UNITED STATES
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
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 June 30, 2003
[ ] 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 0-11766
ANGELES PARTNERS XI
(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)
California 95-3788040
(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 PARTNERS XI
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
(Unaudited)
(in thousands, except unit data)
June 30, 2003
Assets
Cash and cash equivalents $ 319
Receivables and deposits 397
Restricted escrows 625
Other assets 481
Investment property:
Land $ 3,998
Buildings and related personal property 32,738
36,736
Less accumulated depreciation (26,728) 10,008
$ 11,830
Liabilities and Partners' Deficit
Liabilities
Accounts payable $ 45
Tenant security deposit liabilities 401
Due to affiliates 638
Other liabilities 196
Mortgage note payable 33,694
Partners' Deficit
General partners $ (548)
Limited partners (39,627 units issued and
outstanding) (22,596) (23,144)
$ 11,830
See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
ANGELES PARTNERS XI
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(Unaudited)
(in thousands, except per unit data)
Three Months Ended Six Months Ended
June 30, June 30,
2003 2002 2003 2002
Revenues:
Rental income $ 1,847 $ 2,027 $ 3,720 $ 4,101
Other income 108 129 192 298
Casualty gain -- -- 4 --
Total revenues 1,955 2,156 3,916 4,399
Expenses:
Operating 687 580 1,327 1,237
General and administrative 44 55 229 128
Depreciation 551 536 1,093 1,059
Interest 583 591 1,163 1,186
Property taxes 266 265 531 529
Total expenses 2,131 2,027 4,343 4,139
Net (loss) income $ (176) $ 129 $ (427) $ 260
Net (loss) income allocated to general
partners (1%) $ (2) $ 1 $ (4) $ 3
Net (loss) income allocated to limited
partners (99%) (174) 128 (423) 257
$ (176) $ 129 $ (427) $ 260
Net (loss) income per limited partnership unit $ (4.39) $ 3.23 $(10.67) $ 6.49
Distributions per limited partnership unit $ -- $ -- $ 3.36 $ --
See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
ANGELES PARTNERS XI
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN PARTNERS' DEFICIT
(Unaudited)
(in thousands, except unit data)
Limited
Partnership General Limited
Units Partners Partners Total
Original capital contributions 40,000 $ 30 $ 40,000 $ 40,030
Partners' deficit at
December 31, 2002 39,627 $ (543) $ (22,040) $(22,583)
Distributions to partners (1) (133) (134)
Net loss for the six
months ended June 30, 2003 -- (4) (423) (427)
Partners' deficit
at June 30, 2003 39,627 $ (548) $ (22,596) $(23,144)
See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
ANGELES PARTNERS XI
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(Unaudited)
(in thousands)
Six Months Ended
June 30,
2003 2002
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net (loss) income $ (427) $ 260
Adjustments to reconcile net (loss) income to net cash
provided by operating activities:
Depreciation 1,093 1,059
Amortization of loan costs 8 8
Casualty gain (4) --
Change in accounts:
Receivables and deposits (88) 399
Other assets (42) (151)
Accounts payable (62) (8)
Tenant security deposit liabilities 16 (64)
Due to general partner 11 --
Other liabilities (131) (262)
Net cash provided by operating activities 374 1,241
Cash flows from investing activities:
Property improvements and replacements (838) (1,055)
Insurance proceeds received 4 --
Net cash used in investing activities (834) (1,055)
Cash flows from financing activities:
Advances from affiliates 611 --
Payments on mortgage note payable (375) (421)
Distributions to partners (134) --
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities 102 (421)
Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents (358) (235)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period 677 460
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period $ 319 $ 225
Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information:
Cash paid for interest $ 1,018 $ 1,177
Supplemental disclosure of non-cash flow information:
Property improvements and replacements included in
accounts payable $ -- $ 127
Included in property improvements and replacements for the six months ended June
30, 2003 and 2002, are approximately $161,000 and $259,000, respectively, of
improvements which were included in accounts payable at December 31, 2002 and
2001, respectively.
See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
ANGELES PARTNERS XI
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
Note A - Basis of Presentation
The accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements of Angeles Partners
XI (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 and six month periods ended June 30, 2003, are not necessarily indicative
of the results that may be expected for the fiscal year ending December 31,
2003. 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, 2002. The Managing General Partner is an
affiliate of Apartment Investment and Management Company ("AIMCO"), a publicly
traded real estate investment trust.
Reclassifications
Certain reclassifications have been made to the 2002 information in order to
conform to the 2003 presentation.
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 (i) certain
payments to affiliates for services and (ii) reimbursement of certain expenses
incurred by affiliates on behalf of the Partnership.
In exchange for property management services, affiliates of the Managing General
Partner are entitled to receive 5% of gross receipts from the Partnership's
property. The Partnership paid to such affiliates approximately $197,000 and
$222,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2003 and 2002, respectively, which is
included in operating expenses.
Affiliates of the Managing General Partner received reimbursement of accountable
administrative expenses amounting to approximately $143,000 and $207,000 for the
six months ended June 30, 2003 and 2002, respectively, which are included in
general and administrative expenses and investment property. Included in these
amounts are fees related to construction management services provided by an
affiliate of the Managing General Partner of approximately $71,000 and $107,000
for the six months ended June 30, 2003 and 2002, respectively. The construction
management service fees are calculated based on a percentage of current
additions to investment property.
The Partnership Agreement provides for a fee equal to 7.5% 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.
One half of this fee is to be accrued and not paid unless the limited partners
have received distributions equal to a 5% cumulative annual return on their
adjusted capital investment as defined in the Partnership Agreement. This return
criteria has not been met. During the six months ended June 30, 2003 and 2002 no
fees were earned or paid. At June 30, 2003, the Partnership has accrued
approximately $21,000 of Partnership management fees which is included in other
liabilities on the accompanying consolidated balance sheet and this amount will
remain accrued until criteria for payment has been met.
During the six months ended June 30, 2003, the Managing General Partner loaned
the Partnership $611,000 to cover operating expenses and capital expenditures.
At June 30, 2003 the amount of the outstanding loan and accrued interest was
approximately $617,000 and is included in due to affiliates on the accompanying
consolidated balance sheet. Interest is charged on this loan at prime plus 2% or
6.00% at June 30, 2003, and was approximately $6,000 for the six months ended
June 30, 2003. There were no similar loans payable at June 30, 2002.
The Partnership insures 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 six months ended June 30, 2003 and 2002,
the Partnership was charged by AIMCO and its affiliates approximately $103,000
and $124,000, respectively, for insurance coverage and fees associated with
policy claims administrations.
Note C - Casualty
During the year ended December 31, 2002, a casualty gain of approximately
$17,000 was recorded at Fox Run Apartments. The casualty gain related to a fire
that occurred in June 2002. The gain was a result of the receipt of insurance
proceeds of approximately $18,000 offset by the write-off of the net book value
of the destroyed assets totaling approximately $1,000.
During the six months ended June 30, 2003, additional insurance proceeds of
approximately $4,000 were received and recorded as additional casualty gain.
Note D - 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
purported to assert claims on behalf of a class of limited partners and
derivatively on behalf of a number of limited partnerships (including the
Partnership) that 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 that 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 sought 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 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 opposed 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 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 could 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 Heller action was brought as a purported
derivative action, and asserted 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. Before completing
briefing on the appeal, the parties stayed further proceedings in the appeal in
light of a settlement.
On January 8, 2003, the parties filed a Stipulation of Settlement in proposed
settlement of the Nuanes action and the Heller action described below.
In general terms, the proposed settlement provides for certification for
settlement purposes of a settlement class consisting of all limited partners in
this Partnership and others (the "Partnerships") as of December 20, 2002, the
dismissal with prejudice and release of claims in the Nuanes and Heller
litigation, payment by AIMCO of $9.9 million (which shall be distributed to
settlement class members after deduction of attorney fees and costs of class
counsel and certain costs of settlement) and up to $1 million toward the cost of
independent appraisals of the Partnerships' properties by a Court appointed
appraiser. An affiliate of the Managing General Partner has also agreed to make
a tender offer to purchase all of the partnership interests in the Partnerships
within one year of final approval, if it is granted, and to provide partners
with the independent appraisals at the time of these tenders. The proposed
settlement also provided for the limitation of the allowable costs which the
Managing General Partner or its affiliates will charge the Partnerships in
connection with this litigation and imposes limits on the class counsel fees and
costs in this litigation. On April 11, 2003, notice was distributed to limited
partners providing the details of the proposed settlement.
On June 13, 2003, the Court granted final approval of the settlement and entered
judgment in both the Nuanes and Heller actions.
The Managing General Partner does not anticipate that any costs to the
Partnership, 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 report contain certain forward-looking statements,
including, without limitation, statements regarding future financial performance
and the effect of government regulations. 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; litigation, including costs associated with prosecuting and
defending claims and any adverse outcomes, 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 property consists of one apartment complex. The
following table sets forth the average occupancy of the property for the six
months ended June 30, 2003 and 2002:
Average Occupancy
Property 2003 2002
Fox Run Apartments 92% 95%
Plainsboro, New Jersey
The Managing General Partner attributes the decrease in occupancy to a weak
economy.
Results of Operations
The Partnership's net loss for the three and six months ended June 30, 2003 was
approximately $176,000 and $427,000, respectively compared to net income of
approximately $129,000 and $260,000 for the corresponding periods in 2002. The
decrease in net income for the three and six months ended June 30, 2003 compared
to the corresponding period in 2002 is due to a decrease in total revenues and
an increase in total expenses. Total revenues decreased for the three and six
months ended June 30, 2003, primarily due to decreases in rental income and
other income. Rental income decreased due to a decrease in occupancy and an
increase in concession costs at the Partnership's investment property. Other
income decreased due to a decrease in lease cancellation, recreational facility,
and cleaning and damage fees, partially offset by increased utility
reimbursements.
Total expenses increased for the six months ended June 30, 2003 primarily due to
an increase in general and administrative expenses, depreciation expense, and
operating expense partially offset by a decrease in interest expense. Total
expenses increased for the three months ended June 30, 2003 primarily due to
increases in depreciation and operating expenses, partially offset by a decrease
in interest expense. Depreciation expense increased for the three and six month
periods ended June 30, 2003 due to property improvements and replacements during
the past twelve months, which are now being depreciated. Operating expenses
increased for the three and six month periods ended June 30, 2003 due to
increases in maintenance and property expenses partially offset by decreases in
administrative expenses and property management fees. Maintenance expenses
increased due to an increase in snow removal and repairs at Fox Run Apartments.
Property expense increased primarily due to an increase in utility expenses at
the Partnership's property. The decrease in administrative expenses is due to a
decrease in the ad valorem tax bill. The decrease in property management fees is
due to a decrease in rental income. Interest expense decreased for the three and
six months ended June 30, 2003 due to principal payments made on the mortgage
debt encumbering the Partnership's property.
General and administrative expenses increased for the six months ended June 30,
2003 primarily due to a new partnership level tax based on the number of
partners in the partnership implemented by the state of New Jersey in July 2002.
General and administrative expense decreased for the three months ended June 30,
2003 due to reduced costs of services included in management reimbursements to
the Managing General Partner allowed under the Partnership Agreement. Also
included in general and administrative expenses for both periods are costs
associated with the quarterly and annual communications with investors and
regulatory agencies and the annual audit required by the Partnership Agreement.
During the year ended December 31, 2002, a casualty gain of approximately
$17,000 was recorded at Fox Run Apartments. The casualty gain related to a fire
that occurred in June 2002. The gain was a result of the receipt of insurance
proceeds of approximately $18,000 offset by the write-off of the net book value
of the destroyed assets totaling approximately $1,000. During the six months
ended June 30, 2003, additional insurance proceeds of approximately $4,000 were
received and recorded as additional casualty gain.
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 June 30, 2003, the Partnership had cash and cash equivalents of approximately
$319,000 compared to approximately $225,000 at June 30, 2002. Cash and cash
equivalents decreased approximately $358,000 since December 31, 2002 due to
approximately $834,000 of cash used in investing activities partially offset by
approximately $374,000 of cash provided by operating activities and $102,000
provided by financing activities. Cash used in investing activities consisted of
property improvements and replacement expenditures slightly offset by the
receipt of insurance proceeds. Cash provided by financing activities consisted
of distributions to partners and principal payments made on the mortgage
encumbering Fox Run Apartments. 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 property 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 Managing 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.
During the six months ended June 30, 2003, the Partnership completed
approximately $677,000 of capital improvements at Fox Run Apartments, primarily
consisting of a gas submetering project, water heater and floor covering
replacement, parking lot upgrades and structural improvements. These
improvements were funded from operating cash flow. The Partnership evaluates the
capital improvement needs of the property and currently expects to complete an
additional $76,000 in capital improvements during the remainder of 2003. The
additional capital improvements will consist primarily of floor covering
replacements, appliance replacements, HVAC upgrades, fencing, pool enhancements,
exterior building improvements and major landscaping. 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. 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 Partnership's assets are thought to be sufficient for any near-term needs
(exclusive of capital improvements) of the Partnership. The mortgage
indebtedness of approximately $33,694,000 encumbering Fox Run Apartments is
being amortized over 20 years and matures in December 2021 at which time it is
expected to be fully amortized.
The Partnership distributed the following amounts during the six months ended
June 30, 2003 and 2002 (in thousands, except per unit data):
For the Six Per For the Six Per
Months Ended Limited Months Ended Limited
June 30, Partnership June 30, Partnership
2003 Unit 2002 Unit
Refinancing (1) $ 134 $ 3.36 $ -- $ --
(1) Refinancing proceeds are from the December 2001 refinancing of Fox Run
Apartments. Approximately $554,000 remains to be distributed at June 30,
2003.
Future cash distributions will depend on the levels of net cash generated from
operations, the availability of cash reserves, the timing of the debt maturity
and refinancing and/or sale of the property. The Partnership's cash available
for distribution is reviewed on a monthly basis. There can be no assurance that
the Partnership will generate sufficient funds from operations, after required
capital improvement expenditures, to permit further distributions to its
partners in 2003 or subsequent periods.
Other
In addition to its indirect ownership of the general partner interests in the
Partnership, AIMCO and its affiliates owned 24,944 limited partnership units
(the "Units") in the Partnership representing 62.95% of the outstanding Units at
June 30, 2003. 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 in exchange for cash or a combination of cash and
units in the operating partnership of AIMCO either through private purchases or
tender offers. Pursuant to the Partnership Agreement, unitholders holding a
majority of the Units are entitled to take action with respect to a variety of
matters that include, but are not limited to, voting on certain amendments to
the Partnership Agreement and voting to remove the Managing General Partner. As
a result of its ownership of 62.95% of the outstanding Units, AIMCO and its
affiliates are in a position to control all voting decisions with respect to the
Partnership. Although the Managing General Partner owes fiduciary duties to the
limited partners of the Partnership, the Managing General Partner also owes
fiduciary duties to AIMCO as its sole stockholder. As a result, the duties of
the Managing General Partner, as managing general partner, to the Partnership
and its limited partners may come into conflict with the duties of the Managing
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
The investment property is recorded at cost, less accumulated depreciation,
unless considered impaired. If events or circumstances indicate that the
carrying amount of the 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 property. 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 impairment of 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 and
the Partnership fully reserves all balances outstanding over thirty days. The
Partnership will offer rental concessions during particularly slow months or in
response to heavy competition from other similar complexes in the area. Any
concessions given at the inception of the lease are amortized over the life of
the lease.
ITEM 3. Controls and Procedures
(a) Disclosure Controls and Procedures. The Partnership's management, with the
participation of the principal executive officer and principal financial officer
of the Managing General Partner, who are the equivalent of the Partnership's
principal executive officer and principal financial officer, respectively, has
evaluated the effectiveness of the Partnership's disclosure controls and
procedures (as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act")) as of the end
of the period covered by this report. Based on such evaluation, the principal
executive officer and principal financial officer of the Managing General
Partner, who are the equivalent of the Partnership's principal executive officer
and principal financial officer, respectively, have concluded that, as of the
end of such period, the Partnership's disclosure controls and procedures are
effective.
(b) Internal Control Over Financial Reporting. There have not been any changes
in the Partnership's internal control over financial reporting (as such term is
defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act) during the
fiscal quarter to which this report relates that have materially affected, or
are reasonably likely to materially affect, the Partnership's internal control
over financial reporting.
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
purported to assert claims on behalf of a class of limited partners and
derivatively on behalf of a number of limited partnerships (including the
Partnership) that 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 that 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 sought 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 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 opposed 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 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 could 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 Heller action was brought as a purported
derivative action, and asserted 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. Before completing
briefing on the appeal, the parties stayed further proceedings in the appeal in
light of a settlement.
On January 8, 2003, the parties filed a Stipulation of Settlement in proposed
settlement of the Nuanes action and the Heller action described below.
In general terms, the proposed settlement provides for certification for
settlement purposes of a settlement class consisting of all limited partners in
this Partnership and others (the "Partnerships") as of December 20, 2002, the
dismissal with prejudice and release of claims in the Nuanes and Heller
litigation, payment by AIMCO of $9.9 million (which shall be distributed to
settlement class members after deduction of attorney fees and costs of class
counsel and certain costs of settlement) and up to $1 million toward the cost of
independent appraisals of the Partnerships' properties by a Court appointed
appraiser. An affiliate of the Managing General Partner has also agreed to make
a tender offer to purchase all of the partnership interests in the Partnerships
within one year of final approval, if it is granted, and to provide partners
with the independent appraisals at the time of these tenders. The proposed
settlement also provided for the limitation of the allowable costs which the
Managing General Partner or its affiliates will charge the Partnerships in
connection with this litigation and imposes limits on the class counsel fees and
costs in this litigation. On April 11, 2003, notice was distributed to limited
partners providing the details of the proposed settlement.
On June 13, 2003, the Court granted final approval of the settlement and entered
judgment in both the Nuanes and Heller actions.
The Managing General Partner does not anticipate that any costs to the
Partnership, 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, Amended Agreement of Limited Partnership dated
February 26, 1982, filed in Form 10-K dated November 30, 1983,
incorporated herein by reference.
Exhibit 31.1, Certification of equivalent of Chief Executive
Officer pursuant to Securities Exchange Act Rules
13a-14(a)/15d-14(a), as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
Exhibit 31.2, Certification of equivalent of Chief Financial
Officer pursuant to Securities Exchange Act Rules
13a-14(a)/15d-14(a), as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
Exhibit 32.1, Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002.
b) Reports on Form 8-K:
None filed during the quarter ended June 30, 2003.
SIGNATURES
In accordance with the requirements of the Exchange Act, the Registrant has
caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly
authorized.
ANGELES PARTNERS XI
(A California Limited Partnership)
(Registrant)
By: Angeles Realty Corporation II
Managing General Partner
By: /s/Patrick J. Foye
Patrick J. Foye
Executive Vice President
By: /s/Thomas C. Novosel
Senior Vice President and
Chief Accounting Officer
Date: August 13, 2003
Exhibit 31.1
CERTIFICATION
I, Patrick J. Foye, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Angeles Partners
XI;
2. Based on my knowledge, this 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
report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this 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 report;
4. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant
and have:
(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our
supervision, 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 report is being prepared;
(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about
the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of
the end of the period covered by this report based on such
evaluation; and
(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the
registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth
fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and
5. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based
on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the
registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design
or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to
record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's
internal control over financial reporting.
Date: August 13, 2003
/s/Patrick J. Foye
Patrick J. Foye
Executive Vice President of Angeles Realty
Corporation II, equivalent of the chief
executive officer of the Partnership
Exhibit 31.2
CERTIFICATION
I, Paul J. McAuliffe, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Angeles Partners
XI;
2. Based on my knowledge, this 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
report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this 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 report;
4. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant
and have:
(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our
supervision, 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 report is being prepared;
(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about
the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of
the end of the period covered by this report based on such
evaluation; and
(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the
registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth
fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and
5. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based
on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the
registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design
or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to
record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's
internal control over financial reporting.
Date: August 13, 2003
/s/Paul J. McAuliffe
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 32.1
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 Partners XI
(the "Partnership"), for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2003 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: August 13, 2003
/s/Paul J. McAuliffe
Name: Paul J. McAuliffe
Date: August 13, 2003
This certification is furnished with this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Partnership for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.