total/Average
|
1,862,656 | $ | 10,085,555 | $ | 5.51 | 98 | % | 98 | % |
23
(1)
|
All
community shopping centers except Capital Plaza (which is subject to a
long-term ground lease expiring in 2053 from a third party) are
wholly-owned by us.
|
(2)
|
Total
annualized base rents of our Company as of December 31,
2009.
|
(3)
|
Calculated
as total annualized base rents, divided by gross leaseable area actually
leased as of December 31,
2009.
|
(4)
|
Roundy’s
has sub-leased the space it leases at Charlevoix Commons (35,896 square
feet, rented at a rate of $5.97 per square foot). The lease with Roundy’s
will expire on December 31, 2011. We have entered into a lease
with Family Farm and Home, Inc (the Roundy’s sub-tenant). The
Family Farm lease commences January 1, 2012, has a term of 5 years and a
rental rate of $2.00 per square
foot.
|
(5)
|
The
option to extend the lease beyond its initial term is only at the option
of the tenant.
|
(6)
|
Properties
subject to a mortgage/debt or pledged pursuant to our credit
facilities.
|
ITEM
3.
|
LEGAL
PROCEEDINGS
|
From time
to time, we are involved in legal proceedings in the ordinary course of
business. We are not presently involved in any litigation nor, to our
knowledge, is any other litigation threatened against us, other than routine
litigation arising in the ordinary course of business, which is expected to be
covered by our liability insurance and all of which collectively is not expected
to have a material adverse effect on our liquidity, results of operations or
business or financial condition.
ITEM
4.
|
RESERVED
|
PART
II
ITEM
5.
|
MARKET
FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER
PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES
|
Our
common stock is traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol
“ADC”. The following table sets forth the high and low closing prices
of our common stock, as reported on the New York Stock Exchange, and the
dividends declared per share of common stock by us for each calendar quarter in
the last two fiscal years. Dividends were paid in the periods
immediately subsequent to the periods in which such dividends were
declared.
Quarter Ended
|
High
|
Low
|
Dividends Declared Per
Common Share
|
|||||||||
March
31, 2009
|
$ | 19.32 | $ | 9.31 | $ | 0.50 | ||||||
June
30, 2009
|
$ | 18.66 | $ | 14.89 | $ | 0.50 | ||||||
September
30, 2009
|
$ | 24.61 | $ | 17.10 | $ | 0.51 | ||||||
December
31, 2009
|
$ | 24.94 | $ | 21.01 | $ | 0.51 | ||||||
|
||||||||||||
March
31, 2008
|
$ | 31.02 | $ | 26.74 | $ | 0.50 | ||||||
June
30, 2008
|
$ | 29.14 | $ | 21.48 | $ | 0.50 | ||||||
September
30, 2008
|
$ | 29.25 | $ | 23.05 | $ | 0.50 | ||||||
December
31, 2008
|
$ | 27.49 | $ | 9.48 | $ | 0.50 |
On March
3, 2010, the reported closing sale price per share of common stock on the New
York Stock Exchange was $21.27.
At February 26, 2010, there were
8,271,464 shares of our common stock issued and outstanding which were held by
approximately 200 stockholders of record. The number of stockholders
of record does not reflect persons or entities who held their shares in nominee
or “street” name. In addition, at December 31, 2009 there were
347,619 Operating Partnership units outstanding held by limited partners other
than our Company. The units are exchangeable into shares of common
stock on a one for one basis.
24
For 2009,
we paid $2.02 per share of common stock in dividends. Of the $2.02, 100.0%
represented ordinary income, and 0.0% represented return of capital, for tax
purposes. For 2008, we paid $2.00 per share of common stock in dividends. Of the
$2.00, 98.0% represented ordinary income, and 2.0% represented return of
capital, for tax purposes.
We intend
to continue to declare quarterly dividends to our
stockholders. However, our distributions are determined by our board
of directors and will depend on a number of factors, including the amount of our
funds from operations, the financial and other condition of our properties, our
capital requirements, restrictions in our debt instruments, our annual
distribution requirements under the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code
applicable to REITs and such other factors as our board of directors deems
relevant. We have historically paid cash dividends, although we may
choose to pay a portion in stock dividends in the future. To qualify
as a REIT, we must distribute at least 90% of our REIT taxable income prior to
net capital gains to our stockholders, as well as meet certain other
requirements. We must pay these distributions in the taxable year the income is
recognized, or in the following taxable year if they are declared during the
last three months of the taxable year, payable to stockholders of record on a
specified date during such period and paid during January of the following year.
Such distributions are treated as paid by us and received by our stockholders on
December 31 of the year in which they are declared. In addition, at our
election, a distribution for a taxable year may be declared in the following
taxable year if it is declared before we timely file our tax return for such
year and if paid on or before the first regular dividend payment after such
declaration. These distributions qualify as dividends paid for the 90% REIT
distribution test for the previous year and are taxable to holders of our
capital stock in the year in which paid.
During
the year ended December 31, 2009, we did not sell any unregistered
securities. During the fourth quarter of 2009, we did not repurchase
any of our equity securities.
For
information about our equity compensation plan, please see Part III, Item 12 of
this report.
25
ITEM
6.
|
SELECTED
FINANCIAL DATA
|
The
following table sets forth our selected financial information on a historical
basis and should be read in conjunction with “Management’s Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and all of the
financial statements and notes thereto included elsewhere in this Form
10-K. Certain amounts have been reclassified to conform to the
current presentation of discontinued operations. The balance sheet
for the periods ending December 31, 2005 through 2009 and operating data for
each of the periods presented were derived from our audited financial
statements.
Selected
Financial Data
(in
thousands, except per share, number of properties, and percentage leased
information)
Year Ended December 31,
|
||||||||||||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||||||||||||
Operating
Data
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Total
Revenue
|
$ | 37,260 | $ | 35,654 | $ | 34,468 | $ | 32,908 | $ | 31,579 | ||||||||||
Expenses
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Property
Expense (1)
|
4,363 | 4,448 | 4,310 | 4,219 | 4,545 | |||||||||||||||
General
and Administrative
|
4,559 | 4,361 | 4,462 | 4,019 | 4,191 | |||||||||||||||
Interest
|
4,635 | 5,179 | 4,896 | 4,625 | 4,159 | |||||||||||||||
Depreciation
and Amortization
|
5,709 | 5,384 | 5,017 | 4,851 | 4,637 | |||||||||||||||
Total
Expenses
|
19,266 | 19,372 | 18,685 | 17,714 | 17,532 | |||||||||||||||
Other
Income (2)
|
- | - | 1,044 | - | 6 | |||||||||||||||
Income
Before Discontinued Operations
|
17,994 | 16,282 | 16,827 | 15,194 | 14,053 | |||||||||||||||
Gain
on Sale of Asset From Discontinued Operations
|
- | - | - | - | 2,654 | |||||||||||||||
Income
From Discontinued Operations
|
- | - | - | - | 486 | |||||||||||||||
Net
Income
|
17,994 | 16,282 | 16,827 | 15,194 | 17,193 | |||||||||||||||
Less
Net Income Attributable to Non-Controlling Interest
|
950 | 1,265 | 1,345 | 1,220 | 1,145 | |||||||||||||||
Net
Income Attributable to Agree Realty Corporation
|
$ | 17,044 | $ | 15,017 | $ | 15,482 | $ | 13,974 | $ | 16,048 | ||||||||||
Number
of Properties
|
73 | 68 | 64 | 60 | 59 | |||||||||||||||
Number
of Square Feet
|
3,492 | 3,439 | 3,385 | 3,355 | 3,363 | |||||||||||||||
Percentage
Leased
|
98 | % | 99 | % | 99 | % | 99 | % | 99 | % | ||||||||||
Per
Share Data – Diluted
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Income
Before Discontinued Operations
|
$ | 2.14 | $ | 1.95 | $ | 2.01 | $ | 1.83 | $ | 1.72 | ||||||||||
Discontinued
Operations
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
.42 | |||||||||||||||
Net
Income
|
$ | 2.14 | $ | 1.95 | $ | 2.01 | $ | 1.83 | $ | 2.14 | ||||||||||
Weighted
Average of Common Shares Outstanding – Diluted
|
7,966 | 7,718 | 7,716 | 7,651 | 7,491 | |||||||||||||||
Cash
Dividends
|
$ | 2.02 | $ | 2.00 | $ | 1.97 | $ | 1.96 | $ | 1.96 | ||||||||||
Balance
Sheet Data
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Real
Estate (before accumulated depreciation)
|
$ | 320,444 | $ | 311,343 | $ | 290,074 | $ | 268,248 | $ | 258,232 | ||||||||||
Total
Assets
|
$ | 261,789 | $ | 256,897 | $ | 239,348 | $ | 223,515 | $ | 223,460 | ||||||||||
Total
Debt, including accrued interest
|
$ | 104,814 | $ | 101,069 | $ | 82,889 | $ | 69,031 | $ | 68,504 |
(1)
|
Property
expense includes real estate taxes, property maintenance, insurance,
utilities and land lease expense.
|
(2)
|
Other
income is composed of development fee income, gain on land sales, and
equity in net income of unconsolidated
entities.
|
(3)
|
Net
income per share has been computed by dividing the net income by the
weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding and the
effect of dilutive securities
outstanding.
|
26
ITEM
7.
|
MANAGEMENT’S
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF
OPERATIONS
|
Overview
We were
established to continue to operate and expand the retail property business of
our predecessor. We commenced our operations in April
1994. Our assets are held by and all operations are conducted
through, directly or indirectly, the Operating Partnership, of which we are the
sole general partner and held a 95.93% interest as of December 31,
2009. We are operating so as to qualify as a REIT for federal income
tax purposes.
The
following should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial
Statements of Agree Realty Corporation, including the respective notes thereto,
which are included elsewhere in this Form 10-K.
Recent
Accounting Pronouncements
In June
2009, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued “Accounting
Standards Update 2009-01 Topic 105-Generally Accepted Accounting Principles
amendments based on Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 168-The FASB
Accounting Standards Codification and the Hierarchy of Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles” (“ASU 2009-01”), “The FASB Accounting Standards
Codification and the Hierarchy of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles – a
replacement of FASB Statement No. 162” (“SFAS 168”). ASU
2009-01, or the FASB Accounting Standards Codification (“Codification”), will
become the source of authoritative U.S. generally accepted accounting principles
(“GAAP”) recognized by the FASB to be applied by nongovernmental
entities. On the effective date of ASU 2009-01, the Codification will
supersede all then-existing non-SEC accounting and reporting
standards. All other non-grandfathered non-SEC accounting literature
not included in the Codification will become non-authoritative. ASU
2009-01 is effective for financial statements issued for interim and annual
periods ending after September 15, 2009. The adoption of the standard
did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial position, results
of operations, or cash flows.
Critical
Accounting Policies
Critical
accounting policies are those that are both significant to the overall
presentation of our financial condition and results of operations and require
management to make difficult, complex or subjective judgments. For
example, significant estimates and assumptions have been made with respect to
revenue recognition, capitalization of costs related to real estate investments,
potential impairment of real estate investments, operating cost reimbursements,
and taxable income.
Minimum
rental income attributable to leases is recorded when due from
tenants. Certain leases provide for additional percentage rents based
on tenants’ sales volumes. These percentage rents are recognized when
determinable by us. In addition, leases for certain tenants contain
rent escalations and/or free rent during the first several months of the lease
term; however, such amounts are not material.
Real
estate assets are stated at cost less accumulated depreciation. All
costs related to planning, development and construction of buildings prior to
the date they become operational, including interest and real estate taxes
during the construction period, are capitalized for financial reporting purposes
and recorded as property under development until construction has been
completed. The viability of all projects under construction or
development are regularly evaluated under applicable accounting requirements,
including requirements relating to abandonment of assets or changes in use. To
the extent a project, or individual components of the project, are no longer
considered to have value, the related capitalized costs are charged against
operations. Subsequent to completion of construction, expenditures
for property maintenance are charged to operations as incurred, while
significant renovations are capitalized. Depreciation of the
buildings is recorded on the straight-line method using an estimated useful life
of forty years.
27
We evaluate real estate for impairment
when events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of the
assets may not be recoverable through the estimated undiscounted future cash
flows from the use of these assets. When any such impairment exists,
the related assets will be written down to fair value and such excess carrying
value is charged to income. The expected cash flows of a project are
dependent on estimates and other factors subject to change, including (1)
changes in the national, regional, and/or local economic climates, (2)
competition from other shopping centers, stores, clubs, mailings, and the
internet, (3) increases in operating costs, (4) bankruptcy and/or other changes
in the condition of third parties, including tenants, (5) expected holding
period, and (6) availability of credit. These factors could cause our expected
future cash flows from a project to change, and, as a result, an impairment
could be considered to have occurred.
Substantially
all of our leases contain provisions requiring tenants to pay as additional rent
a proportionate share of operating expenses (“operating cost reimbursements”)
such as real estate taxes, repairs and maintenance, insurance,
etc. The related revenue from tenant billings is recognized in the
same period the expense is recorded.
We have
elected to be taxed as a REIT under the Internal Revenue Code, commencing with
our 1994 tax year. As a result, we are not subject to federal income
taxes to the extent that we distribute annually at lease 90% of our REIT taxable
income to our stockholders and satisfy certain other requirements defined in the
Internal Revenue Code.
We
established TRS entities pursuant to the provisions of the REIT Modernization
Act. Our TRS entities are able to engage in activities resulting in
income that previously would have been disqualified from being eligible REIT
income under the federal income tax regulations. As a result, certain
activities of our Company which occur within our TRS entities are subject to
federal and state income taxes. As of December 31, 2009 and
2008, we had accrued a deferred income tax amount of
$705,000. In addition, we have recorded an income tax liability
of $62,000 as of December 31, 2009.
Comparison
of Year Ended December 31, 2009 to Year Ended December 31, 2008
Minimum
rental income increased $1,307,000, or 4%, to $34,157,000 in 2009, compared to
$32,850,000 in 2008. The increase was the result of the development
of a Walgreen drug store and a bank land lease in Macomb Township, Michigan in
March 2008, the development of a Walgreen drug store located in Ypsilanti,
Michigan in May 2008, the development of a Walgreen drug store in Ocala, Florida
in June 2008, the development of a Walgreen drug store in Shelby Township,
Michigan in July 2008, the development of a Walgreen drug store in Silver
Springs Shores, Florida in January 2009, the development of a Walgreen drug
store in Brighton, Michigan in February 2009, the development of a Walgreen drug
store in Port St John, Florida in June 2009, the development of a Walgreen drug
store in Lowell, Michigan in September 2009 and the development of a Chase bank
branch land lease in Southfield, Michigan in October 2009. Our revenue increases
from these developments amounted to $1,694,000. In addition, rental
income from our Big Rapids, Michigan shopping center increased by $182,000 as a
result of redevelopment activities and rental income decreased ($569,000) as a
result of the closing of a Circuit City store in Boynton Beach, Florida and
other rental adjustments.
Operating
cost reimbursements decreased $137,000, or 5%, to $2,647,000 in 2009, compared
to $2,784,000 in 2008. Operating cost reimbursements decreased due to
the net decrease in property operating expenses as explained below.
We earned
development fee income of $410,000 in 2009 related to a project we have
commenced in Oakland, California. There was no development fee income
in 2008. We expect to earn development fee income in
2010.
Other
income increased $26,000 to $30,000 in 2009, compared to $4,000 in
2008.
Real
estate taxes increased $71,000, or 4%, to $1,938,000 in 2009 compared to
$1,867,000 in 2008. The increase is the result of general assessment
increases on the properties.
Property
operating expenses (shopping center maintenance, snow removal, insurance and
utilities) decreased $247,000, or 14%, to $1,566,000 in 2009 compared to
$1,813,000 in 2008. The decrease was the result of a decrease in
shopping center maintenance expenses of ($73,000); decreased snow removal costs
of ($175,000); increased utility costs of $29,000; and decreased insurance costs
of ($28,000) in 2009 versus 2008.
28
Land
lease payments increased $92,000, or 12%, to $859,000 in 2009 compared to
$767,000 for 2008. The increase is the result of our leasing of land
for our Shelby Township, Michigan development.
General
and administrative expenses increased $198,000, or 5%, to $4,559,000 in 2009
compared to $4,361,000 in 2008. The increase was primarily the result
of increased dead deal costs related to property searches in Michigan and
Florida and compensation related expenses. General and administrative
expenses as a percentage of rental income remained at 13.3% for 2009 and
2008.
Depreciation
and amortization increased $324,000, or 6%, to $5,709,000 in 2009 compared to
$5,385,000 in 2008. The increase was the result the development and
acquisition of four properties in 2008 and five properties in 2009.
Interest
expense decreased $544,000, or 11%, to $4,635,000 in 2009, from $5,179,000 in
2008. The decrease in interest expense resulted from substantial
reductions in interest rates in 2009 as compared to 2008.
Our net
income increased $1,712,000, or 11%, to $17,994,000 in 2009, from $16,282,000 in
2008 as a result of the foregoing factors.
Comparison
of Year Ended December 31, 2008 to Year Ended December 31, 2007
Minimum
rental income increased $1,214,000, or 4%, to $32,850,000 in 2008, compared to
$31,636,000 in 2007. The increase was the result of the development
of a Walgreen drug store in Livonia, Michigan in June 2007, the development of a
Walgreen drug store in Barnesville, Georgia in October 2007, the development of
a parcel of land located in East Lansing, Michigan in November 2007, the
development of a parcel of land located in Plainfield, Indiana in November 2007,
the development of a Walgreen drug store and a bank land lease in Macomb
Township, Michigan in March 2008, the development of a Walgreen drug store
located in Ypsilanti, Michigan in May 2008, the development of a Walgreen drug
store in Ocala, Florida in June 2008 and the development of a Walgreen drug
store in Shelby Township, Michigan in July 2008. Our revenue
increases from these developments amounted to $2,010,000. Our
increase in rental income was partially offset by a lease termination payment
related to our Big Rapids, Michigan shopping center that was received in 2007 of
($608,000), a reduction in rental of income related to our redevelopment of our
Big Rapids, Michigan shopping center of ($143,000) and a reduction of rent at
our only Circuit City store of ($56,000).
Percentage
rents decreased $22,000, or 59%, to $15,000 in 2008, compared to $37,000 in
2007. The decrease was primarily the result of decreased tenant
sales.
Operating
cost reimbursements increased $25,000, or 1%, to $2,784,000 in 2008, compared to
$2,759,000 in 2007. Operating cost reimbursements increased due to
the increase in property operating expenses as explained below.
Other
income decreased $31,000 to $4,000 in 2008, compared to $35,000 in
2007.
Real
estate taxes increased $18,000, or 1%, to $1,867,000 in 2008 compared to
$1,849,000 in 2007. The increase is the result of general assessment
increases on the properties.
Property
operating expenses (shopping center maintenance, snow removal, insurance and
utilities) increased $28,000, or 2%, to $1,813,000 in 2008 compared to
$1,785,000 in 2007. The increase was the result of a decrease in
shopping center maintenance expenses of ($64,000); increased snow removal costs
of $68,000; increased utility costs of $29,000; and decreased insurance costs of
($5,000) in 2008 versus 2007.
Land
lease payments increased $91,000, or 14%, to $767,000 in 2008 compared to
$676,000 for 2007. The increase is the result of our leasing of land
for our Shelby Township, Michigan development.
29
General
and administrative expenses decreased $101,000, or 2%, to $4,361,000 in 2008
compared to $4,462,000 in 2007. The decrease was the result of an
increase in compensation related expenses of $58,000; decreased contracted
services to investigate development opportunities of ($165,000) and increased
property management related expenses of $6,000. General and
administrative expenses as a percentage of rental income decreased from 14.1%
for 2007 to 13.3% for 2008.
Depreciation
and amortization increased $368,000, or 7%, to $5,385,000 in 2008 compared to
$5,017,000 in 2007. The increase was the result of the development
and acquisition of four properties in 2008 and four properties in
2007.
Interest
expense increased $283,000, or 6%, to $5,179,000 in 2008, from $4,896,000 in
2007. The increase in interest expense was the result of increased
borrowings to fund the development and acquisition of four properties in 2008
and four properties in 2007.
In
October 2007, we completed the sale of our interest in two contracts to acquire
a 14.9 acre parcel of land to a national home improvement
superstore. The transaction resulted in a gain of $1,044,000 net of
deferred income taxes of $705,000. We established a TRS to facilitate
this transaction. We elected to defer the recognition of the gain
from the transaction for income tax purposes by making an election under Section
1031 of the Internal Revenue Code. There were no gains from property
sales in 2008.
Our net
income decreased $545,000, or 3%, to $16,282,000 in 2008, from $16,827,000 in
2007 as a result of the foregoing factors.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
Our principal demands for liquidity are
operations, distributions to our stockholders, debt repayment, development of
new properties, redevelopment of existing properties and future property
acquisitions. We intend to meet our short-term liquidity
requirements, including capital expenditures related to the leasing and
improvement of the properties, through cash flow provided by operations and the
Line of Credit and the Credit Facility (as defined below). We believe
that adequate cash flow will be available to fund our operations and pay
dividends in accordance with REIT requirements for at least the next 12
months. We may obtain additional funds for future development or
acquisitions through other borrowings or the issuance of additional shares of
common stock, although current market conditions have severely limited the
availability of new sources of financing and capital, which will likely have an
impact on our ability to obtain construction financing for planned new
development projects in the near term. We believe that these
financing sources will enable us to generate funds sufficient to meet both our
short-term and long-term capital needs.
We intend
to maintain a ratio of total indebtedness (including construction or acquisition
financing) to market capitalization of 65% or less. Nevertheless, we
may operate with debt levels which are in excess of 65% of market capitalization
for extended periods of time. At December 31, 2009, our ratio of
indebtedness to market capitalization was approximately 53%. This
ratio decreased from 65% as of December 31, 2008 as a result of an increase in
the market value of our common stock.
During
the quarter ended December 31, 2009, we declared a quarterly dividend of $.51
per share. The cash dividend was paid on January 5, 2010 to holders
of record on December 21, 2009.
Our cash
flows from operations increased $1,650,000 to $23,580,000 in 2009, compared to
$21,930,000 in 2008. Cash used in investing activities decreased
$12,670,000 to $8,749,000 in 2009, compared to $21,419,000 in
2008. Cash used in financing activities increased $14,424,000 to
$14,811,000 in 2009, compared to $387,000 in 2008. Our cash and cash
equivalents increased by $20,000 to $689,000 as of December 31, 2009 as a result
of the foregoing factors.
As of
December 31, 2009, we had total mortgage indebtedness of
$75,552,802. Of this total mortgage indebtedness, $51,398,837 is
fixed rate, self-amortizing debt with a weighted average interest rate of 6.56%
and the remaining mortgage debt of $24,153,965 has a maturity date of July 14,
2013, can be extended at our option for two additional years and bears interest
at 150 basis points over LIBOR (or 1.74% as of December 31,
2009). The proceeds from this mortgage loan were used to reduce
amounts outstanding under our Credit Facility (as defined below). In
January 2009, we entered into an interest rate swap agreement that will fix the
interest rate during the initial term of the mortgage at
3.744%.
30
In
addition, the Operating Partnership has in place a $55 million credit facility
(the “Credit Facility”) with Bank of America, as the agent, which is guaranteed
by our Company. The Credit Facility matures in November
2011. Advances under the Credit Facility bear interest within a range
of one-month to 12-month LIBOR plus 100 basis points to 150 basis points or the
lender’s prime rate, at our option, based on certain factors such as the ratio
of our indebtedness to the capital value of our properties. The
Credit Facility generally is used to fund property acquisitions and development
activities. As of February 15, 2010, $28,500,000 was outstanding
under the Credit Facility bearing a weighted average interest rate of
1.23%.
We also
have in place a $5 million line of credit (the “Line of Credit”), which matures
in November 2011. The Line of Credit bears interest at the lender’s prime rate
less 75 basis points or 150 basis points in excess of the one-month to 12-month
LIBOR rate, at our option. The purpose of the Line of Credit is to
generally provide working capital and fund land options and start-up costs
associated with new projects. As of February 15, 2010, $2,791,750 was
outstanding under the Line of Credit bearing a weighted average interest rate of
2.50%.
The
following table outlines our contractual obligations (in thousands) as of
December 31, 2009:
Total
|
Yr 1
|
2-3 Yrs
|
4-5 Yrs
|
Over 5 Yrs
|
||||||||||||||||
Mortgages
Payable
|
$ | 75,553 | $ | 4,026 | $ | 8,879 | $ | 31,511 | $ | 31,137 | ||||||||||
Notes
Payable
|
29,000 | - | 29,000 | - | - | |||||||||||||||
Land
Lease Obligations
|
13,975 | 891 | 1,813 | 1,813 | 9,458 | |||||||||||||||
Other
Long-Term Liabilities
|
- | - | - | - | - | |||||||||||||||
Estimated
Interest Payments on Mortgages and Notes Payable
|
18,624 | 3,830 | 6,547 | 4,044 | 4,203 |