|
|
![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
| |||||||||
UDR, Inc. 10-K 2008 Documents found in this filing:
Table of Contents
UNITED
STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
Washington, D.C.
20549
Form 10-K
þ ANNUAL
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007
or
o TRANSITION
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
For the transition period
from to
Commission file number 1-10524
UDR, INC.
1745 Shea
Center Drive, Suite 200, Highlands Ranch, Colorado 80129
(Address of principal executive offices) (zip code)
Registrants telephone number, including area code:
(720) 283-6120
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
None
Indicate by checkmark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned
issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities
Act. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file
reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the
Act. Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed
all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the
preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the
registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has
been subject to such filing requirements for the past
90 days. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers
pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K
is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best
of the registrants knowledge, in definitive proxy or other
information statements incorporated by reference in
Part III of this
Form 10-K
or any amendment to this
Form 10-K. o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large
accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated
filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of
large accelerated filer, accelerated
filer and smaller reporting company in
Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company
(as defined in
Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange
Act). Yes o No þ
The aggregate market value of the shares of common stock held by
non-affiliates on June 29, 2007 was approximately
$2.2 billion. This calculation excludes shares of common
stock held by the registrants officers and directors and
each person known by the registrant to beneficially own more
than 5% of the registrants outstanding shares, as such
persons may be deemed to be affiliates. This determination of
affiliate status should not be deemed conclusive for any other
purpose. As of February 15, 2008 there were
133,347,522 shares of the registrants common stock
outstanding.
The information required by Part III of this Report, to the
extent not set forth herein, is incorporated by reference from
the registrants definitive proxy statement for the Annual
Meeting of Stockholders to be held on May 29, 2008.
Table of Contents
PART I
UDR, Inc. is a self administered real estate investment trust,
or REIT, that owns, acquires, renovates, develops, and manages
apartment communities nationwide. At December 31, 2007, our
apartment portfolio included 234 communities located in 30
markets, with a total of 65,867 completed apartment homes.
We have elected to be taxed as a REIT under the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code. To continue to qualify as
a REIT, we must continue to meet certain tests which, among
other things, generally require that our assets consist
primarily of real estate assets, our income be derived primarily
from real estate assets, and that we distribute at least 90% of
our REIT taxable income (other than our net capital gain) to our
stockholders annually. As a qualified REIT, we generally will
not be subject to U.S. federal income taxes at the
corporate level on our net income to the extent we distribute
such net income to our stockholders annually. In 2007, we
declared total distributions of $1.32 per common share to our
stockholders, which represents our 31st year of consecutive
dividend increases to our stockholders.
We were formed in 1972 as a Virginia corporation. In June 2003,
we changed our state of incorporation from Virginia to Maryland.
Our corporate offices are located at 1745 Shea Center Drive,
Suite 200, Highlands Ranch, Colorado. As of
February 15, 2008, we had 1,787 full-time employees and 132
part-time employees.
Our subsidiaries include two operating partnerships, Heritage
Communities L.P., a Delaware limited partnership, and United
Dominion Realty L.P., a Delaware limited partnership, and
RE3,
our subsidiary that focuses on development, land entitlement and
short-term hold investments. Unless the context otherwise
requires, all references in this Report to we,
us, our, the company, or
UDR refer collectively to UDR, Inc. and its
subsidiaries.
Our principal business objective is to maximize the economic
returns of our apartment communities to provide our stockholders
with the greatest possible total return and value. To achieve
this objective, we intend to continue to pursue the following
goals and strategies:
Table of Contents
In the first quarter of 2007, UDR announced its vision to be the
innovative multifamily real estate investment of choice. We
identified four strategies to guide decision-making and
accelerated growth:
1. Strengthen our portfolio
2. Expand
RE3
3. Transform operations
4. Source low-cost capital
UDR is focused on increasing its presence in markets with strong
job growth, low housing affordability, and a favorable
demand/supply ratio for multifamily housing. Portfolio decisions
consider third-party research, taking into account job growth,
multifamily permitting, and housing affordability. In January
2008, UDR announced that it has entered into a contract to sell
25,684 apartment homes in 86 communities for $1.7 billion.
The transaction is expected to close on or about March 3,
2008, at which time UDR will receive $1.5 billion in cash
and a note in the principal amount of $200 million. The
note matures on the same date as the buyers senior
financing, may be prepaid 14 months from the date of the
note, bears interest at a fixed rate of 7.5% per annum and is
secured by a pledge and security agreement and a guarantee.
Closing is subject to customary closing conditions. Upon
completion of the transaction, UDR will own 40,183 homes in 148
communities.
This portfolio sale dramatically accelerates UDRs
transformation to focus on markets that have the best growth
prospects based on favorable job formation and low single-family
home affordability. Upon completion of the sale, UDR expects
that approximately 90% of its net operating income will be
generated from homes located in markets on the Pacific Coast,
the Virginia-Washington, D.C. corridor and Florida.
During 2007, in conjunction with our strategy to strengthen our
portfolio, UDR acquired 13 communities with 2,671 apartment
homes at a total cost of approximately $404.1 million,
including the assumption of secured debt. In addition, we
purchased six parcels of land for $70.7 million and
invested $11.8 million in an operating joint venture. UDR
is targeting apartment community acquisitions in markets where
job growth expectations are above the national average, home
affordability is low, and the demand/supply ratio for
multi-family housing is favorable.
When evaluating potential acquisitions, we consider:
Table of Contents
The following table summarizes our apartment acquisitions and
our year-end ownership position for the past five years
(dollars in thousands):
We regularly monitor and adjust our assets to increase the
quality and performance of our portfolio. During 2007, we sold
over 7,000 of our slower growing, non-core apartment homes while
exiting some markets, specifically Colorado and Georgia, in an
effort to increase the quality and performance of our portfolio.
Proceeds from the disposition program were used primarily to
reduce debt and fund acquisitions.
Factors we consider in deciding whether to dispose of a property
include:
At December 31, 2007, we had 86 communities with a total of
25,684 apartment homes, two communities with a total of 579
condominiums, and one commercial unit classified as real estate
held for disposition. In January 2008, UDR announced that it had
entered into a contract in the fourth quarter of 2007 to sell
25,684 apartment homes in 86 communities for $1.7 billion.
RE3
is our subsidiary that focuses on development, land entitlement
and short-term hold investments. We expanded its development and
redevelopment pipelines through a variety of activities. At
December 31, 2007, UDRs total development pipeline
totaled over 16,600 homes with a budget over $2.7 billion.
Our wholly owned, under development pipeline stands at 6,386
homes with a budgeted cost of $1.0 billion, of which 3,234
homes in five communities are under construction and the
remaining 3,152 homes will be built on 12 land sites. An
additional 1,594 homes budgeted at $244 million are
completed developments or developments in progress in a
pre-sale, contract-to-purchase program. Our completed
redevelopment and redevelopment pipeline stands at 2,956 homes
with a budgeted cost of $150 million, our future
development pipeline of owned properties provides for
construction of an additional 4,419 homes budgeted at
$848 million, and the remaining 1,304 homes with a budgeted
cost of $395 million comprise our interest in one
consolidated development joint venture and three unconsolidated
joint ventures.
Table of Contents
The following wholly owned projects were under development as of
December 31, 2007:
The first phase of the Addison Assemblage will deliver
684 homes in the third quarter of 2010.
In addition, we owned 12 parcels of land held for future
development aggregating $124.5 million at December 31,
2007.
During 2007, we continued to reposition properties in targeted
markets where we concluded there was an opportunity to add value
and achieve greater than inflationary increases in rents over
the long term. In 2007, we spent $194.4 million or $2,829
per home on capital expenditures for all of our communities,
excluding development, condominium conversions and commercial
properties. These capital improvements included turnover related
expenditures for floor coverings and appliances, other recurring
capital expenditures such as roofs, siding, parking lots, and
asset preservation capital expenditures, which aggregated
$44.4 million or $646 per home. In addition, revenue
enhancing capital expenditures, kitchen and bath upgrades,
upgrades to HVAC equipment, and other extensive
exterior/interior upgrades totaled $78.2 million or $1,138
per home, and major renovations totaled $71.8 million or
$1,045 per home for the year ended December 31, 2007.
The following consolidated joint venture project was under
development as of December 31, 2007:
The following unconsolidated joint venture projects were under
development as of December 31, 2007:
Table of Contents
UDR owns a 20% interest in a joint venture to which UDR sold
nine operating properties, consisting of 3,690 homes, and
contributed Lincoln Town Square II, as noted above. In addition,
UDR owns a 49% interest in an operating joint venture which owns
and operates a recently completed 23-story, 166 apartment home
high rise community in Bellevue, WA.
During 2007, UDR has been committed to growing net operating
income through automation and improving the ease of doing
business with us. Since adopting our new Corporate Strategies,
UDR selected and began to deploy YieldStar revenue management
software, launched a newly redesigned, customer-oriented web
site with better features, and improved the quality of our
photos on the web. The new www.udr.com web site
features
side-by-side
apartment and floor plan comparisons, enhanced mapping,
additional pricing options, 360 degree virtual tours, a
furniture arrangement feature, mobile web site access, and
click-to-chat and click-to-call for online support. In the first
month following the launch, UDR experienced the highest unique
visitor traffic in its history.
UDR also launched a new
Spanish-language
site, marketing to Latinos, the nations fastest-growing
ethnic group. The site offers over 4,000 Spanish translated web
pages and includes apartments for rent search resources. The
website can be found at http://es.udr.com and can
also be found on any web-enabled mobile device.
These enhancements have increased traffic and reduced
administrative and marketing costs as we implemented internet
initiatives and technology solutions to drive traffic from low
cost or no cost sources. As a result, customer acquisition costs
have been reduced significantly.
During 2007, UDR established a $650 million joint venture
with a large domestic institutional partner. The venture owns a
portfolio of 3,690 stabilized homes located in nine multi-family
communities in Austin, Dallas and Houston, Texas, and another
302 homes currently under development in Dallas, Texas. In
addition to this $350 million initial pool of assets, the
joint venture contains a $300 million expansion feature for
future acquisitions. At closing, the venture secured a
$232 million, seven year, interest only mortgage which is
recourse only to the properties and bears interest at a rate of
5.61% per annum. The venture secured a commitment for a loan in
the principal amount of $21.7 million to replace
construction financing on an apartment community under
development. The take-out loan provides for interest only, bears
interest at 5.55% per annum and will have a term of
6 years. UDR realized proceeds of $326.2 million for
the properties and we hold a 20% interest in the venture. In
addition to the upfront proceeds, UDR has the opportunity for
future proceeds after certain IRR hurdles are achieved.
As part of our plan to strengthen our capital structure, we
utilized proceeds from dispositions, debt and equity offerings
and refinancings to extend maturities, pay down existing debt,
and acquire apartment communities. The following is a summary of
our major financing activities in 2007:
Table of Contents
Upon completion of the portfolio sale announced in January 2008,
we expect that approximately 90% of our net operating income
will be generated from homes located in markets on the Pacific
Coast, the Virginia-Washington, D.C. corridor and Florida.
We believe that this diversification increases investment
opportunity and decreases the risk associated with cyclical
local real estate markets and economies, thereby increasing the
stability and predictability of our earnings.
In many of our markets, competition for new residents is
intense. Some competing communities offer features that our
communities do not have. Competing communities can use
concessions or lower rents to obtain temporary competitive
advantages. Also, some competing communities are larger or newer
than our communities. The competitive position of each community
is different depending upon many factors including sub-market
supply and demand. In addition, other real estate investors
compete with us to acquire existing properties and to develop
new properties. These competitors include insurance companies,
pension and investment funds, developer partnerships, investment
companies and other apartment REITs. This competition could
increase prices for properties of the type that we would likely
pursue, and our competitors may have greater resources, or lower
capital costs, than we do.
We believe that, in general, we are well-positioned to compete
effectively for residents and investments. We believe our
competitive advantages include:
Moving forward, we will continue to emphasize aggressive lease
management, improved expense control, increased resident
retention efforts and the realignment of employee incentive
plans tied to our bottom line performance. We believe this plan
of operation, coupled with the portfolios strengths in
targeting renters across a geographically diverse platform,
should position us for continued operational improvement.
At December 31, 2007, our apartment portfolio included 234
communities having a total of 65,867 completed apartment homes.
The overall quality of our portfolio has significantly improved
with the disposition of non-core apartment homes and our upgrade
and rehabilitation program. The upgrading of the portfolio
provides several key benefits related to portfolio
profitability. It enables us to raise rents more significantly
and to attract residents with higher levels of disposable income
who are more likely to accept the transfer of expenses, such as
water and sewer costs, from the landlord to the resident. In
addition, it potentially reduces recurring capital expenditures
per apartment home, and therefore should result in increased
cash flow.
Same community property net operating income increased 7.0% or
$17.7 million compared to 2006. The increase in property
net operating income was primarily attributable to a 5.0% or
$18.8 million increase in
Table of Contents
revenues from rental and other income and a 0.9% or
$1.1 million increase in operating expenses. The increase
in revenues from rental and other income was primarily driven by
a 4.2% or $16.2 million increase in rental rates, an 11.4%
or $3.0 million increase in reimbursement income and fee
income, and a 16.2% or $1.0 million decrease in rental
concessions. These increases were partially offset by a 6.8% or
$1.3 million increase in vacancy loss. Physical occupancy
decreased 0.2% to 94.6%.
The increase in property operating expenses was primarily driven
by a 5.2% or $1.8 million increase in real estate taxes
that was partially offset by a 7.6% or $0.8 million
decrease in administrative and marketing costs.
Our upgrade and rehabilitation programs enable us to raise rents
and attract residents with higher levels of disposable income
who are more likely to accept the transfer of expenses, such as
water and sewer costs, from the landlord to the resident. We
believe this segment provides the highest profit potential in
terms of rent growth, stability of occupancy and investment
opportunities.
We have elected to be taxed as a REIT under the Code. To
continue to qualify as a REIT, we must continue to meet certain
tests that, among other things, generally require that our
assets consist primarily of real estate assets, our income be
derived primarily from real estate assets, and that we
distribute at least 90% of our REIT taxable income (other than
net capital gains) to our stockholders annually. Provided we
maintain our qualification as a REIT, we generally will not be
subject to U.S. federal income taxes at the corporate level
on our net income to the extent such net income is distributed
to our stockholders annually. Even if we continue to qualify as
a REIT, we will continue to be subject to certain federal, state
and local taxes on our income and property.
We may utilize taxable REIT subsidiaries to engage in activities
that REITs may be prohibited from performing, including the
provision of management and other services to third parties and
the conduct of certain nonqualifying real estate transactions.
Taxable REIT subsidiaries generally are taxable as regular
corporations and therefore are subject to federal, state and
local income taxes.
Substantially all of our leases are for a term of one year or
less, which may enable us to realize increased rents upon
renewal of existing leases or the beginning of new leases. Such
short-term leases generally minimize the risk to us of the
adverse effects of inflation, although as a general rule these
leases permit residents to leave at the end of the lease term
without penalty. Short-term leases and relatively consistent
demand allow rents to provide an attractive hedge against
inflation.
Various environmental laws govern certain aspects of the ongoing
operation of our communities. Such environmental laws include
those regulating the existence of asbestos-containing materials
in buildings, management of surfaces with lead-based paint (and
notices to residents about the lead-based paint), use of active
underground petroleum storage tanks, and waste-management
activities. The failure to comply with such requirements could
subject us to a government enforcement action
and/or
claims for damages by a private party.
To date, compliance with federal, state and local environmental
protection regulations has not had a material effect on our
capital expenditures, earnings or competitive position. We have
a property management plan for hazardous materials. As part of
the plan, Phase I environmental site investigations and reports
have been completed for each property we acquire. In addition,
all proposed acquisitions are inspected prior to acquisition.
The inspections are conducted by qualified environmental
consultants, and we review the issued report prior to the
purchase or development of any property. Nevertheless, it is
possible that our environmental assessments will not reveal all
environmental liabilities, or that some material environmental
liabilities exist of
Table of Contents
which we are unaware. In some cases, we have abandoned otherwise
economically attractive acquisitions because the costs of
removal or control of hazardous materials have been prohibitive
or we have been unwilling to accept the potential risks
involved. We do not believe we will be required to engage in any
large-scale abatement at any of our properties. We believe that
through professional environmental inspections and testing for
asbestos, lead paint and other hazardous materials, coupled with
a relatively conservative posture toward accepting known
environmental risk, we can minimize our exposure to potential
liability associated with environmental hazards.
Federal legislation requires owners and landlords of residential
housing constructed prior to 1978 to disclose to potential
residents or purchasers of the communities any known lead paint
hazards and imposes treble damages for failure to provide such
notification. In addition, lead based paint in any of the
communities may result in lead poisoning in children residing in
that community if chips or particles of such lead based paint
are ingested, and we may be held liable under state laws for any
such injuries caused by ingestion of lead based paint by
children living at the communities.
We are unaware of any environmental hazards at any of our
properties that individually or in the aggregate may have a
material adverse impact on our operations or financial position.
We have not been notified by any governmental authority, and we
are not otherwise aware, of any material non-compliance,
liability, or claim relating to environmental liabilities in
connection with any of our properties. We do not believe that
the cost of continued compliance with applicable environmental
laws and regulations will have a material adverse effect on us
or our financial condition or results of operations. Future
environmental laws, regulations, or ordinances, however, may
require additional remediation of existing conditions that are
not currently actionable. Also, if more stringent requirements
are imposed on us in the future, the costs of compliance could
have a material adverse effect on us and our financial condition.
We carry comprehensive general liability coverage on our
communities, with limits of liability customary within the
industry to insure against liability claims and related defense
costs. We are also insured, in all material respects, against
the risk of direct physical damage in amounts necessary to
reimburse us on a replacement cost basis for costs incurred to
repair or rebuild each property, including loss of rental income
during the reconstruction period.
Executive
Officers of the Company
The following table sets forth information about our executive
officers as of February 15, 2008. The executive officers
listed below serve in their respective capacities at the
discretion of our board of directors.
Table of Contents
Set forth below is certain biographical information about our
executive officers.
Mr. Toomey spearheads the vision and strategic direction of
the company and oversees its executive officers. He joined us in
February 2001 as President, Chief Executive Officer and
Director. Prior to joining us, Mr. Toomey was with
Apartment Investment and Management Company (AIMCO) from January
1995 until February 2001, where he served as Chief Operating
Officer for two years and Chief Financial Officer for four
years. During his tenure at AIMCO, Mr. Toomey was
instrumental in the growth of AIMCO from 34,000 apartment homes
to 360,000 apartment homes. He has also served, from 1990 to
1995, as a Senior Vice President and Treasurer at Lincoln
Property Company, a national real estate development, property
management and real estate consulting company. Mr. Toomey
began his career at Arthur Andersen & Co. serving real
estate and banking clients as an Audit Manager. He currently
serves as a member of the boards of the National Association of
Real Estate Investment Trusts (NAREIT) and the National Multi
Housing Council (NMHC). Additionally, Mr. Toomey serves as
Chairman of the Real Estate Roundtable Task Force on Avian Flu
Pandemic Preparedness and is an Oregon State University
Foundation Trustee.
Mr. Wallis oversees the areas of acquisitions,
dispositions, asset quality and development. He joined us in
April 2001 as Senior Executive Vice President responsible for
acquisitions, dispositions, condominium conversions, legal and
certain administrative matters. Since that time, his focus has
shifted to acquisitions, dispositions, asset quality and
development. Prior to joining us, Mr. Wallis was the
President of Golden Living Communities, a company he established
in 1995 to develop senior housing. During his tenure at Golden
Living, Mr. Wallis was involved in the development of eight
communities containing over 1,200 assisted and independent
living apartments. From 1980 to 1995, Mr. Wallis was
Executive Vice President of Finance and Administration at
Lincoln Property Company where he handled interim and permanent
financing for office, retail, multi-family and mixed-use
developments. His responsibilities also included the negotiation
of acquisitions, dispositions, and management contracts, and he
oversaw the direction of the national accounting and computer
services divisions. Prior to joining Lincoln, Mr. Wallis
served as Vice President of Finance for Folsom Investments,
Inc., a large diversified real estate developer. Mr. Wallis
began his career as an auditor at Alford, Meroney and Company, a
Dallas CPA firm.
Mr. Ernst oversees the areas of corporate accounting,
financial planning and analysis, investor relations, treasury
operations and SEC reporting. He joined us in July 2006 as
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. Prior to
joining us, Mr. Ernst was with Prentiss Properties Trust
(Prentiss), where he most recently served as Executive Vice
President and Chief Financial Officer. He joined Prentiss in
1997 in the role of Vice President and Treasurer, and was
promoted to Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer in
1999, and then to Executive Vice President and Chief Financial
Officer in 2001. During his tenure at Prentiss, Mr. Ernst
was involved in the development of corporate strategy, was
active in corporate mergers and acquisitions activity and
structured in excess of $3.5 billion in capital
transactions. He was a member of Prentisss investment
committee and was responsible for corporate and property
accounting, capital markets, investor relations and financial
planning and analysis. Prior to that, Mr. Ernst worked for
Nations Bank, now Bank of America, where he was a Senior Vice
President in their real estate finance group.
Mr. Giannotti oversees redevelopment projects and
acquisition efforts and development projects in the mid-Atlantic
region. He joined us in September 1985 as Director of
Development and Construction. He was elected Assistant Vice
President in 1988, Vice President in 1989, and Senior Vice
President in 1996. In 1998, he was assigned the additional
responsibilities of Director of Development for the Eastern
Region. In 2003, Mr. Giannotti was promoted to Executive
Vice President Asset Quality to manage the
companys Asset Quality program and to be responsible for
the direction of recurring capital expenditures for asset
preservation, initial capital expenditures relating to
acquisitions and redevelopment projects. In 2006,
Mr. Giannottis responsibilities shifted to focus on
acquisition efforts and development projects in the mid-Atlantic
region as well as redevelopment projects.
10
Table of Contents
Mr. Akin oversees the companys acquisition and
disposition efforts. He joined us in 1996 in connection with the
merger with SouthWest Property Trust, where he had been a
Financial Analyst since 1994. He was promoted to Due Diligence
Analyst in April 1998 and to Asset Manager for the Western
Region in 1999. Mr. Akin was promoted to Vice President,
Senior Business Analyst in September 2000 and his focus shifted
to acquisitions for the Western Region. In May 2004, he was
promoted to Vice President Acquisitions, and in
August 2006, he was promoted to Senior Vice
President Acquisitions and Dispositions. Prior to
joining SouthWest Property Trust, Mr. Akin was with Lexford
Properties from 1989 to 1994, where he began as Staff Accountant
and was promoted to Assistant Controller.
Mr. Culwell oversees all aspects of in-house development,
joint venture development and pre-sale opportunities. He joined
us in June 2006 as Senior Vice President
Development. Prior to joining us, Mr. Culwell served as
Regional Vice President of Development for Gables Residential,
where he established a $300 million pipeline of new
development and redevelopment opportunities. Before joining
Gables Residential, Mr. Culwell had over 30 years of
real estate experience, including working for Elsinore Group,
LLC, Lexford Residential Trust, Cornerstone Housing Corporation
and Trammell Crow Residential Company, where his development and
construction responsibilities included site selection and
acquisition, construction oversight, asset management, as well
as obtaining financing for acquisitions and rehabilitations.
Mr. Culwell began his career, in Houston, as a broker with
Vallone and Associates Real Estate Brokerage.
Mr. Davis oversees property operations. He originally
joined us in March 1989 as Controller and subsequently moved
into Operations as an Area Director. In 2001, Mr. Davis
accepted the position of Chief Operating Officer of JH
Management Co., a California-based apartment company. He
returned to UDR in March 2002 and was promoted to Vice
President, Area Director in September 2004, where he oversaw
operations in California, Washington, Oregon and Arizona. In
November 2007, he was promoted to Senior Vice
President Property Operations, responsible for
company-wide property operations. Prior to joining us in 1989,
Mr. Davis was with Crestar Bank as a Financial Analyst from
1986 to 1989. He began his career in 1984 as a Staff Accountant
for Arthur Young & Co.
Mr. Messenger oversees all aspects of the companys
accounting functions. He joined us in August 2002 as Vice
President and Controller. In that role, Mr. Messenger was
responsible for SEC reporting, Sarbanes-Oxley compliance and
supervision of all accounting functions. In March 2006,
Mr. Messenger was appointed Vice President and Chief
Accounting Officer and in January 2007, while retaining the
Chief Accounting Officer title, he was promoted to Senior Vice
President. Prior to joining us, Mr. Messenger was owner and
President of TRC Management Company, a restaurant management
company in Chicago. He has worked as a Controller at HMS
Resource, Inc. Mr. Messenger began his career with
Ernst & Young LLP, as a manager in their Chicago real
estate division.
Ms. Miles-Ley oversees employee relations, organizational
development, succession planning, staffing and recruitment,
compensation, training and development, benefits administration,
HRIS and payroll. She joined us in June 2007 as Senior Vice
President Human Resources. Prior to joining us,
Ms. Miles-Ley was with Starz Entertainment Group LLC (SEG)
from 2001 to 2007 where she served as Vice President, Human
Resources & Organizational Development. In this role,
Ms. Miles-Ley was primarily responsible for the strategic
planning and implementation of human resource functions in
alignment with SEGs business plan. Prior to her time at
SEG, Ms. Miles-Ley had over twenty years of experience with
both domestic and international work forces, including her
tenure from 1994 to 1997 as Corporate Director of Employee
Relations and Development with Tele-Communications,
Incorporated. From 1993 to 1994, she held the position of HR
Generalist with Sprint International, where she was responsible
for the execution of HR policies across numerous worldwide
business units. Ms. Miles-Ley was with Close Up Foundation
in Alexandria, VA, as an HR Generalist from 1992 to 1993. She
began her career at the American Red Cross as an Employee
Relations Case Manager in Wildflecken, West Germany.
Ms. Riffe oversees all accounting and tax planning in our
RE3
subsidiary, manages enterprise-wide forecasting, oversees
Corporate Tax, Risk Management, Legal Administration, and is the
companys Corporate Compliance Officer. She joined us in
February 2007 as Senior Vice President, Chief Financial
Officer
RE3,
the companys subsidiary that focuses on development,
redevelopment, land entitlement and short term hold
Table of Contents
investments. In June 2007, she assumed the added
responsibilities of Corporate Compliance Officer and oversight
of the Corporate Tax, Risk Management and Legal Administration
departments. Prior to joining us, Ms. Riffe was with Sunset
Financial Resources, Inc. (SFO), where she most recently served
as Interim Chief Executive Officer. She joined SFO in 2005, as
Chief Financial Officer and Secretary, and was appointed in 2006
to serve as Interim Chief Executive Officer through the
completion of SFOs merger with Alesco Financial. From 2002
to 2005, Ms. Riffe held the position of Chief Financial
Officer and Secretary for U.S. Restaurant Properties Inc.
(USRP), where she was responsible for capital markets, corporate
governance, SEC reporting, tax compliance and was the USRP point
person for the merger between USRP and CNL Restaurant
Properties, Inc., now Trustreet Properties, Inc. From 1999 to
2002, she held the position of Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer with The Mail Box, a privately held print and
mail company in Dallas. She was with Pinnacle Restaurant Group
LLC from 1998 to 1999 in the role of Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer. Prior to that, Ms. Riffe was employed by
Casa Olé Restaurants, Inc. from 1996 to 1997 as Senior Vice
President, Chief Financial Officer, Secretary and Treasurer.
From 1991 to 1996, Ms. Riffe was employed by Spaghetti
Warehouse, Inc., where she began as Assistant Controller, was
promoted to Director of Budgeting and Financial Planning in July
1992, and to Controller and Treasurer in May 1993.
Ms. Riffe began her career in the audit department of KPMG
Peat Marwicks Dallas office.
Mr. Sircar oversees all aspects of the companys
Technology Management. He joined us in July 2007 as Senior Vice
President, Chief Information Officer. Prior to joining the
company, Mr. Sircar was with Wachovia Corporation from 1995
to 2007, where he began as a Systems Manager. In 1997 he was
promoted to Strategic Technology Partner and to Vice President,
Division Information Officer in 1999. Mr. Sircar was
promoted to Senior Vice President, Division Information
Officer of Finance Technology in 2003, where he oversaw the
technology aspects of numerous business transformations and
optimization initiatives. Prior to Mr. Sircars tenure
with Wachovia, he was with Royal Insurance Company as
Applications Manager from 1985 to 1995. He began his career as
Project Leader, Professional Services, for Burroughs Corporation.
Mr. Spangler oversees internal audit, utilities management,
procurement and non-rental revenue programs. He joined us in
August 1998 as Assistant Vice President, Operational Planning
and Asset Management, and was promoted to Vice President,
Director of Operational Planning and Asset Management that same
year. He was promoted to Senior Vice President
Business Development in February 2003, and served in the
additional role of Chief Risk Officer from 2003 to December
2006. Prior to joining us, Mr. Spangler served for nine
years as an Asset Manager for Summit Enterprises, Inc. of
Virginia, a private investment management firm, where he oversaw
a portfolio consisting of agricultural, commercial, mixed-use
commercial, industrial and residential properties.
Mr. Walker oversees the companys Asset Quality,
Kitchen & Bath and Green Building programs
in addition to all non-residential owned and leased real estate.
He joined us in May 2006 as Senior Vice President
Transactions. Mr. Walker is responsible for the direction
of recurring capital expenditures for asset preservation,
initial capital expenditures relating to acquisitions, insurance
claims, the kitchen & bath program, all of UDR owned
and leased real estate, and the companys Green
Building program. He has authored Green
Building articles for industry publications and has been
recognized by the EPA and the Department of Energy for his
contributions to the commercial real estate industry. Prior to
joining us, Mr. Walker served as a consultant to the
multi-family industry. He served as President of Harwood
Pacific, a Dallas-based developer of mixed-use high-rise office
projects. He was also President of Harwood Management, a
division of Harwood International, from 1994 to 2002, where he
was responsible for operations of an $800 million portfolio
of properties in Europe and the U.S.
Ms. Norwood oversees the companys legal department,
coordinates outside legal services and is the companys
Corporate Secretary. She joined us in August 2001 as Vice
President Legal Administration and Corporate
Secretary. Prior to joining us, Ms. Norwood was employed by
Centex Corporation in various legal capacities for
15 years, the most recent of which was as its Legal
Administrator. Centex is a New York Stock Exchange listed
company that operates in the home building, financial services,
construction products, construction services and investment real
estate business segments.
Table of Contents
Mr. Simon oversees capital markets and treasury management.
He joined us in October 2006 as Vice President and Treasurer.
Prior to joining us, Mr. Simon was with Prentiss Properties
Trust (Prentiss) where he most recently served as Senior Vice
President and Treasurer. Mr. Simons tenure at
Prentiss began in 1985 when he joined Cadillac Fairview US, a
publicly-held precursor to Prentiss, in the role of tax analyst.
In 1987 he was promoted to Corporate Controller, to Vice
President Accounting in 1992, and to Senior Vice President and
Chief Accounting Officer in 1999. In May 2004, Mr. Simon
took over the role of Senior Vice President and Treasurer.
During his tenure at Prentiss, Mr. Simon was responsible
for the design and implementation of new accounting systems;
served as project leader for the implementation of Sarbanes
Oxley; and the negotiation of construction financing, property
level financing, corporate financings and interest rate hedge
transactions. He was integrally involved in the merger of
Prentiss with Brandywine Realty Trust, including the transfer,
pay-off, or defeasance of the Prentiss debt portfolio.
Mr. Simon began his career at Fox & Company, now
Grant Thornton, as a tax accountant.
We file electronically with the Securities and Exchange
Commission our annual reports on
Form 10-K,
quarterly reports on
Form 10-Q,
and current reports on
Form 8-K,
pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934. You may obtain a free copy of our annual
reports on
Form 10-K,
quarterly reports on
Form 10-Q,
and current reports on
Form 8-K,
and amendments to those reports on the day of filing with the
SEC on our website at www.udr.com, or by sending an
e-mail
message to ir@udr.com.
On May 31, 2007, our Chief Executive Officer submitted to
the New York Stock Exchange the annual certification required by
Section 303A.12(a) of the NYSE Listed Company Manual
regarding our compliance with NYSE corporate governance listing
standards. In addition, the certifications of our Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer required under
Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 are filed as
Exhibits 31.1 and 31.2, respectively, to this Report.
There are many factors that affect our business and our results
of operations, some of which are beyond our control. The
following is a description of important factors that may cause
our actual results of operations in future periods to differ
materially from those currently expected or discussed in
forward-looking statements set forth in this Report relating to
our financial results, operations and business prospects. Except
as required by law, we undertake no obligation to update any
such forward-looking statements to reflect events or
circumstances after the date on which it is made.
Unfavorable Changes in Apartment Market and Economic
Conditions Could Adversely Affect Occupancy Levels and Rental
Rates. Market and economic conditions in the
metropolitan areas in which we operate may significantly affect
our occupancy levels and rental rates and, therefore, our
profitability. Factors that may adversely affect these
conditions include the following:
Table of Contents
The strength of the United States economy has become
increasingly susceptible to global events and threats of
terrorism. At the same time, productivity enhancements and the
increased exportation of labor have resulted in limited job
growth despite an improving economy. Continued weakness in job
creation, or any worsening of current economic conditions,
generally and in our principal market areas, could have a
material adverse effect on our occupancy levels, our rental
rates and our ability to strategically acquire and dispose of
apartment communities. This may impair our ability to satisfy
our financial obligations and pay distributions to our
stockholders.
New Acquisitions, Developments and Condominium Projects May
Not Achieve Anticipated Results. We intend to
continue to selectively acquire apartment communities that meet
our investment criteria and to develop apartment communities for
rental operations, to convert properties into condominiums and
to develop condominium projects. Our acquisition, development
and condominium activities and their success are subject to the
following risks:
Possible Difficulty of Selling Apartment Communities Could
Limit Operational and Financial Flexibility. We
periodically dispose of apartment communities that no longer
meet our strategic objectives, but market conditions could
change and purchasers may not be willing to pay prices
acceptable to us. A weak market may limit our ability to change
our portfolio promptly in response to changing economic
conditions. Furthermore, a significant portion of the proceeds
from our overall property sales may be held by intermediaries in
order for some sales to qualify as like-kind exchanges under
Section 1031 of the Internal Revenue Code, so that any
related capital gain can be deferred for federal income tax
purposes. As a result, we may not have immediate access to all
of the cash flow generated from our property sales. In addition,
federal tax laws limit our ability to profit on the sale of
communities that we have owned for fewer than four years, and
this limitation may prevent us from selling communities when
market conditions are favorable.
Increased Competition Could Limit Our Ability to Lease
Apartment Homes or Increase or Maintain
Rents. Our apartment communities compete with
numerous housing alternatives in attracting residents, including
other apartment communities and single-family rental homes, as
well as owner occupied single- and multi-family homes.
Competitive housing in a particular area could adversely affect
our ability to lease apartment homes and increase or maintain
rents.
Insufficient Cash Flow Could Affect Our Debt Financing and
Create Refinancing Risk. We are subject to the
risks normally associated with debt financing, including the
risk that our operating income and cash flow will be
insufficient to make required payments of principal and
interest, or could restrict our borrowing capacity under our
line of credit due to debt covenant restraints. Sufficient cash
flow may not be available to make all required principal
payments and still satisfy our distribution requirements to
maintain our status as a REIT for federal income tax purposes,
and the full limits of our line of credit may not be available
to us if our operating performance falls outside the constraints
of our debt covenants. Additionally, we are likely to need to
refinance substantially all of our outstanding debt as it
matures. We may not be able to refinance existing debt, or the
terms of any refinancing may not be as favorable as the terms of
the existing debt, which could create pressures to sell assets
or to issue additional equity when we would otherwise not choose
to do so. In
Table of Contents
addition, our failure to comply with our debt covenants could
result in a requirement to repay our indebtedness prior to its
maturity, which could have an adverse effect on our cash flow
and increase our financing costs.
Failure to Generate Sufficient Revenue Could Impair Debt
Service Payments and Distributions to
Stockholders. If our apartment communities do not
generate sufficient net rental income to meet rental expenses,
our ability to make required payments of interest and principal
on our debt securities and to pay distributions to our
stockholders will be adversely affected. The following factors,
among others, may affect the net rental income generated by our
apartment communities:
Expenses associated with our investment in a community, such as
debt service, real estate taxes, insurance and maintenance
costs, are generally not reduced when circumstances cause a
reduction in rental income from that community. If a community
is mortgaged to secure payment of debt and we are unable to make
the mortgage payments, we could sustain a loss as a result of
foreclosure on the community or the exercise of other remedies
by the mortgage holder.
Debt Level May Be Increased. Our current
debt policy does not contain any limitations on the level of
debt that we may incur, although our ability to incur debt is
limited by covenants in our bank and other credit agreements. We
manage our debt to be in compliance with these debt covenants,
but subject to compliance with these covenants, we may increase
the amount of our debt at any time without a concurrent
improvement in our ability to service the additional debt.
Financing May Not Be Available and Could Be
Dilutive. Our ability to execute our business
strategy depends on our access to an appropriate blend of debt
financing, including unsecured lines of credit and other forms
of secured and unsecured debt, and equity financing, including
common and preferred equity. We and other companies in the real
estate industry have experienced limited availability of
financing from time to time. Debt or equity financing may not be
available in sufficient amounts, or on favorable terms or at
all. If we issue additional equity securities to finance
developments and acquisitions instead of incurring debt, the
interests of our existing stockholders could be diluted.
Development and Construction Risks Could Impact Our
Profitability. We intend to continue to develop
and construct apartment communities. Development activities may
be conducted through wholly owned affiliated companies or
through joint ventures with unaffiliated parties. Our
development and construction activities may be exposed to the
following risks:
Table of Contents
Construction costs have been increasing in our existing markets,
and the costs of upgrading acquired communities have, in some
cases, exceeded our original estimates. We may experience
similar cost increases in the future. Our inability to charge
rents that will be sufficient to offset the effects of any
increases in these costs may impair our profitability.
Some Potential Losses Are Not Covered by
Insurance. We have a comprehensive insurance
program covering our property and operating activities. We
believe the policy specifications and insured limits of these
policies are adequate and appropriate. There are, however,
certain types of extraordinary losses for which we may not have
insurance. Accordingly, we may sustain uninsured losses due to
insurance deductibles, self-insured retention, uninsured claims
or casualties, or losses in excess of applicable coverage.
We may not be able to renew insurance coverage in an adequate
amount or at reasonable prices. In addition, insurance companies
may no longer offer coverage against certain types of losses,
such as losses due to terrorist acts and mold, or, if offered,
these types of insurance may be prohibitively expensive. If an
uninsured loss or a loss in excess of insured limits occur, we
could lose all or a portion of the capital we have invested in a
property, as well as the anticipated future revenue from the
property. In such an event, we might nevertheless remain
obligated for any mortgage debt or other financial obligations
related to the property. Material losses in excess of insurance
proceeds may occur in the future. If one or more of our
significant properties were to experience a catastrophic loss,
it could seriously disrupt our operations, delay revenue and
result in large expenses to repair or rebuild the property. Such
events could adversely affect our cash flow and ability to make
distributions to stockholders.
Failure to Succeed in New Markets May Limit Our
Growth. We may from time to time make
acquisitions outside of our existing market areas if appropriate
opportunities arise. We may be exposed to a variety of risks if
we choose to enter new markets, and we may not be able to
operate successfully in new markets. These risks include, among
others:
Changing Interest Rates Could Increase Interest Costs and
Adversely Affect Our Cash Flow and the Market Price of Our
Securities. We currently have, and expect to
incur in the future, interest-bearing debt at rates that vary
with market interest rates. As of December 31, 2007, we had
approximately $522.1 million of variable rate indebtedness
outstanding, which constitutes approximately 15% of our total
outstanding indebtedness as of such date. An increase in
interest rates would increase our interest expenses and increase
the costs of refinancing existing indebtedness and of issuing
new debt. Accordingly, higher interest rates could adversely
affect cash flow and our ability to service our debt and to make
distributions to security holders. In addition, an increase in
market interest rates may lead our security holders to demand a
higher annual yield, which could adversely affect the market
price of our common and preferred stock and debt securities.
Risk of Inflation/Deflation. Substantial
inflationary or deflationary pressures could have a negative
effect on rental rates and property operating expenses.
Limited Investment Opportunities Could Adversely Affect Our
Growth. We expect that other real estate
investors will compete with us to acquire existing properties
and to develop new properties. These competitors include
insurance companies, pension and investment funds, developer
partnerships, investment companies and other apartment REITs.
This competition could increase prices for properties of the
type that we would likely
Table of Contents
pursue, and our competitors may have greater resources than we
do. As a result, we may not be able to make attractive
investments on favorable terms, which could adversely affect our
growth.
Failure to Integrate Acquired Communities and New Personnel
Could Create Inefficiencies. To grow
successfully, we must be able to apply our experience in
managing our existing portfolio of apartment communities to a
larger number of properties. In addition, we must be able to
integrate new management and operations personnel as our
organization grows in size and complexity. Failures in either
area will result in inefficiencies that could adversely affect
our expected return on our investments and our overall
profitability.
Interest Rate Hedging Contracts May Be Ineffective and May
Result in Material Charges. From time to time
when we anticipate issuing debt securities, we may seek to limit
our exposure to fluctuations in interest rates during the period
prior to the pricing of the securities by entering into interest
rate hedging contracts. We may do this to increase the
predictability of our financing costs. Also, from time to time
we may rely on interest rate hedging contracts to limit our
exposure under variable rate debt to unfavorable changes in
market interest rates. If the terms of new debt securities are
not within the parameters of, or market interest rates fall
below that which we incur under a particular interest rate
hedging contract, the contract is ineffective. Furthermore, the
settlement of interest rate hedging contracts has involved and
may in the future involve material charges.
Potential Liability for Environmental Contamination Could
Result in Substantial Costs. Under various
federal, state and local environmental laws, as a current or
former owner or operator of real estate, we could be required to
investigate and remediate the effects of contamination of
currently or formerly owned real estate by hazardous or toxic
substances, often regardless of our knowledge of or
responsibility for the contamination and solely by virtue of our
current or former ownership or operation of the real estate. In
addition, we could be held liable to a governmental authority or
to third parties for property damage and for investigation and
clean-up
costs incurred in connection with the contamination. These costs
could be substantial, and in many cases environmental laws
create liens in favor of governmental authorities to secure
their payment. The presence of such substances or a failure to
properly remediate any resulting contamination could materially
and adversely affect our ability to borrow against, sell or rent
an affected property.
We Would Incur Adverse Tax Consequences if We Fail to Qualify
as a REIT. We have elected to be taxed as a REIT
under the Internal Revenue Code. Our qualification as a REIT
requires us to satisfy numerous requirements, some on an annual
and quarterly basis, established under highly technical and
complex Internal Revenue Code provisions for which there are
only limited judicial or administrative interpretations, and
involves the determination of various factual matters and
circumstances not entirely within our control. We intend that
our current organization and method of operation enable us to
continue to qualify as a REIT, but we may not so qualify or we
may not be able to remain so qualified in the future. In
addition, U.S. federal income tax laws governing REITs and
other corporations and the administrative interpretations of
those laws may be amended at any time, potentially with
retroactive effect. Future legislation, new regulations,
administrative interpretations or court decisions could
adversely affect our ability to qualify as a REIT or adversely
affect our stockholders.
If we fail to qualify as a REIT in any taxable year, we would be
subject to federal income tax (including any applicable
alternative minimum tax) on our taxable income at regular
corporate rates, and would not be allowed to deduct dividends
paid to our stockholders in computing our taxable income. Also,
unless the Internal Revenue Service granted us relief under
certain statutory provisions, we would be disqualified from
treatment as a REIT for the four taxable years following the
year in which we first failed to qualify. The additional tax
liability from the failure to qualify as a REIT would reduce or
eliminate the amount of cash available for investment or
distribution to our stockholders. This would likely have a
significant adverse effect on the value of our securities and
our ability to raise additional capital. In addition, we would
no longer be required to make distributions to our stockholders.
Even if we continue to qualify as a REIT, we will continue to be
subject to certain federal, state and local taxes on our income
and property.
We May Conduct a Portion of Our Business Through Taxable REIT
Subsidiaries, Which are Subject to Certain Tax
Risks. We have established several taxable REIT
subsidiaries. Despite our qualification as a REIT, our taxable
REIT subsidiaries must pay income tax on their taxable income.
In addition, we must
Table of Contents
comply with various tests to continue to qualify as a REIT for
federal income tax purposes, and our income from and investments
in our taxable REIT subsidiaries generally do not constitute
permissible income and investments for these tests. While we
will attempt to ensure that our dealings with our taxable REIT
subsidiaries will not adversely affect our REIT qualification,
we cannot provide assurance that we will successfully achieve
that result. Furthermore, we may be subject to a 100% penalty
tax, we may jeopardize our ability to retain future gains on
real property sales, or our taxable REIT subsidiaries may be
denied deductions, to the extent our dealings with our taxable
REIT subsidiaries are not deemed to be arms length in
nature or are otherwise not respected.
Certain Property Transfers May Generate Prohibited
Transaction Income, Resulting in a Penalty Tax on Gain
Attributable to the Transaction. From time to
time, we may transfer or otherwise dispose of some of our
properties. Under the Internal Revenue Code, any gain resulting
from transfers of properties that we hold as inventory or
primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of
business would be treated as income from a prohibited
transaction subject to a 100% penalty tax. Since we acquire
properties for investment purposes, we do not believe that our
occasional transfers or disposals of property are prohibited
transactions. However, whether property is held for investment
purposes is a question of fact that depends on all the facts and
circumstances surrounding the particular transaction. The
Internal Revenue Service may contend that certain transfers or
disposals of properties by us are prohibited transactions. If
the Internal Revenue Service were to argue successfully that a
transfer or disposition of property constituted a prohibited
transaction, then we would be required to pay a 100% penalty tax
on any gain allocable to us from the prohibited transaction and
we may jeopardize our ability to retain future gains on real
property sales. In addition, income from a prohibited
transaction might adversely affect our ability to satisfy the
income tests for qualification as a REIT for federal income tax
purposes.
Changes in Market Conditions and Volatility of Stock Prices
Could Adversely Affect the Market Price of Our Common
Stock. The stock markets, including the New York
Stock Exchange, on which we list our common shares, have
experienced significant price and volume fluctuations. As a
result, the market price of our common stock could be similarly
volatile, and investors in our common stock may experience a
decrease in the value of their shares, including decreases
unrelated to our operating performance or prospects.
Property Ownership Through Joint Ventures May Limit Our
Ability to Act Exclusively in Our Interest. We
have in the past and may in the future develop and acquire
properties in joint ventures with other persons or entities when
we believe circumstances warrant the use of such structures. If
we use such a structure, we could become engaged in a dispute
with one or more of our joint venture partners that might affect
our ability to operate a jointly-owned property. Moreover, joint
venture partners may have business, economic or other objectives
that are inconsistent with our objectives, including objectives
that relate to the appropriate timing and terms of any sale or
refinancing of a property. In some instances, joint venture
partners may have competing interests in our markets that could
create conflicts of interest.
Compliance or Failure to Comply with the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990 or Other Safety Regulations and
Requirements Could Result in Substantial Costs. The
Americans with Disabilities Act generally requires that public
buildings, including our properties, be made accessible to
disabled persons. Noncompliance could result in the imposition
of fines by the federal government or the award of damages to
private litigants. From time to time claims may be asserted
against us with respect to some of our properties under this
Act. If, under the Americans with Disabilities Act, we are
required to make substantial alterations and capital
expenditures in one or more of our properties, including the
removal of access barriers, it could adversely affect our
financial condition and results of operations.
Our properties are subject to various federal, state and local
regulatory requirements, such as state and local fire and life
safety requirements. If we fail to comply with these
requirements, we could incur fines or private damage awards. We
do not know whether existing requirements will change or whether
compliance with future requirements will require significant
unanticipated expenditures that will affect our cash flow and
results of operations.
Table of Contents
Real Estate Tax and Other Laws. Generally we
do not directly pass through costs resulting from compliance
with or changes in real estate tax laws to residential property
tenants. We also do not generally pass through increases in
income, service or other taxes, to tenants under leases. These
costs may adversely affect funds from operations and the ability
to make distributions to stockholders. Similarly, compliance
with or changes in (i) laws increasing the potential
liability for environmental conditions existing on properties or
the restrictions on discharges or other conditions or
(ii) rent control or rent stabilization laws or other laws
regulating housing, such as the Americans with Disabilities Act
and the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, may result in
significant unanticipated expenditures, which would adversely
affect funds from operations and the ability to make
distributions to stockholders.
Risk of Damage from Catastrophic Weather
Events. Certain of our communities are located in
the general vicinity of active earthquake faults, mudslides and
fires, and others where there are hurricanes, tornadoes or risks
of other inclement weather. The adverse weather events could
cause damage or losses greater than insured levels. In the event
of a loss in excess of insured limits, we could lose our capital
invested in the affected community, as well as anticipated
future revenue from that community. We would also continue to be
obligated to repay any mortgage indebtedness or other
obligations related to the community. Any such loss could
materially and adversely affect our business and our financial
condition and results of operations.
Insurance coverage for such catastrophic events is expensive due
to limited industry capacity. As a result, we may experience
shortages in desired coverage levels if market conditions are
such that insurance is not available.
Terrorist Attacks May Have an Adverse Effect on Our Business
and Operating Results and Could Decrease the Value of Our
Assets. Terrorist attacks and other acts of
violence or war could have a material adverse effect on our
business and operating results. Attacks that directly impact one
or more of our apartment communities could significantly affect
our ability to operate those communities and thereby impair our
ability to achieve our expected results. Further, our insurance
coverage may not cover all losses caused by a terrorist attack.
In addition, the adverse effects that such violent acts and
threats of future attacks could have on the U.S. economy
could similarly have a material adverse effect on our business
and results of operations.
Any Weaknesses Identified in Our Internal Control Over
Financial Reporting Could Have an Adverse Effect on Our Stock
Price. Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 requires us to evaluate and report on our internal
report over financial reporting. If we identify one or more
material weaknesses in our internal control over financial
reporting, we could lose investor confidence in the accuracy and
completeness of our financial reports, which in turn could have
an adverse effect on our stock price.
Maryland Law May Limit the Ability of a Third Party to
Acquire Control of Us, Which May Not be in Our
Stockholders Best Interests. Maryland
business statutes may limit the ability of a third party to
acquire control of us. As a Maryland corporation, we are subject
to various Maryland laws which may have the effect of
discouraging offers to acquire our company and of increasing the
difficulty of consummating any such offers, even if our
acquisition would be in our stockholders best interests.
The Maryland General Corporation Law restricts mergers and other
business combination transactions between us and any person who
acquires beneficial ownership of shares of our stock
representing 10% or more of the voting power without our board
of directors prior approval. Any such business combination
transaction could not be completed until five years after the
person acquired such voting power, and generally only with the
approval of stockholders representing 80% of all votes entitled
to be cast and
662/3%
of the votes entitled to be cast, excluding the interested
stockholder, or upon payment of a fair price. Maryland law also
provides generally that a person who acquires shares of our
equity stock that represents 10% (and certain higher levels) of
the voting power in electing directors will have no voting
rights unless approved by a vote of two-thirds of the shares
eligible to vote.
Limitations on Share Ownership and Limitations on the Ability
of Our Stockholders to Effect a Change in Control of Our Company
May Prevent Takeovers That are Beneficial to Our Stockholders.
One of the requirements for maintenance of our qualification
as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes is that no
more than 50% in value of our outstanding capital stock may be
owned by five or fewer individuals, including entities specified
in the Internal Revenue Code, during the last half of any
taxable year. Our charter contains ownership and transfer
restrictions relating to our stock primarily to assist us in
complying with this and other
Table of Contents
REIT ownership requirements; however, the restrictions may have
the effect of preventing a change of control, which does not
threaten REIT status. These restrictions include a provision
that generally limits ownership by any person of more than 9.9%
of the value of our outstanding equity stock, unless our board
of directors exempts the person from such ownership limitation,
provided that any such exemption shall not allow the person to
exceed 13% of the value of our outstanding equity stock. These
provisions may have the effect of delaying, deferring or
preventing someone from taking control of us, even though a
change of control might involve a premium price for our
stockholders or might otherwise be in our stockholders
best interests.
None.
At December 31, 2007, our apartment portfolio included 234
communities located in 30 markets, with a total of 65,867
completed apartment homes. We own approximately
50,300 square feet of office space in Richmond, Virginia,
and we lease approximately 15,500 square feet of office
space in Highlands Ranch, Colorado, for our corporate
headquarters. The table below sets forth a summary of our real
estate portfolio by geographic market at December 31, 2007.
SUMMARY
OF REAL ESTATE PORTFOLIO BY GEOGRAPHIC MARKET AT DECEMBER 31,
2007
Table of Contents
We are subject to various legal proceedings and claims arising
in the ordinary course of business. We cannot determine the
ultimate liability with respect to such legal proceedings and
claims at this time. We believe that such liability, to the
extent not provided for through insurance or otherwise, will not
have a material adverse effect on our financial condition,
results of operations or cash flow.
No matters were submitted to a vote of our security holders
during the fourth quarter of the year ended December 31,
2007.
21
Table of Contents
Our common stock is traded on the New York Stock Exchange under
the symbol UDR. The following tables set forth the
quarterly high and low sale prices per common share reported on
the NYSE for each quarter of the last two fiscal years.
Distribution information for common stock reflects distributions
declared per share for each calendar quarter and paid at the end
of the following month.
On February 15, 2008, the closing sale price of our common
stock was $22.51 per share on the NYSE and there were 5,521
holders of record of the 133,347,522 outstanding shares of our
common stock.
We have determined that, for federal income tax purposes,
approximately 16% of the distributions for each of the four
quarters of 2007 represented ordinary income, 64% represented
long-term capital gain, and 20% represented unrecaptured
section 1250 gain.
We pay regular quarterly distributions to holders of shares of
our common stock. Future distributions will be at the discretion
of our board of directors and will depend on our actual funds
from operations, financial condition and capital requirements,
the annual distribution requirements under the REIT provisions
of the Internal Revenue Code, and other factors. The annual
distribution payment for calendar year 2007 necessary for us to
maintain our status as a REIT was approximately $0.18 per share
of common stock. We declared total distributions of $1.32 per
share of common stock for 2007.
The Series E Cumulative Convertible Preferred Stock has no
stated par value and a liquidation preference of $16.61 per
share. Subject to certain adjustments and conditions, each share
of the Series E is convertible at any time and from time to
time at the holders option into one share of our common
stock. The holders of the Series E are entitled to vote on
an as-converted basis as a single class in combination with the
holders of common stock at any meeting of our stockholders for
the election of directors or for any other purpose on which the
holders of common stock are entitled to vote. The Series E
has no stated maturity and is not subject to any sinking fund or
any mandatory redemption.
Distributions declared on the Series E in 2007 were $1.33
per share or $0.3322 per quarter. The Series E is not
listed on any exchange. At December 31, 2007, a total of
2,803,812 shares of the Series E were outstanding.
Table of Contents
We are authorized to issue up to 20,000,000 shares of our
Series F Preferred Stock. Our Series F Preferred Stock
may be purchased by holders of our operating partnership units,
or OP Units, described below under Operating
Partnership Units, at a purchase price of $0.0001 per
share. OP Unitholders are entitled to subscribe for and
purchase one share of our Series F Preferred Stock for each
OP Unit held. At December 31, 2007, a total of
666,293 shares of the Series F Preferred Stock were
outstanding at a value of $66.63. Holders of the Series F
Preferred Stock are entitled to one vote for each share of the
Series F Preferred Stock they hold, voting together with
the holders of our common stock, on each matter submitted to a
vote of securityholders at a meeting of our stockholders. The
Series F Preferred Stock does not entitle its holders to
any other rights, privileges or preferences.
We have a Dividend Reinvestment and Stock Purchase Plan under
which holders of our common stock may elect to automatically
reinvest their distributions and make additional cash payments
to acquire additional shares of our common stock. Stockholders
who do not participate in the plan continue to receive dividends
as declared. As of February 15, 2008, there were 3,183
participants in the plan.
From time to time we issue shares of our common stock in
exchange for OP Units tendered to our operating
partnerships, United Dominion Realty, L.P. and Heritage
Communities L.P., for redemption in accordance with the
provisions of their respective partnership agreements. At
December 31, 2007, there were 8,653,560 OP Units and
316,452 OP Units in United Dominion Realty, L.P. and
Heritage Communities L.P., respectively, that were owned by
limited partners. The holder of the OP Units has the right
to require United Dominion Realty, L.P. to redeem all or a
portion of the OP Units held by the holder in exchange for
a cash payment based on the market value of our common stock at
the time of redemption. However, United Dominion Realty,
L.P.s obligation to pay the cash amount is subject to the
prior right of the company to acquire such OP Units in
exchange for either the cash amount or shares of our common
stock. Heritage Communities L.P. OP Units are convertible
into common stock in lieu of cash, at our option, once the
holder elects to convert, at an exchange ratio of
1.575 shares for each OP Unit. In December 2007, the
Series A limited liability company was dissolved, the
Series A OPPS were distributed to the members of the
Series A limited liability company and, as a result, the
members of Series A limited liability company became
limited partners in United Dominion Realty, L.P. These
OP Units are convertible into common stock, once the
holders elected to convert, at an exchange ratio of
1.5091 shares for each OP Unit. During 2007, we issued
a total of 1,031,627 shares of common stock in exchange for
OP Units.
In February 2006, our Board of Directors authorized a
10 million share repurchase program. This program
authorizes the repurchase of our common stock in open market
purchases, in block purchases, privately negotiated
transactions, or otherwise. As reflected in the table below,
1,232,300 shares of common stock were repurchased under
this program or otherwise during the quarter ended
December 31, 2007.
Table of Contents
The following table sets forth certain information regarding our
common stock repurchases during the quarter ended
December 31, 2007:
Table of Contents
The following graph provides a comparison from December 31,
2002 through December 31, 2007 of the cumulative total
stockholder return (assuming reinvestment of any dividends)
among UDR, the NAREIT Equity REIT Index, Standard &
Poors 500 Stock Index, the NAREIT Equity Apartment Index
and the MSCI US REIT Index. The graph assumes that $100 was
invested on December 31, 2002, in each of our common stock
and the indices presented. Historical stock price performance is
not necessarily indicative of future stock price performance.
Performance
Graph
The foregoing graph and chart shall not be deemed
incorporated by reference by any general statement incorporating
by reference this Report into any filing under the Securities
Act or under the Exchange Act, except to the extent we
specifically incorporate this information by reference.
Table of Contents
The following table sets forth selected consolidated financial
and other information as of and for each of the years in the
five-year period ended December 31, 2007. The table should
be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial
statements and the notes thereto, and Item 7.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition
and Results of Operations, included elsewhere in this Report.
Table of Contents
This Report contains forward-looking statements within the
meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and
Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Such
forward-looking statements include, without limitation,
statements concerning property acquisitions and dispositions,
development activity and capital expenditures, capital raising
activities, rent growth, occupancy, and rental expense growth.
Words such as expects, anticipates,
intends, plans, believes,
seeks, estimates, and variations of such
words and similar expressions are intended to identify such
forward-looking statements. Such statements involve known and
unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause
our actual results, performance or achievements to be materially
different from the results of operations or plans expressed or
implied by such forward-looking statements. Such factors
include, among other things, unanticipated adverse business
developments affecting us, or our properties, adverse changes in
the real estate markets and general and local economies and
business conditions. Although we believe that the assumptions
underlying the forward-looking statements contained herein are
reasonable, any of the assumptions could be inaccurate, and
therefore such statements included in this Report may not prove
to be accurate. In light of the significant uncertainties
inherent in the forward-looking statements included herein, the
inclusion of such information should not be regarded as a
representation by us or any other person that the results or
conditions described in such statements or our objectives and
plans will be achieved.
Business
Overview
We are a real estate investment trust, or REIT, that owns,
acquires, renovates, develops, and manages apartment communities
nationwide. We were formed in 1972 as a Virginia corporation. In
June 2003, we changed our state of incorporation from Virginia
to Maryland. Our subsidiaries include two operating
partnerships, Heritage Communities L.P., a Delaware limited
partnership, and United Dominion Realty, L.P., a Delaware
limited partnership. Unless the context otherwise requires, all
references in this Report to we, us,
our, the company, or UDR
refer collectively to UDR, Inc. and its subsidiaries.
Table of Contents
At December 31, 2007, our portfolio included 234
communities with 65,867 apartment homes nationwide. The
following table summarizes our market information by major
geographic markets (includes real estate held for disposition,
real estate under development, and land, but excludes commercial
properties):
Liquidity is the ability to meet present and future financial
obligations either through operating cash flows, the sale or
maturity of existing assets, or by the acquisition of additional
funds through capital
Table of Contents
management. Both the coordination of asset and liability
maturities and effective capital management are important to the
maintenance of liquidity. Our primary source of liquidity is our
cash flow from operations as determined by rental rates,
occupancy levels, and operating expenses related to our
portfolio of apartment homes. We routinely use our unsecured
bank credit facility to temporarily fund certain investing and
financing activities prior to arranging for longer-term
financing. During the past several years, proceeds from the sale
of real estate have been used for both investing and financing
activities.
We expect to meet our short-term liquidity requirements
generally through net cash provided by operations and borrowings
under credit arrangements. We expect to meet certain long-term
liquidity requirements such as scheduled debt maturities, the
repayment of financing on development activities, and potential
property acquisitions, through long-term secured and unsecured
borrowings, the disposition of properties, and the issuance of
additional debt or equity securities. We believe that our net
cash provided by operations will continue to be adequate to meet
both operating requirements and the payment of dividends by the
company in accordance with REIT requirements in both the short-
and long-term. Likewise, the budgeted expenditures for
improvements and renovations of certain properties are expected
to be funded from property operations.
We have a shelf registration statement filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission which provides for the issuance of an
indeterminate amount of common stock, preferred stock, debt
securities, warrants, purchase contracts and units to facilitate
future financing activities in the public capital markets.
Access to capital markets is dependent on market conditions at
the time of issuance.
Future development expenditures are expected to be funded with
proceeds from the sale of property, with construction loans,
through joint ventures, the use of our unsecured revolving
credit facility, and to a lesser extent, with cash flows
provided by operating activities. Acquisition activity in
strategic markets is expected to be largely financed through the
issuance of equity and debt securities, the issuance of
operating partnership units, the assumption or placement of
secured
and/or
unsecured debt and by the reinvestment of proceeds from the sale
of properties.
During 2008, we have approximately $11.7 million of secured
debt and $275.9 million of unsecured debt maturing and we
anticipate repaying that debt with proceeds from borrowings
under our secured or unsecured credit facilities, the issuance
of new unsecured debt securities or equity or from disposition
proceeds.
Our critical accounting policies are those having the most
impact on the reporting of our financial condition and results
and those requiring significant judgments and estimates. These
policies include those related to (1) capital expenditures,
(2) impairment of long-lived assets, and (3) real
estate investment properties. With respect to these critical
accounting policies, we believe that the application of
judgments and assessments is consistently applied and produces
financial information that fairly depicts the results of
operations for all periods presented.
In conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in
the United States, we capitalize those expenditures related to
acquiring new assets, materially enhancing the value of an
existing asset, or substantially extending the useful life of an
existing asset. Expenditures necessary to maintain an existing
property in ordinary operating condition are expensed as
incurred.
During 2007, $194.4 million or $2,829 per home was spent on
capital expenditures for all of our communities, excluding
development, condominium conversions and commercial properties.
These capital improvements included turnover related
expenditures for floor coverings and appliances, other recurring
capital expenditures such as roofs, siding, parking lots, and
asset preservation capital expenditures, which aggregated
$44.4 million or $646 per home. In addition, revenue
enhancing capital expenditures, kitchen and bath upgrades,
upgrades to HVAC equipment, and other extensive
exterior/interior upgrades totaled $78.2 million or
Table of Contents
$1,138 per home, and major renovations totaled
$71.8 million or $1,045 per home for the year ended
December 31, 2007.
The following table outlines capital expenditures and repair and
maintenance costs for all of our communities, excluding real
estate under development, condominium conversions and commercial
properties, for the periods presented:
Total capital expenditures for our communities decreased
$21.3 million or $167 per home for the year ended
December 31, 2007 compared to the same period in 2006. This
decrease was attributable to a $65.9 million decrease in
revenue enhancing improvements at certain of our properties that
was offset by an additional $9.8 million being invested in
recurring capital expenditures and an additional
$34.8 million being invested in major renovations as
compared to the same period in 2006. We will continue to
selectively add revenue enhancing improvements which we believe
will provide a return on investment substantially in excess of
our cost of capital. Recurring capital expenditures during 2008
are currently expected to be approximately $650 per home.
We record impairment losses on long-lived assets used in
operations when events and circumstances indicate that the
assets might be impaired and the undiscounted cash flows
estimated to be generated by the future operation and
disposition of those assets are less than the net book value of
those assets. Our cash flow estimates are based upon historical
results adjusted to reflect our best estimate of future market
and operating conditions and our estimated holding periods. The
net book value of impaired assets is reduced to fair market
value. Our estimates of fair market value represent our best
estimate based upon industry trends and reference to market
rates and transactions.
We purchase real estate investment properties from time to time
and allocate the purchase price to various components, such as
land, buildings, and intangibles related to in-place leases in
accordance with FASB Statement No. 141, Business
Combinations. The purchase price is allocated based on the
relative fair value of each component. The fair value of
buildings is determined as if the buildings were vacant upon
acquisition and subsequently leased at market rental rates. As
such, the determination of fair value considers the present
value of all cash flows expected to be generated from the
property including an initial
lease-up
period. We determine the fair value of in-place leases by
assessing the net effective rent and remaining term of the lease
relative to market terms for similar leases at acquisition. In
addition, we consider the cost of acquiring similar leases, the
foregone rents associated with the
lease-up
period, and the carrying costs associated with the
lease-up
period. The fair value of in-place leases is recorded and
amortized as amortization expense over the remaining contractual
lease period.
Table of Contents
The following discussion explains the changes in net cash
provided by operating activities and net cash used in investing
and financing activities that are presented in our Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows.
For the year ended December 31, 2007, our net cash flow
provided by operating activities was $250.6 million
compared to $229.6 million for 2006. During 2007, the
increase in cash flow from operating activities resulted
primarily from the increase in property operating income from
our apartment community portfolio (see discussion under
Apartment Community Operations).
For the year ended December 31, 2007, net cash used in
investing activities was $71.4 million compared to
$150.0 million for 2006. Changes in the level of investing
activities from period to period reflects our strategy as it
relates to our acquisition, capital expenditure, development,
and disposition programs, as well as the impact of the capital
market environment on these activities, all of which are
discussed in further detail below.
For the year ended December 31, 2007, we acquired 13
apartment communities with 2,671 apartment homes, six parcels of
land, and one operating joint venture for an aggregate
consideration of $486.5 million. In 2006, we acquired eight
apartment communities with 2,763 apartment homes for an
aggregate consideration of $327.5 million and two parcels
of land for $19.9 million. Our long-term strategic plan is
to achieve greater operating efficiencies by investing in fewer,
more concentrated markets. As a result, we have been expanding
our interests in the fast growing Southern California, Florida,
and Metropolitan Washington DC markets over the past years.
During 2008, we plan to continue to channel new investments into
those markets we believe will provide the best investment
returns. Markets will be targeted based upon defined criteria
including favorable job formation and low single-family home
affordability.
Development activity is focused in core markets in which we have
strong operations in place. For the year ended December 31,
2007, we invested approximately $101.3 million in
development projects, a decrease of $0.5 million from our
2006 level of $101.8 million.
The following wholly owned projects were under development as of
December 31, 2007:
The first phase of the Addison Assemblage will deliver
684 homes in the third quarter of 2010.
In addition, we owned 12 parcels of land held for future
development aggregating $124.5 million at December 31,
2007.
Table of Contents
In June 2006, we completed the formation of a development joint
venture that will invest approximately $138 million to
develop one apartment community with 298 apartment homes in
Marina del Rey, California. UDR is the financial partner and is
responsible for funding the costs of development and receives a
preferred return from 7% to 8.5% before our partner receives a
50% participation. Our initial investment was
$27.5 million. Under FASB Interpretation No. 46,
Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities, this
venture has been consolidated into UDRs financial
statements. Our joint venture partner is the managing partner as
well as the developer, general contractor, and property manager.
The following consolidated joint venture project was under
development as of December 31, 2007:
UDR is a partner in a joint venture to develop a site in
Bellevue, Washington. At closing, we owned 49% of the project
that involves building a 430 home high rise apartment building
with ground floor retail. Our investment at December 31,
2007 was $8.1 million.
UDR is a partner in a joint venture which will develop 274
apartment homes in the central business district of Bellevue,
Washington. Construction began in the fourth quarter of 2006 and
is scheduled for completion in 2008. At closing, we owned 49% of
the project. Our investment at December 31, 2007 and 2006
was $8.9 million and $5.9 million, respectively.
In January 2007, we entered into a joint venture which owns and
operates a recently completed 23-story, 166 apartment home high
rise community in the central business district of Bellevue,
Washington. At closing, UDR owned 49% of the project (subject to
a $34 million mortgage). Our initial investment was
$11.8 million. Our investment at December 31, 2007 was
$11.2 million.
In November 2007, UDR and an institutional unaffiliated partner
formed a joint venture which owns and operates various
properties located in Texas. On the closing date, UDR sold nine
operating properties, consisting of 3,690 units, and
contributed one property under development to the joint venture.
The property under development will have 302 units and is
expected to be completed in the third quarter of 2008. UDR
contributed cash and property equal to 20% of the fair value of
the properties. The unaffiliated partner contributed cash equal
to 80% of the fair value of the properties comprising the
venture, which was then used to purchase the nine operating
properties from UDR. Our investment at December 31, 2007
was $20.1 million.
The following unconsolidated joint venture projects were under
development as of December 31, 2007:
Table of Contents
For the year ended December 31, 2007, UDR sold 21
communities with a total of 7,125 apartment homes for a gross
consideration of $729.2 million, one parcel of land for
$4.5 million, and contributed one property under
development, at cost, to a joint venture arrangement in Texas.
In addition, we sold 61 condominiums from two communities with a
total of 640 condominiums for a gross consideration of
$10.4 million. We recognized after-tax gains for financial
reporting purposes of $256.2 million on these sales.
Proceeds from the sales were used primarily to reduce debt.
For the year ended December 31, 2006, UDR sold 24
communities with 7,653 apartment homes for a gross consideration
of $444.9 million. In addition, we sold 384 condominiums
from four communities with a total of 612 condominiums for a
gross consideration of $72.1 million. We recognized
after-tax gains for financial reporting purposes of
$148.6 million on these sales. Proceeds from the sales were
used primarily to reduce debt.
Net cash used in financing activities during 2007 was
$178.1 million compared to $93.0 million in 2006. As
part of the plan to improve our balance sheet, we utilized
proceeds from dispositions, equity and debt offerings, and
refinancings to extend maturities, pay down existing debt, and
purchase new properties.
The following is a summary of our financing activities for the
year ended December 31, 2007:
We have four secured revolving credit facilities with Fannie Mae
with an aggregate commitment of $748.9 million. As of
December 31, 2007, $663.9 million was outstanding
under the Fannie Mae credit facilities leaving
$85.0 million of unused capacity. The Fannie Mae credit
facilities are for an initial term of ten years, bear interest
at floating and fixed rates, and certain variable rate
facilities can be extended for an additional five years at our
option. We have $583.1 million of the funded balance fixed
at a weighted average interest rate of 5.9% and the remaining
balance on these facilities is currently at a weighted average
variable rate of 5.1%.
On July 27, 2007, we amended and restated our existing
three-year $500 million senior unsecured revolving credit
facility with a maturity date of May 31, 2008, (which could
be extended for an additional year at our option) to increase
the facility to $600 million and to extend its maturity to
July 26, 2012. Under certain circumstances, we may increase
the new $600 million credit facility to $750 million.
Based on our current credit ratings, the $600 million
credit facility carries an interest rate equal to LIBOR plus a
spread of 47.5 basis points, which represents a
10 basis point reduction to the previous $500 million
credit facility.
Table of Contents
Under a competitive bid feature and for so long as we maintain
an Investment Grade Rating, we have the right under the new
$600 million credit facility to bid out 50% of the
commitment amount and we can bid out 100% of the commitment
amount once per quarter. As of December 31, 2007,
$309.5 million was outstanding under the credit facility
leaving $290.5 million of unused capacity.
The Fannie Mae credit facility and the bank revolving credit
facility are subject to customary financial covenants and
limitations.
We are exposed to interest rate risk associated with variable
rate notes payable and maturing debt that has to be refinanced.
We do not hold financial instruments for trading or other
speculative purposes, but rather issue these financial
instruments to finance our portfolio of real estate assets.
Interest rate sensitivity is the relationship between changes in
market interest rates and the fair value of market rate
sensitive assets and liabilities. Our earnings are affected as
changes in short-term interest rates impact our cost of variable
rate debt and maturing fixed rate debt. A large portion of our
market risk is exposure to short-term interest rates from
variable rate borrowings outstanding under our Fannie Mae credit
facility and our bank revolving credit facility, which totaled
$80.8 million and $309.5 million, respectively, at
December 31, 2007. The impact on our financial statements
of refinancing fixed rate debt that matured during 2007 was
immaterial.
If market interest rates for variable rate debt average
100 basis points more in 2008 than they did during 2007,
our interest expense would increase, and income before taxes
would decrease by $5.2 million. Comparatively, if market
interest rates for variable rate debt had averaged
100 basis points more in 2007 than in 2006, our interest
expense would have increased, and net income would have
decreased by $4.9 million. If market rates for fixed rate
debt were 100 basis points higher at December 31,
2007, the fair value of fixed rate debt would have decreased
from $2.9 billion to $2.8 billion. If market interest
rates for fixed rate debt were 100 basis points lower at
December 31, 2007, the fair value of fixed rate debt would
have increased from $2.9 billion to $3.1 billion.
These amounts are determined by considering the impact of
hypothetical interest rates on our borrowing cost. These
analyses do not consider the effects of the adjusted level of
overall economic activity that could exist in such an
environment. Further, in the event of a change of such
magnitude, management would likely take actions to further
mitigate our exposure to the change. However, due to the
uncertainty of the specific actions that would be taken and
their possible effects, the sensitivity analysis assumes no
change in our financial structure.
Funds
from Operations
Funds from operations, or FFO, is defined as net income
(computed in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles), excluding gains (or losses) from sales of
depreciable property, plus real estate depreciation and
amortization, and after adjustments for unconsolidated
partnerships and joint ventures. We compute FFO for all periods
presented in accordance with the recommendations set forth by
the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts
(NAREIT) April 1, 2002 White Paper. We consider
FFO in evaluating property acquisitions and our operating
performance, and believe that FFO should be considered along
with, but not as an alternative to, net income and cash flow as
a measure of our activities in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles. FFO does not represent cash
generated from operating activities in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles and is not necessarily indicative
of cash available to fund cash needs.
Historical cost accounting for real estate assets in accordance
with generally accepted accounting principles implicitly assumes
that the value of real estate assets diminishes predictably over
time. Since real estate values instead have historically risen
or fallen with market conditions, many industry investors and
analysts have considered the presentation of operating results
for real estate companies that use historical cost accounting to
be insufficient by themselves. Thus, NAREIT created FFO as a
supplemental measure of REIT operating performance and defines
FFO as net income (computed in accordance with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States), excluding
gains (or losses) from sales of depreciable property,
Table of Contents
premiums or original issuance costs associated with preferred
stock redemptions, plus depreciation and amortization, and after
adjustments for unconsolidated partnerships and joint ventures.
The use of FFO, combined with the required presentations, has
been fundamentally beneficial, improving the understanding of
operating results of REITs among the investing public and making
comparisons of REIT operating results more meaningful. We
generally consider FFO to be a useful measure for reviewing our
comparative operating and financial performance (although FFO
should be reviewed in conjunction with net income which remains
the primary measure of performance) because by excluding gains
or losses related to sales of previously depreciated operating
real estate assets and excluding real estate asset depreciation
and amortization, FFO can help one compare the operating
performance of a companys real estate between periods or
as compared to different companies. We believe that FFO is the
best measure of economic profitability for real estate
investment trusts.
The following table outlines our FFO calculation and
reconciliation to generally accepted accounting principles for
the three years ended December 31, 2007 (dollars in
thousands):
In the computation of diluted FFO, OP Units,
out-performance partnership units, convertible debt, and the
shares of Series E Cumulative Convertible Preferred Stock
are dilutive; therefore, they are included in the diluted share
count.
RE3
is our subsidiary that focuses on development, land entitlement
and short-term hold investments.
RE3
tax benefits and gain on sales, net of taxes, is defined as net
sales proceeds less a tax provision and the gross investment
basis of the asset before accumulated depreciation. We consider
FFO with
RE3
tax benefits and gain on sales, net of taxes, to be a meaningful
supplemental measure of performance because the short-term use
of funds produce a profit that differs from the traditional
long-term investment in real estate for REITs.
Table of Contents
The following table is our reconciliation of FFO share
information to weighted average common shares outstanding, basic
and diluted, reflected on the Consolidated Statements of
Operations for the three years ended December 31, 2007
(shares in thousands):
FFO also does not represent cash generated from operating
activities in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles, and therefore should not be considered an
alternative to net cash flows from operating activities, as
determined by generally accepted accounting principles, as a
measure of liquidity. Additionally, it is not necessarily
indicative of cash availability to fund cash needs. A
presentation of cash flow metrics based on generally accepted
accounting principles is as follows (dollars in
thousands):
The following discussion includes the results of both continuing
and discontinued operations for the periods presented.
2007-vs.-2006
Net income available to common stockholders was
$205.2 million ($1.53 per diluted share) for the year ended
December 31, 2007, compared to $113.2 million ($0.85
per diluted share) for the year ended December 31, 2006.
The increase for the year ended December 31, 2007, when
compared to the same period in 2006, resulted primarily from the
following items, all of which are discussed in further detail
elsewhere within this Report:
Table of Contents
These increases in income were partially offset by a
$13.6 million increase in real estate depreciation and
amortization expense, an $8.4 million increase in general
and administrative expense, $4.3 million in severance costs
and other restructuring charges in 2007, $2.3 million in
premiums on preferred stock repurchases in 2007, and a
$0.9 million decrease in non-property income during 2007
when compared to 2006.
2006-vs.-2005
Net income available to common stockholders was
$113.2 million ($0.85 per diluted share) for the year ended
December 31, 2006, compared to $139.8 million ($1.03
per diluted share) for the year ended December 31, 2005,
representing a decrease of $26.6 million ($0.18 per diluted
share). The decrease for the year ended December 31, 2006,
when compared to the same period in 2005, resulted primarily
from the following items, all of which are discussed in further
detail elsewhere within this Report:
These decreases in net income were partially offset by
$5.1 million more in gains recognized from the sale of
depreciable property and an unconsolidated joint venture, an
$8.5 million decrease in losses on early debt retirement,
and a $34.2 million increase in apartment community
operating results in 2006 when compared to 2005.
Apartment
Community Operations
Our net income is primarily generated from the operation of our
apartment communities. The following table summarizes the
operating performance of our total apartment portfolio for each
of the periods presented (dollars in thousands):
Table of Contents
The following table is our reconciliation of property operating
income to net income as reflected on the Consolidated Statements
of Operations for the periods presented (dollars in
thousands):
Our same communities (those communities acquired, developed, and
stabilized prior to December 31, 2006 and held on
December 31, 2007, which consisted of 30,686 apartment
homes) provided 57% of our property net operating income for the
year ended December 31, 2007.
Same community property net operating income increased 7.0% or
$17.7 million compared to 2006. The increase in property
operating income was primarily attributable to a 5.0% or
$18.8 million increase in revenues from rental and other
income and a 0.9% or $1.1 million increase in operating
expenses. The increase in revenues from rental and other income
was primarily driven by a 4.2% or $16.2 million increase in
rental rates, an 11.4% or $3.0 million increase in
reimbursement income and fee income, and a 16.2% or
$1.0 million decrease in rental concessions. These
increases were partially offset by a 6.8% or $1.3 million
increase in vacancy loss. Physical occupancy decreased 0.2% to
94.6%.
The increase in property operating expenses was primarily driven
by a 5.2% or $1.8 million increase in real estate taxes
that was partially offset by a 7.6% or $0.8 million
decrease in administrative and marketing costs.
As a result of the percentage changes in property rental income
and property operating expenses, the operating margin (property
operating income divided by property rental income) increased
1.3% to 68.2%.
The remaining 43% or $206.2 million of our property net
operating income during the year ended December 31, 2007,
was generated from communities that we classify as
non-mature communities. UDRs non-mature
communities consist primarily of communities acquired or
developed in 2006 and 2007, sold properties, redevelopment
properties, properties classified as real estate held for
disposition and condominium properties.
The largest component our non-mature portfolio are those
properties that are classified as real estate held for
disposition. At December 31, 2007, UDR had 86 apartment
communities, two condominium projects and one commercial unit
included in real estate held held for disposition. For the year
ended December 31, 2007, these communities provided
$136.5 million of property net operating income.
Table of Contents
Our same communities (those communities acquired, developed, and
stabilized prior to December 31, 2005 and held on
December 31, 2006, which consisted of 60,062 apartment
homes) provided 82% of our property operating income for the
year ended December 31, 2006.
For the year ended December 31, 2006, same community
property operating income increased 8.6% or $30.4 million
compared to 2005. The increase in property operating income was
primarily attributable to a 6.0% or $34.2 million increase
in revenues from rental and other income that was offset by a
1.8% or $3.9 million increase in operating expenses. The
increase in revenues from rental and other income was primarily
driven by a 4.9% or $28.4 million increase in rental rates,
a 17.6% or $2.2 million decrease in rental concessions, and
a 12.5% or $5.0 million increase in utility reimbursement
income and fee income. Physical occupancy increased 0.1% to
94.7%.
The increase in property operating expenses was primarily driven
by a 15.8% or $1.6 million increase in insurance costs, a
4.4% or $1.5 million increase in utility costs, a 2.8% or
$1.5 million increase in personnel costs, a 1.1% or
$0.4 million increase in repair and maintenance expenses,
and a 0.5% or $0.3 million increase in real estate taxes.
These increases in operating expenses were partially offset by a
6.0% or $1.2 million decrease in administrative and
marketing expenses.
As a result of the percentage changes in property rental income
and property operating expenses, the operating margin increased
1.5% to 63.5%.
The remaining 18% of our property operating income during 2006
was generated from communities that we classify as
non-mature communities, UDRs non-mature
communities consist primarily of communities acquired or
developed in 2005 and 2006, sold properties, redevelopment
properties, properties classified as real estate held for
disposition and condominium properties.
For the year ended December 31, 2007, real estate
depreciation and amortization on both continuing and
discontinued operations increased $13.6 million or 5.6%
compared to 2006, primarily due to the significant increase in
per home acquisition cost compared to the existing portfolio and
other capital expenditures.
For the year ended December 31, 2006, real estate
depreciation and amortization on both continuing and
discontinued operations increased $31.7 million or 14.8%
compared to 2005, primarily due to the significant increase in
per home acquisition cost compared to the existing portfolio and
other capital expenditures.
For the year ended December 31, 2007, interest expense on
both continuing and discontinued operations decreased 1.7% or
$3.2 million compared to 2006. For the year ended
December 31, 2007, the weighted average amount of debt
outstanding increased 5.9% or $193.8 million compared to
2006 and the weighted average interest rate decreased from 5.4%
in 2006 to 5.3% in 2007. The weighted average amount of debt
outstanding during 2007 is slightly higher than 2006 as
acquisition costs in 2007 have been funded primarily by the
issuance of debt. The decrease in the weighted average interest
rate during 2007 reflects short-term bank borrowings and
variable rate debt that had lower interest rates in 2007 when
compared to the same period in 2006.
For the year ended December 31, 2006, interest expense on
both continuing and discontinued operations increased
$18.5 million or 11.3% from 2005 primarily due to the
issuance of debt and higher interest rates. For the year ended
December 31, 2006, the weighted average amount of debt
outstanding increased 11.7% or $350.4 million compared to
2005 and the weighted average interest rate increased from 5.3%
to 5.4% during 2006. The weighted average amount of debt
outstanding during 2006 is higher than 2005 as acquisition costs
Table of Contents
in 2005 and in 2006 have been funded primarily by the issuance
of debt. The increase in the weighted average interest rate
during 2006 reflects short-term bank borrowings and variable
rate debt that had higher interest rates when compared to the
prior year that were partially offset by the retirement of
higher coupon debt with lower coupon debt.
For the year ended December 31, 2007, general and
administrative expenses increased $8.4 million or 26.8%
compared to 2006. The increase was due to a number of factors,
including increases in personnel costs, incentive compensation,
and legal and professional fees.
For the year ended December 31, 2006, general and
administrative expenses increased $6.4 million or 25.7%
over 2005 due to a number of factors, including increases in
personnel expense, incentive compensation, professional fees,
dead deal costs, and an operating lease on an airplane.
For the year ended December 31, 2007, UDR recognized
$4.3 million in severance costs and other restructuring
charges. UDR is establishing Highlands Ranch, Colorado, as its
corporate headquarters and is realigning resources to improve
efficiencies and centralize job functions in fewer locations. As
a result of a comprehensive review of the organizational
structure of UDR and its operations, UDR recorded a charge of
$3.6 million during the fourth quarter of 2007 related to
workforce reductions, relocation costs, and other related costs.
These charges are included in the Consolidated Statements of
Operations within the line item Severance costs and other
restructuring charges. All charges were approved by
management and our Board of Directors in October 2007, and all
of the $3.6 million charge will be paid during 2008.
In May 2007, we exercised our right to redeem all of our shares
of our 8.60% Series B Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock
for a cash redemption price of $25 per share plus accrued and
unpaid dividends to the redemption date. The premium amount
recognized to repurchase these shares represents the cumulative
accretion to date between the repurchase value of the preferred
stock and the value at which it was recorded at the time of
issuance.
In 2005, $2.5 million of hurricane related insurance
recoveries were recorded related to damages in Florida caused by
hurricanes Charley, Frances, and Jeanne in 2004. UDR reported
that 25 of our 34 Florida communities were affected by the
hurricanes.
For the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, we
recognized after-tax gains for financial reporting purposes of
$256.2 million, $148.6 million and
$143.5 million, respectively. Changes in the level of gains
recognized from period to period reflect the changing level of
our divestiture activity from period to period as well as the
extent of gains related to specific properties sold.
We believe that the direct effects of inflation on our
operations have been immaterial. Substantially all of our leases
are for a term of one year or less which generally minimizes our
risk from the adverse effects of inflation.
Table of Contents
We do not have any off-balance sheet arrangements that have, or
are reasonably likely to have, a current or future effect on our
financial condition, changes in financial condition, revenue or
expenses, results of operations, liquidity, capital expenditures
or capital resources that are material.
The following table summarizes our contractual obligations as of
December 31, 2007 (dollars in thousands):
During 2007, we incurred interest costs of $178.0 million,
of which $13.2 million was capitalized.
There are many factors that affect our business and the results
of our operations, some of which are beyond our control. These
factors include:
Table of Contents
Information required by this item is included in and
incorporated by reference from Item 7. Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations of this Report.
The consolidated financial statements and related financial
information required to be filed are attached to this Report.
Reference is made to page 46 of this Report for the Index
to Consolidated Financial Statements and Schedule.
None.
As of December 31, 2007, we carried out an evaluation,
under the supervision and with the participation of our Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, of the
effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure
controls and procedures. Our disclosure controls and procedures
are designed with the objective of ensuring that information
required to be disclosed in our reports filed under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is recorded, processed,
summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the
SECs rules and forms. Based on this evaluation, our Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that our
disclosure controls and procedures are effective in timely
alerting them to material information required to be included in
our periodic SEC reports.
It should be noted that the design of any system of controls is
based in part upon certain assumptions about the likelihood of
future events, and there can be no assurance that any design
will succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential
future conditions, regardless of how remote. However, our Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded
that our disclosure controls and procedures are effective under
circumstances where our disclosure controls and procedures
should reasonably be expected to operate effectively.
UDRs management is responsible for establishing and
maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting
as defined in
Rule 13a-15(f)
under the Exchange Act. Under the supervision and with the
participation of our management, UDRs Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer conducted an evaluation of
the effectiveness of our internal control over financial
reporting based on the framework in Internal
Control Integrated Framework issued by the
Committee of Sponsoring Organizations (COSO).
Based on UDRs evaluation, management concluded that our
internal control over financial reporting was effective as of
December 31, 2007.
Ernst & Young LLP, the independent registered public
accounting firm that audited our consolidated financial
statements included in this Report, has audited UDRs
internal control over financial reporting as of
Table of Contents
December 31, 2007. The report of Ernst & Young
LLP, which expresses an unqualified opinion on UDRs
internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2007, is included under the heading
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm on
Internal Control Over Financial Reporting contained in
this Report.
Our Chief Executive Officer and our Chief Financial Officer
concluded that during the quarter ended December 31, 2007,
there has been no change in our internal control over financial
reporting that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely
to materially affect, our internal control over financial
reporting.
None.
The information required by this item is incorporated by
reference to the information set forth under the headings
Election of Directors, Corporate Governance
Matters, Audit Committee Report,
Corporate Governance Matters-Audit Committee Financial
Expert, Corporate Governance Matters-Identification
and Selection of Nominees for Directors, Corporate
Governance Matters-Board of Directors and Committee
Meetings and Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership
Reporting Compliance in our definitive proxy statement for
our Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held on May 29,
2008.
Information required by this item regarding our executive
officers is included in Part I of this Report in the
section entitled Business-Executive Officers of the
Company.
We have a code of ethics for senior financial officers that
applies to our principal executive officer, all members of our
finance staff, including the principal financial officer, the
principal accounting officer, the treasurer and the controller,
our director of investor relations, our corporate secretary, and
all other company officers. We also have a code of business
conduct and ethics that applies to all of our employees.
Information regarding our codes is available on our website,
www.udr.com, and is incorporated by reference to the
information set forth under the heading Corporate
Governance Matters in our definitive proxy statement for
our Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held on May 29,
2008. We intend to satisfy the disclosure requirements under
Item 10 of
Form 8-K
regarding an amendment to, or a waiver from, a provision of our
codes by posting such amendment or waiver on our website.
The information required by this item is incorporated by
reference to the information set forth under the headings
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and
Management, Corporate Governance
Matters-Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider
Participation, Executive Compensation,
Compensation of Directors and Compensation
Committee Report in our definitive proxy statement for our
Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held on May 29, 2008.
The information required by this item is incorporated by
reference to the information set forth under the headings
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and
Management, Executive Compensation and
Equity Compensation Plan Information in our
definitive proxy statement for our Annual Meeting of
Stockholders to be held on May 29, 2008.
Table of Contents
The information required by this item is incorporated by
reference to the information set forth under the heading
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and
Management, Corporate Governance Matters-Corporate
Governance Overview, Corporate Governance
Matters-Director
Independence, Corporate Governance
Matters-Independence of Audit, Compensation and Governance
Committees, and Executive Compensation in our
definitive proxy statement for our Annual Meeting of
Stockholders to be held on May 29, 2008.
The information required by this item is incorporated by
reference to the information set forth under the headings
Audit Fees and Pre-Approval Policies and
Procedures in our definitive proxy statement for our
Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held on May 29, 2008.
(a) The following documents are filed as part of this
Report:
1. Financial Statements. See Index to
Consolidated Financial Statements and Schedule on page 46
of this Report.
2. Financial Statement Schedule. See
Index to Consolidated Financial Statements and Schedule on
page 46 of this Report. All other schedules are omitted
because they are not required, are inapplicable, or the required
information is included in the financial statements or notes
thereto.
3. Exhibits. The exhibits filed with this
Report are set forth in the Exhibit Index.
Table of Contents
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15
(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant
has duly caused this Report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, this Report has been signed below on February 26,
2008 by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in
the capacities indicated.
Table of Contents
UDR,
INC.
All other schedules are omitted since the required information
is not present or is not present in amounts sufficient to
require submission of the schedule, or because the information
required is included in the financial statements and notes
thereto.
Table of Contents
Board of Directors and Stockholders
UDR, Inc.
We have audited UDR Inc.s (the Company)
internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2007, based on criteria established in
Internal Control Integrated Framework issued by the
Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission
(the COSO criteria). The Companys management is
responsible for maintaining effective internal control over
financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness
of internal control over financial reporting included in the
accompanying Managements Report on Internal Control over
Financial Reporting included at Item 9A. Our responsibility
is to express an opinion on the Companys internal control
over financial reporting based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control
over financial reporting was maintained in all material
respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of
internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk
that a material weakness exists, testing and evaluating the
design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on
the assessed risk, and performing such other procedures as we
considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our
audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
A companys internal control over financial reporting is a
process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the
reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of
financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles. A companys
internal control over financial reporting includes those
policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance
of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly
reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the
company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions
are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial
statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company
are being made only in accordance with authorizations of
management and directors of the company; and (3) provide
reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of
unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the
companys assets that could have a material effect on the
financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over
financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements.
Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future
periods are subject to the risk that controls may become
inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree
of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
In our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material
respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as
of December 31, 2007, based on the COSO criteria.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the
consolidated balance sheets as of December 31, 2007 and
2006, and the related consolidated statements of operations,
stockholders equity, and cash flows for each of the three
years in the period ended December 31, 2007 of UDR, Inc.
and our report dated February 25, 2008 expressed an
unqualified opinion thereon.
/s/ Ernst &
Young LLP
Richmond, Virginia
February 25, 2008
Table of Contents
Board of Directors and Stockholders
UDR, Inc.
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of
UDR, Inc. (the Company) as of December 31, 2007
and 2006, and the related consolidated statements of operations,
stockholders equity, and cash flows for each of the three
years in the period ended December 31, 2007. Our audits
also included the financial statement schedule listed in the
Index at Item 15(a). These financial statements and
schedule are the responsibility of the Companys
management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these
financial statements and schedule based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are
free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a
test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in
the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the
accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall financial
statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a
reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above
present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated
financial position of UDR, Inc. at December 31, 2007 and
2006, and the consolidated results of its operations and its
cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended
December 31, 2007, in conformity with U.S. generally
accepted accounting principles. Also, in our opinion, the
related financial statement schedule, when considered in
relation to the basic consolidated financial statements taken as
a whole, presents fairly, in all material respects, the
information set forth therein.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the
Companys internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2007, based on criteria established in
Internal Control Integrated Framework issued by the
Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission
and our report dated February 25, 2008 expressed an
unqualified opinion thereon.
/s/ Ernst &
Young LLP
Richmond, Virginia
February 25, 2008
Table of Contents
UDR
INC.
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS
(In thousands, except for share data)
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||