UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
Form 10-QSB
(Mark One)
[X] QUARTERLY REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT
OF 1934
For the quarterly period ended September 30, 2002
[ ] TRANSITION REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT
OF 1934
For the transition period from _________to _________
Commission file number 0-16116
ANGELES OPPORTUNITY PROPERTIES, LTD.
(Exact name of small business issuer as specified in its charter)
California 95-4052473
(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)
PART I - FINANCIAL INFORMATION
ITEM 1. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
ANGELES OPPORTUNITY PROPERTIES, LTD.
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
(Unaudited)
(in thousands, except unit data)
September 30, 2002
Assets
Cash and cash equivalents $ 234
Receivables and deposits 26
Restricted escrows 38
Other assets 281
Investment properties:
Land $ 1,013
Buildings and related personal property 8,319
9,332
Less accumulated depreciation (3,484) 5,848
$ 6,427
Liabilities and Partners' Deficit
Liabilities
Accounts payable $ 32
Tenant security deposit liabilities 31
Accrued property taxes 204
Other liabilities 142
Mortgage notes payable 6,813
Partners' Deficit
General partner $ (163)
Limited partners (12,425 units issued and
outstanding) (632) (795)
$ 6,427
See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
ANGELES OPPORTUNITY PROPERTIES, LTD.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(Unaudited)
(in thousands, except per unit data)
Three Months Ended Nine Months Ended
September 30, September 30,
2002 2001 2002 2001
Revenues:
Rental income $ 540 $ 646 $ 1,745 $ 1,904
Other income 77 31 162 107
Total revenues 617 677 1,907 2,011
Expenses:
Operating 268 268 768 777
General and administrative 34 41 111 121
Depreciation 85 85 263 261
Interest 127 109 386 326
Property taxes 68 71 206 201
Total expenses 582 574 1,734 1,686
Net income $ 35 $ 103 $ 173 $ 325
Net income allocated to general
partner (1%) $ -- $ 1 $ 2 $ 3
Net income allocated to limited
partners (99%) 35 102 171 322
$ 35 $ 103 $ 173 $ 325
Net income per limited
partnership unit $ 2.82 $ 8.21 $ 13.76 $ 25.92
Distributions per limited
partnership unit $ 14.81 $ 13.04 $ 43.86 $ 51.11
See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
ANGELES OPPORTUNITY PROPERTIES, LTD.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN PARTNERS' DEFICIT
(Unaudited)
(in thousands, except unit data)
Limited
Partnership General Limited
Units Partner Partners Total
Original capital contributions 12,425 $ 1 $12,425 $12,426
Partners' deficit at
December 31, 2001 12,425 $ (154) $ (258) $ (412)
Distributions to partners -- (11) (545) (556)
Net income for the nine months
ended September 30, 2002 -- 2 171 173
Partners' deficit at
September 30, 2002 12,425 $ (163) $ (632) $ (795)
See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
ANGELES OPPORTUNITY PROPERTIES, LTD.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(Unaudited)
(in thousands)
Nine Months Ended
September 30,
2002 2001
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net income $ 173 $ 325
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash
provided by operating activities:
Depreciation 263 261
Amortization of loan costs and discount 13 24
Change in accounts:
Receivables and deposits 148 98
Other assets (40) (7)
Accounts payable (11) (36)
Tenant security deposit liabilities 7 (1)
Accrued property taxes 119 (56)
Other liabilities 80 82
Net cash provided by operating activities 752 690
Cash flows from investing activities:
Property improvements and replacements (111) (131)
Net withdrawals from restricted escrows 2 38
Net cash used in investing activities (109) (93)
Cash flows from financing activities:
Payments on mortgage notes payable (107) (22)
Distributions to partners (556) (647)
Net cash used in financing activities (663) (669)
Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents (20) (72)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period 254 393
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period $ 234 $ 321
Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information:
Cash paid for interest $ 342 $ 301
See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
ANGELES OPPORTUNITY PROPERTIES, LTD.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
Note A - Basis of Presentation
The accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements of Angeles
Opportunity Properties, Ltd. (the "Partnership" or the "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
"General Partner") all adjustments (consisting of normal recurring accruals)
considered necessary for a fair presentation have been included. Operating
results for the three and nine month periods ended September 30, 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. The General
Partner is a 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 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 reimbursement of certain expenses incurred by affiliates on behalf
of the Partnership.
Affiliates of the 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
$97,000 and $101,000 for the nine months ended September 30, 2002 and 2001,
respectively, which is included in operating expenses.
An affiliate of the General Partner received reimbursements of accountable
administrative expense amounting to approximately $67,000 and $83,000 for the
nine months ended September 30, 2002 and 2001, respectively, which is included
in general and administrative expense.
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 General Partner. During the nine months ended September
30, 2002 and 2001, the Partnership was charged by AIMCO and its affiliates
approximately $32,000 and $24,000, 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 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 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 General Partner filed a
motion seeking dismissal of the action. In lieu of responding to the motion, the
plaintiffs filed an amended complaint. The 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 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 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
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
General Partner and affiliated defendants oppose the motion. On April 29, 2002,
the Court held a hearing on plaintiffs' motion for class certification and took
the matter under submission after further briefing, as ordered by the court, was
submitted by the parties. On July 10, 2002, the Court entered an order vacating
the current trial date of January 13, 2003 (as well as the pre-trial and
discovery cut-off dates) and stayed the case in its entirety through November 7,
2002 so that the parties can have an opportunity to discuss settlement. On
October 30, 2002, the court entered an order extending the stay in effect
through January 10, 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 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 parties are currently in the midst of briefing that appeal.
The 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 Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 provides a "safe harbor"
for forward-looking statements in certain circumstances. The matters discussed
in this report contain certain forward-looking statements, including, without
limitation, statements regarding future financial performance and the effect of
government regulations. The discussions of the Registrant's business and results
of operations, including forward-looking statements pertaining to such matters,
do not take into account the effects of any changes to the Registrant's business
and results of operations. Actual results may differ materially from those
described in the forward-looking statements and will be affected by a variety of
risks and factors including, without limitation: national and local economic
conditions; the terms of governmental regulations that affect the Registrant and
interpretations of those regulations; the competitive environment in which the
Registrant operates; financing risks, including the risk that cash flows from
operations may be insufficient to meet required payments of principal and
interest; real estate risks, including variations of real estate values and the
general economic climate in local markets and competition for tenants in such
markets; and possible environmental liabilities. Readers should carefully review
the Registrant's financial statements and the notes thereto, as well as the risk
factors described in the documents the Registrant files from time to time with
the Securities and Exchange Commission.
The Partnership's investment properties consist of two apartment complexes. The
following table sets forth the average occupancy for each of the properties for
the nine months ended September 30, 2002 and 2001:
Average Occupancy
Property 2002 2001
Lake Meadows Apartments (1) 90% 96%
Garland, Texas
Lakewood Apartments (2) 91% 95%
Tomball, Texas
(1) Occupancy at Lake Meadows Apartments decreased primarily due to increased
competition in the area.
(2) Occupancy at Lakewood Apartments decreased primarily due to a large
employer layoff in the area.
Results of Operations
The Partnership had net income of approximately $173,000 for the nine months
ended September 30, 2002, as compared to net income of approximately $325,000
for the nine months ended September 30, 2001. The Partnership had net income of
approximately $35,000 for the three months ended September 30, 2002, as compared
to net income of approximately $103,000 for the three months ended September 30,
2001. The decrease in net income for the three and nine months ended September
30, 2002 was due to a decrease in total revenues and an increase in total
expenses. The decrease in total revenues was due to a decrease in rental income,
partially offset by an increase in other income. Rental income decreased due to
a decrease in occupancy partially offset by an increase in average rental rates
at both investment properties. Other income increased due to increases in
utility reimbursements, late charges and non-refundable fees partially offset by
decreases in interest income at both investment properties.
Total expenses for the three and nine month periods increased due to an increase
in interest expense partially offset by a decrease in general and administrative
expense. Interest expense increased due to the refinancing of Lakewood
Apartments in December 2001, which resulted in a higher debt balance.
General and administrative expense decreased due to a decrease in professional
fees associated with the administrating the Partnership. Included in general and
administrative expenses for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2002
and 2001 are management reimbursements to the 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 General Partner
monitors the rental market environment 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 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 General Partner will
be able to sustain such a plan.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
At September 30, 2002, the Partnership had cash and cash equivalents of
approximately $234,000 compared to approximately $321,000 for the corresponding
period in 2001. Cash and cash equivalents decreased approximately $20,000 from
December 31, 2001 due to approximately $663,000 and $109,000 of cash used in
financing and investing activities, respectively, largely offset by
approximately $752,000 of cash provided by operating activities. Cash used in
financing activities consisted of distributions to the partners and principal
payments made on the mortgages encumbering both investment properties. Cash used
in investing activities consisted of property improvements and replacements
partially offset by net withdrawals from restricted escrows maintained by the
mortgage lender. 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. The General Partner monitors
developments in the area of legal and regulatory compliance and is studying new
federal laws, including the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 mandates or suggests additional compliance measures with regard to
governance, disclosure, audit and other areas. In light of these changes, the
Partnership expects that it will incur higher expenses related to compliance,
including increased legal and audit fees. Capital improvements for each of the
Partnership's properties are detailed below.
Lake Meadows Apartments
Approximately $38,000 was budgeted for capital improvements for the year 2002 at
Lake Meadows Apartments consisting primarily of floor covering and appliance
replacements. During the nine months ended September 30, 2002, the Partnership
completed approximately $44,000 of budgeted and unbudgeted capital improvements
at Lake Meadows Apartments, consisting primarily of floor covering and appliance
replacements, major landscaping and interior decoration. These improvements were
funded from operating cash flow. Additional capital 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 and replacement reserves.
Lakewood Apartments
Approximately $98,000 was budgeted for capital improvements for the year 2002 at
Lakewood Apartments consisting primarily of parking area improvements and air
conditioning, floor covering and appliance replacements. During the nine months
ended September 30, 2002, the Partnership completed approximately $67,000 of
capital improvements at the property, consisting primarily of floor covering and
appliance replacements, and structural upgrades. These improvements were funded
from operating cash flow. Additional capital 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.
Additional capital expenditures will be incurred only to the extent of cash
available from operations and from the Partnership's 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 is approximately $6,813,000, net of discounts. Lake Meadows
Apartments' mortgage is being amortized over 343 months with balloon payments
due at the maturity date of October 2003. Lakewood Apartments' indebtedness is
being amortized over 240 months with a maturity date of January 1, 2022 at which
time it is scheduled to be fully amortized. The General Partner will attempt to
refinance such indebtedness and/or sell the properties prior to such maturity
dates. If the properties cannot be refinanced or sold for a sufficient amount,
the Partnership will risk losing such properties through foreclosure.
The Partnership distributed the following amounts during the nine months ended
September 30, 2002 and 2001 (in thousands, except per unit data):
Nine Months Per Limited Nine Months Per Limited
Ended Partnership Ended Partnership
September 30, 2002 Unit September 30, 2001 Unit
Operations (1) $ 556 $43.86 $ 647 $51.11
(1) Includes approximately $5,000 distributed to the general partner of the
majority-owned sub-tier limited partnership.
The Partnership's cash available for distribution is reviewed on a monthly
basis. 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. There can be no assurance that
the Partnership will generate sufficient funds from operations after required
capital expenditures to permit further distributions to its partners for the
remainder of 2002 or subsequent periods.
Other
In addition to its indirect ownership of the general partner interest in the
Partnership, AIMCO and its affiliates owned 6,160 limited partnership units (the
"Units") in the Partnership representing 49.58% of the outstanding units at
September 30, 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 acquire additional units of limited partnership interest in the
Partnership in exchange for cash or a combination of cash and units in the
operating partnership of AIMCO either through private purchases or tender
offers. 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 General Partner. As a result of its ownership of 49.58% of
the outstanding Units, AIMCO is in a position to influence all such voting
decisions with respect to the Registrant. Although the General Partner owes
fiduciary duties to the limited partners of the Partnership, the General Partner
also owes fiduciary duties to AIMCO as its sole stockholder. As a result, the
duties of the General Partner, as general partner, to the Partnership and its
limited partners may come into conflict with the duties of the General Partner
to AIMCO, as its sole stockholder.
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
The consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States which require the Partnership
to make estimates and assumptions. The Partnership believes that of its
significant accounting policies, the following may involve a higher degree of
judgment and complexity.
Impairment of Long-Lived Assets
Investment properties are recorded at cost, less accumulated depreciation,
unless considered impaired. If events or circumstances indicate that the
carrying amount of a property may be impaired, the Partnership will make an
assessment of its recoverability by estimating the undiscounted future cash
flows, excluding interest charges, of the property. If the carrying amount
exceeds the aggregate future cash flows, the Partnership would recognize an
impairment loss to the extent the carrying amount exceeds the fair value of the
property.
Real property investments are subject to varying degrees of risk. Several
factors may adversely affect the economic performance and value of the
Partnership's investment properties. These factors include changes in the
national, regional and local economic climate; local conditions, such as an
oversupply of multifamily properties; competition from other available
multifamily property owners and changes in market rental rates. Any adverse
changes in these factors could cause an impairment in the Partnership's assets.
Revenue Recognition
The Partnership generally leases apartment units for twelve-month terms or less.
Rental income attributable to leases is recognized monthly as it is earned. The
Partnership will offer rental concessions during particularly slow months or in
response to heavy competition from other similar complexes in the area.
Concessions are charged to income as incurred.
ITEM 3. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
The principal executive officer and principal financial officer of the General
Partner, who are the equivalent of the Partnership's principal executive officer
and principal financial officer, respectively, have, within 90 days of the
filing date of this quarterly report, evaluated the effectiveness of the
Partnership's disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules (13a-14(c) and (15d-14(c)) and have determined that such disclosure
controls and procedures are adequate. There have been no significant changes in
the Partnership's internal controls or in other factors that could significantly
affect the Partnership's internal controls since the date of evaluation. The
Partnership does not believe any significant deficiencies or material weaknesses
exist in the Partnership's internal controls. Accordingly, no corrective actions
have been taken.
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 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 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 General Partner filed a
motion seeking dismissal of the action. In lieu of responding to the motion, the
plaintiffs filed an amended complaint. The 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 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 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
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
General Partner and affiliated defendants oppose the motion. On April 29, 2002,
the Court held a hearing on plaintiffs' motion for class certification and took
the matter under submission after further briefing, as ordered by the court, was
submitted by the parties. On July 10, 2002, the Court entered an order vacating
the current trial date of January 13, 2003 (as well as the pre-trial and
discovery cut-off dates) and stayed the case in its entirety through November 7,
2002 so that the parties can have an opportunity to discuss settlement. On
October 30, 2002, the court entered an order extending the stay in effect
through January 10, 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 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 parties are currently in the midst of briefing that appeal.
The 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:
Exhibit 3.1, Amendment Certificate and Agreement of the
Limited Partnership filed in the Partnership's prospectus
dated July 7, 1986, which is incorporated herein by reference.
Exhibit 99, Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer.
b) Reports on Form 8-K:
None filed during the quarter ended September 30, 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 OPPORTUNITY PROPERTIES, LTD.
By: Angeles Realty Corporation II
General Partner
By: /s/Patrick J. Foye
Patrick J. Foye
Executive Vice President
By: /s/Thomas C. Novosel
Thomas C. Novosel
Senior Vice President
and Chief Accounting Officer
Date: November 13, 2002
CERTIFICATION
I, Patrick J. Foye, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Angeles Opportunity
Properties, Ltd.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly
report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;
4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:
a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is
being prepared;
b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and
c) Presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;
5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
a) All significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the
registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and
b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
controls; and
6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this
quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal
controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls
subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective
actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.
Date: November 13, 2002
_______________________
Patrick J. Foye
Executive Vice President of Angeles Realty
Corporation II, equivalent of the chief
executive officer of the Partnership
CERTIFICATION
I, Paul J. McAuliffe, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Angeles Opportunity
Properties, Ltd.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly
report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;
4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:
a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is
being prepared;
b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and
c) Presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;
5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
a) All significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the
registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and
b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
controls; and
6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this
quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal
controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls
subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective
actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.
Date: November 13, 2002
_______________________
Paul J. McAuliffe
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial
Officer of Angeles Realty Corporation II,
equivalent of the chief financial officer of
the Partnership
Exhibit 99
Certification of CEO and CFO
Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
As Adopted Pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Angeles Opportunity
Properties, Ltd. (the "Partnership"), for the quarterly period ended September
30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), Patrick J. Foye, as the equivalent of the chief executive
officer of the Partnership, and Paul J. McAuliffe, as the equivalent of the
chief financial officer of the Partnership, each hereby certifies, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that, to the best of his knowledge:
(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
of the Partnership.
/s/ Patrick J. Foye
Name: Patrick J. Foye
Date: November 13, 2002
/s/ Paul J. McAuliffe
Name: Paul J. McAuliffe
Date: November 13, 2002
This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Partnership for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.