FORM 10-QSB--QUARTERLY OR TRANSITIONAL REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
Quarterly or Transitional Report
U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
Form 10-QSB
(Mark One)
[X] QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE
ACT OF 1934
For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2002
[ ] TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE
ACT OF 1934
For the transition period from _________to _________
Commission file number 0-13192
ANGELES INCOME PROPERTIES, LTD. III
(Exact name of small business issuer as specified in its charter)
California 95-3903984
(State or other jurisdiction of (I.R.S. Employer
incorporation or organization) Identification No.)
55 Beattie Place, P.O. Box 1089
Greenville, South Carolina 29602
(Address of principal executive offices)
(864) 239-1000
(Issuer's telephone number)
Check whether the issuer (1) filed all reports required to be filed by Section
13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act during the past 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___
PART I - FINANCIAL INFORMATION
ITEM 1. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
a)
ANGELES INCOME PROPERTIES, LTD. III
BALANCE SHEET
(Unaudited)
(in thousands, except unit data)
March 31, 2002
Assets
Cash and cash equivalents $ 155
Receivables and deposits 4
Other assets 20
Investment property
Land $ 657
Buildings and related personal property 4,402
5,059
Less accumulated depreciation (3,698) 1,361
$ 1,540
Liabilities and Partners' (Deficit) Capital
Liabilities
Accounts payable $ 5
Tenant security deposit liabilities 19
Accrued property taxes 7
Other liabilities 54
Partners' (Deficit) Capital
General partners $ (17)
Limited partners (86,738 units issued and
outstanding) 1,472 1,455
$ 1,540
See Accompanying Notes to Financial Statements
b)
ANGELES INCOME PROPERTIES, LTD. III
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(Unaudited)
(in thousands, except per unit data)
Three Months Ended
March 31,
2002 2001
Revenues:
Rental income $ 201 $ 210
Other income 12 12
Total revenues 213 222
Expenses:
Operating 76 81
General and administrative 23 37
Depreciation 59 66
Property taxes 14 15
Total expenses 172 199
Net income $ 41 $ 23
Net income allocated to general partners (1%) $ -- $ --
Net income allocated to limited partners (99%) 41 23
Net income $ 41 $ 23
Net income per limited partnership unit $ 0.47 $ 0.27
Distributions per limited partnership unit $ -- $ 1.71
See Accompanying Notes to Financial Statements
c)
ANGELES INCOME PROPERTIES, LTD. III
STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN PARTNERS' (DEFICIT) CAPITAL
(Unaudited)
(in thousands, except unit data)
Limited
Partnership General Limited
Units Partners Partners Total
Original capital contributions 86,920 $ 1 $43,460 $43,461
Partners' (deficit) capital
at December 31, 2001 86,738 $ (17) $ 1,431 $ 1,414
Net income for the three months
ended March 31, 2002 -- -- 41 41
Partners' (deficit) capital
at March 31, 2002 86,738 $ (17) $ 1,472 $ 1,455
See Accompanying Notes to Financial Statements
d)
ANGELES INCOME PROPERTIES, LTD. III
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(Unaudited)
(in thousands)
Three Months Ended
March 31,
2002 2001
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net income $ 41 $ 23
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash
provided by operating activities:
Depreciation 59 66
Change in accounts:
Receivables and deposits -- 3
Other assets (12) (7)
Accounts payable -- (6)
Tenant security deposit liabilities 1 (1)
Accrued property taxes (27) (25)
Due to affiliates (29) --
Other liabilities 1 7
Net cash provided by operating activities 34 60
Cash flows from investing activities:
Property improvements and replacements (14) (14)
Cash flows from financing activities:
Distributions to partners -- (150)
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents 20 (104)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period 135 206
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period $ 155 $ 102
See Accompanying Notes to Financial Statements
e)
ANGELES INCOME PROPERTIES, LTD. III
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
Note A - Basis of Presentation
The accompanying unaudited financial statements of Angeles Income Properties,
Ltd. III (the "Partnership" or "Registrant") have been prepared in accordance
with generally accepted accounting principles for interim financial information
and with the instructions to Form 10-QSB and Item 310(b) of Regulation S-B.
Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and footnotes required
by generally accepted accounting principles for complete financial statements.
In the opinion of Angeles Realty Corporation II (the "Managing General
Partner"), all adjustments (consisting of normal recurring accruals) considered
necessary for a fair presentation have been included. Operating results for the
three month period ended March 31, 2002, are not necessarily indicative of the
results that may be expected for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2002. For
further information, refer to the financial statements and footnotes thereto
included in the Partnership's Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended
December 31, 2001. The Managing General Partner is a wholly owned subsidiary of
Apartment Investment and Management Company ("AIMCO"), a publicly traded real
estate investment trust.
Note B - Transactions with Affiliated Parties
The Partnership has no employees and is dependent on the Managing General
Partner and its affiliates for the management and administration of all
Partnership activities. The Partnership Agreement provides (i) for certain
payments to affiliates for services and (ii) reimbursement of certain expenses
incurred by affiliates on behalf of the Partnership.
Affiliates of the Managing General Partner are entitled to receive 5% of gross
receipts from the Registrant's property as compensation for providing property
management services. The Registrant paid to such affiliates approximately
$11,000 for each of the three months ended March 31, 2002 and 2001, which is
included in operating expenses.
The Partnership Agreement provides for a fee equal to 10% of "net cash flow from
operations", as defined in the Partnership Agreement to be paid to the Managing
General Partner for executive and administrative management services. This fee
is calculated and accrued quarterly. A fee of approximately $27,000 was earned
for the twelve months ended December 31, 2001 and was paid during the three
months ended March 31, 2002. During the three months ended March 31, 2002, the
Managing General Partner earned a fee of approximately $2,000 which is included
in other liabilities.
An affiliate of the Managing General Partner received reimbursement of
accountable administrative expenses amounting to approximately $8,000 and
$22,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2002 and 2001, respectively which
is included in general and administrative expenses.
Beginning in 2001, the Partnership began insuring its property up to certain
limits through coverage provided by AIMCO which is generally self-insured for a
portion of losses and liabilities related to workers compensation, property
casualty and vehicle liability. The Partnership insures its property above the
AIMCO limits through insurance policies obtained by AIMCO from insurers
unaffiliated with the Managing General Partner. During the three months ended
March 31, 2002 and 2001, the Partnership was charged by AIMCO and its affiliates
approximately $9,000 and $13,000, respectively, for insurance coverage and fees
associated with policy claims administration.
Note C - Legal Proceedings
In March 1998, several putative unit holders of limited partnership units of the
Partnership commenced an action entitled Rosalie Nuanes, et al. v. Insignia
Financial Group, Inc., et al. (the "Nuanes action") in the Superior Court of the
State of California for the County of San Mateo. The plaintiffs named as
defendants, among others, the Partnership, its Managing General Partner and
several of their affiliated partnerships and corporate entities. The action
purports to assert claims on behalf of a class of limited partners and
derivatively on behalf of a number of limited partnerships (including the
Partnership) which are named as nominal defendants, challenging, among other
things, the acquisition of interests in certain Managing General Partner
entities by Insignia Financial Group, Inc. ("Insignia") and entities which were,
at one time, affiliates of Insignia; past tender offers by the Insignia
affiliates to acquire limited partnership units; management of the partnerships
by the Insignia affiliates; and the series of transactions which closed on
October 1, 1998 and February 26, 1999 whereby Insignia and Insignia Properties
Trust, respectively, were merged into AIMCO. The plaintiffs seek monetary
damages and equitable relief, including judicial dissolution of the Partnership.
On June 25, 1998, the Managing General Partner filed a motion seeking dismissal
of the action. In lieu of responding to the motion, the plaintiffs filed an
amended complaint. The Managing General Partner filed demurrers to the amended
complaint which were heard February 1999.
Pending the ruling on such demurrers, settlement negotiations commenced. On
November 2, 1999, the parties executed and filed a Stipulation of Settlement,
settling claims, subject to court approval, on behalf of the Partnership and all
limited partners who owned units as of November 3, 1999. Preliminary approval of
the settlement was obtained on November 3, 1999 from the Court, at which time
the Court set a final approval hearing for December 10, 1999. Prior to the
December 10, 1999 hearing, the Court received various objections to the
settlement, including a challenge to the Court's preliminary approval based upon
the alleged lack of authority of prior lead counsel to enter the settlement. On
December 14, 1999, the Managing General Partner and its affiliates terminated
the proposed settlement. In February 2000, counsel for some of the named
plaintiffs filed a motion to disqualify plaintiff's lead and liaison counsel who
negotiated the settlement. On June 27, 2000, the Court entered an order
disqualifying them from the case and an appeal was taken from the order on
October 5, 2000. On December 4, 2000, the Court appointed the law firm of Lieff
Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein LLP as new lead counsel for plaintiffs and the
putative class. Plaintiffs filed a third amended complaint on January 19, 2001.
On March 2, 2001, the Managing General Partner and its affiliates filed a
demurrer to the third amended complaint. On May 14, 2001, the Court heard the
demurrer to the third amended complaint. On July 10, 2001, the Court issued an
order sustaining defendants' demurrer on certain grounds. On July 20, 2001,
Plaintiffs filed a motion for reconsideration of the Court's July 10, 2001 order
granting in part and denying in part defendants' demurrer. On September 7, 2001,
Plaintiffs filed a fourth amended class and derivative action complaint. On
September 12, 2001, the Court denied Plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration. On
October 5, 2001, the Managing General Partner and affiliated defendants filed a
demurrer to the fourth amended complaint, which was heard on December 11, 2001.
On February 2, 2002, the Court served its order granting in part the demurrer.
The Court has dismissed without leave to amend certain of the plaintiffs'
claims. On February 11, 2002, plaintiffs filed a motion seeking to certify a
putative class comprised of all non-affiliated persons who own or have owned
units in the partnerships. The Managing General Partner and affiliated
defendants oppose the motion. On April 29, 2002, the Court heard argument on the
motion and ordered further briefing after which time the matter will be taken
under submission. The Court has set the matter for trial in January 2003.
During the third quarter of 2001, a complaint (the "Heller action") was filed
against the same defendants that are named in the Nuanes action, captioned
Heller v. Insignia Financial Group. On or about August 6, 2001, plaintiffs filed
a first amended complaint. The first amended complaint in the Heller action is
brought as a purported derivative action, and asserts claims for among other
things breach of fiduciary duty; unfair competition; conversion, unjust
enrichment; and judicial dissolution. Plaintiffs in the Nuanes action filed a
motion to consolidate the Heller action with the Nuanes action and stated that
the Heller action was filed in order to preserve the derivative claims that were
dismissed without leave to amend in the Nuanes action by the Court order dated
July 10, 2001. On October 5, 2001, the Managing General Partner and affiliated
defendants moved to strike the first amended complaint in its entirety for
violating the Court's July 10, 2001 order granting in part and denying in part
defendants' demurrer in the Nuanes action, or alternatively, to strike certain
portions of the complaint based on the statute of limitations. Other defendants
in the action demurred to the fourth amended complaint, and, alternatively,
moved to strike the complaint. On December 11, 2001, the court heard argument on
the motions and took the matters under submission. On February 4, 2002, the
Court served notice of its order granting defendants' motion to strike the
Heller complaint as a violation of its July 10, 2001 order in the Nuanes action.
On March 27, 2002, the plaintiffs filed a notice appealing the order striking
the complaint.
The Managing General Partner does not anticipate that any costs, whether legal
or settlement costs, associated with these cases will be material to the
Partnership's overall operations.
The Partnership is unaware of any other pending or outstanding litigation that
is not of a routine nature arising in the ordinary course of business.
ITEM 2. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OR PLAN OF OPERATIONS
The matters discussed in this Form 10-QSB contain certain forward-looking
statements and involve risks and uncertainties (including changing market
conditions, competitive and regulatory matters, etc.) detailed in the
disclosures contained in this Form 10-QSB and the other filings with the
Securities and Exchange Commission made by the Registrant from time to time. The
discussion of the Registrant's business and results of operations, including
forward-looking statements pertaining to such matters, does not take into
account the effects of any changes to the Registrant's business and results of
operation. Accordingly, actual results could differ materially from those
projected in the forward-looking statements as a result of a number of factors,
including those identified herein.
The Partnership's investment property consists of one apartment complex. The
following table sets forth the average occupancy of the property for the three
months ended March 31, 2002 and 2001:
Average Occupancy
Property 2002 2001
Lake Forest Apartments 89% 93%
Brandon, Mississippi
The Managing General Partner attributes the decrease in occupancy to the
unfavorable economic conditions in the local market area.
Results from Operations
The Registrant's net income for the three months ended March 31, 2002 was
approximately $41,000 compared to approximately $23,000 for the corresponding
period in 2001. The increase in net income is primarily attributable to a
decrease in total expenses partially offset by a slight decrease in total
revenues. Total revenues decreased due to a decrease in rental income. Rental
income decreased due to decreased rental rates and a decrease in occupancy at
Lake Forest Apartments.
Total expenses decreased due to a decrease in operating expense, general and
administrative and depreciation expense. Operating expense decreased due to a
decrease in maintenance expenses at Lake Forest Apartments. Depreciation expense
decreased due to certain fixed assets becoming fully depreciated at the property
in 2001.
General and administrative expense decreased primarily due to a decrease in the
costs of services included in the management reimbursements to the Managing
General Partner as allowed under the Partnership Agreement. In addition to these
reimbursements, costs associated with the quarterly and annual communications
with investors and regulatory agencies and the annual audit required by the
Partnership Agreement are also included in general and administrative expenses.
As part of the ongoing business plan of the Partnership, the Managing General
Partner monitors the rental market environment of its investment property to
assess the feasibility of increasing rents, maintaining or increasing occupancy
levels and protecting the Partnership from increases in expenses. As part of
this plan, the Managing General Partner attempts to protect the Partnership from
the burden of inflation-related increases in expenses by increasing rents and
maintaining a high overall occupancy level. However, due to changing market
conditions, which can result in the use of rental concessions and rental
reductions to offset softening market conditions, there is no guarantee that the
Managing General Partner will be able to sustain such a plan.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
At March 31, 2002, the Registrant had cash and cash equivalents of approximately
$155,000 compared to approximately $102,000 at March 31, 2001. The net increase
in cash and cash equivalents of approximately $20,000 since December 31, 2001
was due to approximately $34,000 of cash provided by operating activities,
partially offset by approximately $14,000 of cash used in investing activities.
Cash used in investing activities consisted of property improvements and
replacements. The Registrant invests its working capital reserves in interest
bearing accounts.
The sufficiency of existing liquid assets to meet future liquidity and capital
expenditure requirements is directly related to the level of capital
expenditures required at the Partnership's property to adequately maintain the
physical assets and other operating needs of the Registrant and to comply with
Federal, state, and local legal and regulatory requirements. Capital
improvements planned for the Registrant's property are detailed below.
The Partnership budgeted approximately $46,000 for capital improvements at Lake
Forest Apartments for 2002 consisting primarily of floor covering and appliance
replacements, office computers and air conditioning upgrades. During the three
months ended March 31, 2002, the property spent approximately $14,000 on capital
expenditures, consisting primarily of floor covering replacements and plumbing
upgrades. These improvements were funded from operating cash flow. Additional
improvements may be considered and will depend on the physical condition of the
property and anticipated cash flow generated by the property.
The additional capital expenditures will be incurred only if cash is available
from operations or Partnership reserves. To the extent that such budgeted
capital improvements are completed, the Registrant's distributable cash flow, if
any, may be adversely affected at least in the short term.
The Registrant's current assets are thought to be sufficient for any near-term
needs (exclusive of capital improvements) of the Registrant.
The Partnership distributed the following amounts during the three months ended
March 31, 2002 and 2001 (in thousands, except per unit data):
Three Months Per Limited Three Months Per Limited
Ended Partnership Ended Partnership
March 31, 2002 Unit March 31, 2001 Unit
Operations $ -- $ -- $ 150 $ 1.71
Future cash distributions will depend on the levels of net cash generated from
operations, the availability of cash reserves, mortgage financing, and/or the
sale of the property. The Partnership's distribution policy is reviewed on a
monthly basis. There can be no assurance that the Partnership will generate
sufficient funds from operations, after required capital expenditures, to permit
distributions to its partners during the remainder of 2002 or subsequent
periods.
In addition to its indirect ownership of the general partner interest in the
Partnership, AIMCO and its affiliates owned 41,137 limited partnership units
(the "Units") in the Partnership representing 47.43% of the outstanding Units at
March 31, 2002. A number of these Units were acquired pursuant to tender offers
made by AIMCO or its affiliates. It is possible that AIMCO or its affiliates
will make one or more additional offers to acquire additional limited
partnership interests in the Partnership for cash or in exchange for units in
the operating partnership of AIMCO. Under the Partnership Agreement, unitholders
holding a majority of the Units are entitled to take action with respect to a
variety of matters which would include voting on certain amendments to the
Partnership Agreement and voting to remove the Managing General Partner. As a
result of its ownership of 47.43% of the outstanding Units, AIMCO is in a
position to significantly influence all voting decisions with respect to the
Registrant. When voting on matters, AIMCO would in all likelihood vote the Units
it acquired in a manner favorable to the interest of the Managing General
Partner because of its affiliation with the Managing General Partner.
PART II - OTHER INFORMATION
ITEM 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
In March 1998, several putative unit holders of limited partnership units of the
Partnership commenced an action entitled Rosalie Nuanes, et al. v. Insignia
Financial Group, Inc., et al. (the "Nuanes action") in the Superior Court of the
State of California for the County of San Mateo. The plaintiffs named as
defendants, among others, the Partnership, its Managing General Partner and
several of their affiliated partnerships and corporate entities. The action
purports to assert claims on behalf of a class of limited partners and
derivatively on behalf of a number of limited partnerships (including the
Partnership) which are named as nominal defendants, challenging, among other
things, the acquisition of interests in certain Managing General Partner
entities by Insignia Financial Group, Inc. ("Insignia") and entities which were,
at one time, affiliates of Insignia; past tender offers by the Insignia
affiliates to acquire limited partnership units; management of the partnerships
by the Insignia affiliates; and the series of transactions which closed on
October 1, 1998 and February 26, 1999 whereby Insignia and Insignia Properties
Trust, respectively, were merged into AIMCO. The plaintiffs seek monetary
damages and equitable relief, including judicial dissolution of the Partnership.
On June 25, 1998, the Managing General Partner filed a motion seeking dismissal
of the action. In lieu of responding to the motion, the plaintiffs filed an
amended complaint. The Managing General Partner filed demurrers to the amended
complaint which were heard February 1999.
Pending the ruling on such demurrers, settlement negotiations commenced. On
November 2, 1999, the parties executed and filed a Stipulation of Settlement,
settling claims, subject to court approval, on behalf of the Partnership and all
limited partners who owned units as of November 3, 1999. Preliminary approval of
the settlement was obtained on November 3, 1999 from the Court, at which time
the Court set a final approval hearing for December 10, 1999. Prior to the
December 10, 1999 hearing, the Court received various objections to the
settlement, including a challenge to the Court's preliminary approval based upon
the alleged lack of authority of prior lead counsel to enter the settlement. On
December 14, 1999, the Managing General Partner and its affiliates terminated
the proposed settlement. In February 2000, counsel for some of the named
plaintiffs filed a motion to disqualify plaintiff's lead and liaison counsel who
negotiated the settlement. On June 27, 2000, the Court entered an order
disqualifying them from the case and an appeal was taken from the order on
October 5, 2000. On December 4, 2000, the Court appointed the law firm of Lieff
Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein LLP as new lead counsel for plaintiffs and the
putative class. Plaintiffs filed a third amended complaint on January 19, 2001.
On March 2, 2001, the Managing General Partner and its affiliates filed a
demurrer to the third amended complaint. On May 14, 2001, the Court heard the
demurrer to the third amended complaint. On July 10, 2001, the Court issued an
order sustaining defendants' demurrer on certain grounds. On July 20, 2001,
Plaintiffs filed a motion for reconsideration of the Court's July 10, 2001 order
granting in part and denying in part defendants' demurrer. On September 7, 2001,
Plaintiffs filed a fourth amended class and derivative action complaint. On
September 12, 2001, the Court denied Plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration. On
October 5, 2001, the Managing General Partner and affiliated defendants filed a
demurrer to the fourth amended complaint, which was heard on December 11, 2001.
On February 2, 2002, the Court served its order granting in part the demurrer.
The Court has dismissed without leave to amend certain of the plaintiffs'
claims. On February 11, 2002, plaintiffs filed a motion seeking to certify a
putative class comprised of all non-affiliated persons who own or have owned
units in the partnerships. The Managing General Partner and affiliated
defendants oppose the motion. On April 29, 2002, the Court heard argument on the
motion and ordered further briefing after which time the matter will be taken
under submission. The Court has set the matter for trial in January 2003.
During the third quarter of 2001, a complaint (the "Heller action") was filed
against the same defendants that are named in the Nuanes action, captioned
Heller v. Insignia Financial Group. On or about August 6, 2001, plaintiffs filed
a first amended complaint. The first amended complaint in the Heller action is
brought as a purported derivative action, and asserts claims for among other
things breach of fiduciary duty; unfair competition; conversion, unjust
enrichment; and judicial dissolution. Plaintiffs in the Nuanes action filed a
motion to consolidate the Heller action with the Nuanes action and stated that
the Heller action was filed in order to preserve the derivative claims that were
dismissed without leave to amend in the Nuanes action by the Court order dated
July 10, 2001. On October 5, 2001, the Managing General Partner and affiliated
defendants moved to strike the first amended complaint in its entirety for
violating the Court's July 10, 2001 order granting in part and denying in part
defendants' demurrer in the Nuanes action, or alternatively, to strike certain
portions of the complaint based on the statute of limitations. Other defendants
in the action demurred to the fourth amended complaint, and, alternatively,
moved to strike the complaint. On December 11, 2001, the court heard argument on
the motions and took the matters under submission. On February 4, 2002, the
Court served notice of its order granting defendants' motion to strike the
Heller complaint as a violation of its July 10, 2001 order in the Nuanes action.
On March 27, 2002, the plaintiffs filed a notice appealing the order striking
the complaint.
The Managing General Partner does not anticipate that any costs, whether legal
or settlement costs, associated with these cases will be material to the
Partnership's overall operations.
ITEM 6. EXHIBITS AND REPORTS ON FORM 8-K
a) Exhibits:
None.
b) Reports on Form 8-K:
None filed during the quarter ended March 31, 2002.
SIGNATURES
In accordance with the requirements of the Exchange Act, the Registrant caused
this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly
authorized.
ANGELES INCOME PROPERTIES, LTD. III
By: Angeles Realty Corporation II
Managing General Partner
By: /s/Patrick J. Foye
Patrick J. Foye
Executive Vice President
By: /s/Martha L. Long
Martha L. Long
Senior Vice President and
Controller
Date: May 13, 2002