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 0-16877
FOX STRATEGIC HOUSING INCOME PARTNERS
(Exact name of small business issuer as specified in its charter)
California 94-3016373
(State or other jurisdiction of (I.R.S. Employer
incorporation or organization) Identification No.)
55 Beattie Place, PO 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 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___
PART I - FINANCIAL INFORMATION
ITEM 1. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
a)
FOX STRATEGIC HOUSING INCOME PARTNERS
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
(Unaudited)
(in thousands, except unit data)
March 31, 2002
Assets
Cash and cash equivalents $ 295
Receivables and deposits 84
Other assets 239
Investment properties:
Land $ 3,119
Buildings and related personal property 19,357
22,476
Less accumulated depreciation (9,357) 13,119
$ 13,737
Liabilities and Partners' (Deficit) Capital
Liabilities
Accounts payable $ 57
Tenant security deposit liabilities 41
Accrued property taxes 187
Due to general partner 252
Other liabilities 109
Mortgage notes payable 10,053
Partners' (Deficit) Capital
General partner $ (300)
Limited partners (26,111 units issued and
outstanding) 3,338 3,038
$ 13,737
See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
b)
FOX STRATEGIC HOUSING INCOME PARTNERS
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(Unaudited)
(in thousands, except per unit data)
Three Months Ended
March 31,
2002 2001
Revenues:
Rental income $ 747 $ 746
Other income 46 43
Total revenues 793 789
Expenses:
Operating 243 229
General and administrative 70 106
Depreciation 191 185
Interest 174 176
Property taxes 76 69
Total expenses 754 765
Net income $ 39 $ 24
Net income allocated to general partner $ 8 $ 5
Net income allocated to limited partners 31 19
$ 39 $ 24
Net income per limited partnership unit $ 1.19 $ 0.73
Distributions per limited partnership unit $ -- $ 19.34
See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
c)
FOX STRATEGIC HOUSING INCOME PARTNERS
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN PARTNERS' (DEFICIT) CAPITAL
(Unaudited)
(in thousands, except unit data)
Limited
Partnership General Limited
Units Partner Partners Total
Original capital contributions 26,111 $ -- $26,111 $26,111
Partners' (deficit) capital at
December 31, 2001 26,111 $ (308) $ 3,307 $ 2,999
Net income for the three months
ended March 31, 2002 -- 8 31 39
Partners' (deficit) capital
at March 31, 2002 26,111 $ (300) $ 3,338 $ 3,038
See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
d)
FOX STRATEGIC HOUSING INCOME PARTNERS
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(Unaudited)
(in thousands)
Three Months Ended
March 31,
2002 2001
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net income $ 39 $ 24
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash
provided by operating activities:
Depreciation 191 185
Amortization of loan costs 7 7
Change in accounts:
Receivables and deposits (35) (19)
Other assets (43) (22)
Accounts payable (43) (12)
Tenant security deposit liabilities (2) (1)
Accrued property taxes (8) (14)
Due to general partner -- 26
Other liabilities (52) 2
Net cash provided by operating activities 54 176
Cash flows from investing activities:
Net withdrawals from restricted escrows -- 50
Property improvements and replacements (48) (82)
Net cash used in investing activities (48) (32)
Cash flows from financing activities:
Distributions to partners -- (513)
Payments on mortgage notes payable (35) (33)
Net cash used in financing activities (35) (546)
Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents (29) (402)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period 324 712
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period $ 295 $ 310
Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information:
Cash paid for interest $ 223 $ 170
See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
e)
FOX STRATEGIC HOUSING INCOME PARTNERS
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
Note A - Basis of Presentation
The accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements of Fox Strategic
Housing Income Partners (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. The Partnership's General Partner is Fox Capital
Management Corporation ("FCMC" or the Managing General Partner), an affiliate of
Apartment Investment and Management Company ("AIMCO"), a publicly traded real
estate investment trust. In the opinion of FCMC 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
consolidated financial statements and footnotes thereto included in the
Partnership's Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended December
31, 2001.
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 for certain payments
to affiliates for services and as 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 both of the Partnership's properties as compensation for providing
property management services. The Partnership paid to such affiliates
approximately $43,000 and $42,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2002 and
2001, respectively, which is included in operating expenses.
An affiliate of the Managing General Partner received reimbursements of
accountable administrative expenses amounting to approximately $45,000 and
$43,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2002 and 2001, respectively, which
is included in general and administrative expenses.
In addition, the general partner earned $39,000 in Partnership Management fees
on distributions from operations during the three months ended March 31, 2001,
of which $27,000 is subordinated to the Limited Partner's annual receipt of 8%
of Adjusted Investment Capital as defined in the Partnership Agreement. There
were no Partnership Management fees earned during the three months ended March
31, 2002. The Partnership Management fees are included in general and
administrative expenses. Such cumulative subordinated fees owed to the general
partner at March 31, 2002 amounted to approximately $252,000 and is included in
due to general partner.
Beginning in 2001, the Partnership began insuring its properties 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 properties 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 $31,000 and $18,000, 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 OPERATION
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 Partnership from time to time.
The discussion of the Partnership'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 Partnership'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 properties consist of two apartment complexes. The
following table sets forth the average occupancy of the properties for the three
months ended March 31, 2002 and 2001:
Average Occupancy
Property 2002 2001
Barrington Place Apartments 98% 93%
Westlake, Ohio
Wood View Apartments 89% 91%
Atlanta, Georgia
The Managing General Partner attributes the increase in occupancy at Barrington
Place Apartments to increased concessions and improved resident relations.
Results of Operations
The Partnership's net income for the three months ended March 31, 2002 and 2001
was approximately $39,000 and $24,000, respectively. The increase in net income
is attributable to a decrease in total expenses and a slight increase in total
revenues. The decrease in total expenses is the result of a decrease in general
and administrative expenses partially offset by an increase in depreciation and
operating expenses at Wood View Apartments. The decrease in general and
administrative expenses is primarily due to a decrease in Partnership management
fees paid with distributions from operations. Depreciation expense increased at
Wood View Apartments due to capital improvements completed and placed in service
during the last twelve months. Operating expense increased primarily due to
increases in salaries and related benefits at Wood View Apartments.
The increase in total revenues is attributable to a slight increase in other
income. The increase in other income is primarily due to an increase in tenant
reimbursements at both properties, primarily utility reimbursements.
Included in general and administrative expense for the three months ended March
31, 2002 and 2001 are management reimbursements to the Managing General Partner
allowed under the Partnership Agreement. In addition, 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.
As part of the ongoing business plan of the Partnership, the Managing General
Partner monitors the rental market environment of each of its investment
properties 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 Partnership had cash and cash equivalents of
approximately $295,000 compared to approximately $310,000 at March 31, 2001. The
decrease in cash and cash equivalents of approximately $29,000 since December
31, 2001, is due to approximately $48,000 and $35,000 of cash used in investing
and financing activities, respectively, partially offset by approximately
$54,000 of cash provided by operating activities. Cash used in investing
activities consisted of property improvements and replacements. Cash used in
financing activities consisted of principal payments made on the mortgages
encumbering the Partnership's properties. The Partnership 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 properties to adequately maintain the physical
assets and other operating needs of the Partnership and to comply with Federal,
state, and local legal and regulatory requirements. Capital improvements planned
for each of the Partnership's properties are detailed below.
Barrington Place Apartments
During the three months ended March 31, 2002, the Partnership completed
approximately $20,000 of capital improvements at Barrington Place Apartments
consisting primarily of floor covering replacements and other building
improvements. These improvements were funded from operating cash flow. Capital
improvements budgeted for 2002 are expected to cost approximately $58,000, which
include floor covering and appliance replacements, air conditioning upgrades and
other building improvements. Additional improvements may be considered and will
depend on the physical condition of the property as well as the anticipated cash
flow generated by the property.
Wood View Apartments
During the three months ended March 31, 2002, the Partnership completed
approximately $28,000 of capital improvements at Wood View Apartments consisting
primarily of plumbing enhancements, floor covering replacements, air
conditioning upgrades and other building improvements. These improvements were
funded from operating cash flow. Capital improvements budgeted for 2002 are
expected to cost approximately $63,000 which include floor covering
replacements. Additional improvements may be considered and will depend on the
physical condition of the property as well as the anticipated cash flow
generated by the property.
The additional capital expenditures will be incurred only if cash is available
from operations or from Partnership reserves. To the extent that such budgeted
capital improvements are completed, the Partnership's distributable cash flow,
if any, may be adversely affected at least in the short term.
The Partnership's current assets are thought to be sufficient for any near-term
needs (exclusive of capital improvements) of the Partnership. The mortgage
indebtedness of approximately $10,053,000 is amortized over 360 months with
balloon payments of approximately $8,952,000 due on August 1, 2008. The Managing
General Partner will attempt to refinance such indebtedness and/or sell the
properties prior to such maturity date. If the properties cannot be refinanced
and/or sold for a sufficient amount, the Partnership will risk losing such
properties through foreclosure.
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 $ -- $ -- $ 513 $19.34
Future cash distributions will depend on the levels of net cash generated from
operations, the availability of cash reserves, and the timing of debt
maturities, refinancings and/or property sales. The Partnership's cash available
for distribution is reviewed on a monthly basis. There can be no assurance,
however, that the Partnership will generate sufficient funds from operations
after required capital expenditures to permit further distributions to its
partners during 2002 or subsequent periods.
In addition to its indirect ownership of the general partner interest in the
Partnership, AIMCO and its affiliates owned 9,987 limited partnership units (the
"Units") in the Partnership representing approximately 38.25% 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 include voting on certain amendments to the Partnership
Agreement and voting to remove the Managing General Partner. 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.
FOX STRATEGIC HOUSING INCOME PARTNERS
(a California Limited Partnership)
By: FOX PARTNERS VIII
Its General Partner
By: Fox Capital Management Corporation
Its 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