UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-Q

(Mark One)
[X]              QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

                    For the quarterly period ended September 30, 2004

OR

[  ]              TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from...................................to................................................
Commission file number:   1-13274

Mack-Cali Realty Corporation
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Maryland (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)

22-3305147 (I.R.S. Employer Identification Number)

11 Commerce Drive, Cranford, New Jersey (Address of principal executive office)

07016-3501 (Zip Code)

(908) 272-8000
(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

Not Applicable
(Former name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since last report)

        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 ninety (90) days. YES X    NO     

        Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). YES X    NO     

As of October 29, 2004, there were 60,857,513 shares of the registrant’s Common Stock, par value $0.01 per share, outstanding.

MACK-CALI REALTY CORPORATION

FORM 10-Q

INDEX

2

MACK-CALI REALTY CORPORATION

Part I – Financial Information

Item 1.    Financial Statements

The accompanying unaudited consolidated balance sheets, statements of operations, of changes in stockholders’ equity, and of cash flows and related notes thereto, have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) for interim financial information and in conjunction with the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). Accordingly, they do not include all of the disclosures required by GAAP for complete financial statements. The financial statements reflect all adjustments consisting only of normal, recurring adjustments, which are, in the opinion of management, necessary for a fair presentation for the interim periods.

The aforementioned financial statements should be read in conjunction with the notes to the aforementioned financial statements and Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and the financial statements and notes thereto included in Mack-Cali Realty Corporation’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003.

The results of operations for the three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2004 are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for the entire fiscal year or any other period.

3

MACK-CALI REALTY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS (in thousands, except per share amounts)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

4

MACK-CALI REALTY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS (in thousands, except per share amounts) (unaudited)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

5

MACK-CALI REALTY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
For the Nine Months Ended September 30, 2004 (in thousands) (unaudited)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

6

MACK-CALI REALTY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS (in thousands) (unaudited)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

7

MACK-CALI REALTY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (dollars in thousands, except per share/unit amounts)

1.    ORGANIZATION AND BASIS OF PRESENTATION

ORGANIZATION
Mack-Cali Realty Corporation, a Maryland corporation, together with its subsidiaries (collectively, the “Company”), is a fully-integrated, self-administered, self-managed real estate investment trust (“REIT”) providing leasing, management, acquisition, development, construction and tenant-related services for its properties. As of September 30, 2004, the Company owned or had interests in 268 properties plus developable land (collectively, the “Properties”). The Properties aggregate approximately 29.6 million square feet, which are comprised of 160 office buildings and 97 office/flex buildings, totaling approximately 29.2 million square feet (which include three office buildings and one office/flex building aggregating 836,000 square feet owned by unconsolidated joint ventures in which the Company has investment interests), six industrial/warehouse buildings totaling approximately 387,400 square feet, two retail properties totaling approximately 17,300 square feet, one hotel (which is owned by an unconsolidated joint venture in which the Company has an investment interest) and two parcels of land leased to others. The Properties are located in nine states, primarily in the Northeast, plus the District of Columbia.

BASIS OF PRESENTATION
The accompanying consolidated financial statements include all accounts of the Company, its majority-owned and/or controlled subsidiaries, which consist principally of Mack-Cali Realty, L.P. (the “Operating Partnership”) and variable interest entities for which the Company has determined itself to be the primary beneficiary, if any. See Investments in Unconsolidated Joint Ventures in Note 2 for the Company’s treatment of unconsolidated joint venture interests. Intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated.

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

2.   SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

Rental Property
Rental properties are stated at cost less accumulated depreciation and amortization. Costs directly related to the acquisition, development and construction of rental properties are capitalized. Capitalized development and construction costs include pre-construction costs essential to the development of the property, development and construction costs, interest, property taxes, insurance, salaries and other project costs incurred during the period of development. Included in total rental property is construction and development in-progress of $97,839 and $84,105 (including land of $52,260 and $49,045) as of September 30, 2004 and December 31, 2003, respectively. Ordinary repairs and maintenance are expensed as incurred; major replacements and betterments, which improve or extend the life of the asset, are capitalized and depreciated over their estimated useful lives. Fully-depreciated assets are removed from the accounts.

The Company considers a construction project as substantially completed and held available for occupancy upon the completion of tenant improvements, but no later than one year from cessation of major construction activity (as distinguished from activities such as routine maintenance and cleanup). If portions of a rental project are substantially completed and occupied by tenants, or held available for occupancy, and other portions have not yet reached that stage, the substantially completed portions are accounted for as a separate project. The Company allocates costs incurred between the portions under construction and the portions substantially completed and held available for occupancy, and capitalizes only those costs associated with the portion under construction.

8

Properties are depreciated using the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the assets. The estimated useful lives are as follows:

Upon acquisition of rental property, the Company estimates the fair value of acquired tangible assets, consisting of land, building and improvements, and identified intangible assets and liabilities, generally consisting of the fair value of (i) above and below market leases, (ii) in-place leases and (iii) tenant relationships. The Company allocates the purchase price to the assets acquired and liabilities assumed based on their relative fair values. In estimating the fair value of the tangible and intangible assets acquired, the Company considers information obtained about each property as a result of its due diligence and marketing and leasing activities, and utilizes various valuation methods, such as estimated cash flow projections utilizing appropriate discount and capitalization rates, estimates of replacement costs net of depreciation, and available market information. The fair value of the tangible assets of an acquired property considers the value of the property as if it were vacant.

Above-market and below-market lease values for acquired properties are recorded based on the present value, (using a discount rate which reflects the risks associated with the leases acquired) of the difference between (i) the contractual amounts to be paid pursuant to each in-place lease and (ii) management’s estimate of fair market lease rates for each corresponding in-place lease, measured over a period equal to the remaining term of the lease for above-market leases and the initial term plus the term of any below-market fixed rate renewal options for below-market leases. The capitalized above-market lease values are amortized as a reduction of base rental revenue over the remaining term of the respective leases, and the capitalized below-market lease values are amortized as an increase to base rental revenue over the remaining initial terms plus the terms of any below-market fixed rate renewal options of the respective leases.

Other intangible assets acquired include amounts for in-place lease values and tenant relationship values, which are based on management’s evaluation of the specific characteristics of each tenant’s lease and the Company’s overall relationship with the respective tenant. Factors to be considered by management in its analysis of in-place lease values include an estimate of carrying costs during hypothetical expected lease-up periods considering current market conditions, and costs to execute similar leases. In estimating carrying costs, management includes real estate taxes, insurance and other operating expenses and estimates of lost rentals at market rates during the expected lease-up periods, depending on local market conditions. In estimating costs to execute similar leases, management considers leasing commissions, legal and other related expenses. Characteristics considered by management in valuing tenant relationships include the nature and extent of the Company’s existing business relationships with the tenant, growth prospects for developing new business with the tenant, the tenant’s credit quality and expectations of lease renewals. The value of in-place leases are amortized to expense over the remaining initial terms of the respective leases. The value of tenant relationship intangibles are amortized to expense over the anticipated life of the relationships.

On a periodic basis, management assesses whether there are any indicators that the value of the Company’s real estate properties may be impaired. A property’s value is impaired only if management’s estimate of the aggregate future cash flows (undiscounted and without interest charges) to be generated by the property is less than the carrying value of the property. To the extent impairment has occurred, the loss shall be measured as the excess of the carrying amount of the property over the fair value of the property. The Company’s estimates of aggregate future cash flows expected to be generated by each property are based on a number of assumptions that are subject to economic and market uncertainties including, among others, demand for space, competition for tenants, changes in market rental rates, and costs to operate each property. As these factors are difficult to predict and are subject to future events that may alter management’s assumptions, the future cash flows estimated by management in its impairment analyses may not be achieved. Management does not believe that the value of any of the Company’s rental properties is impaired.

9

Rental Property Held for Sale and Discontinued Operations
When assets are identified by management as held for sale, the Company discontinues depreciating the assets and estimates the sales price, net of selling costs, of such assets. If, in management’s opinion, the net sales price of the assets which have been identified as held for sale is less than the net book value of the assets, a valuation allowance is established. Properties identified as held for sale and/or sold are presented in discontinued operations for all periods presented. See Note 6 –Discontinued Operations.

If circumstances arise that previously were considered unlikely and, as a result, the Company decides not to sell a property previously classified as held for sale, the property is reclassified as held and used. A property that is reclassified is measured and recorded individually at the lower of (a) its carrying amount before the property was classified as held for sale, adjusted for any depreciation (amortization) expense that would have been recognized had the property been continuously classified as held and used, or (b) the fair value at the date of the subsequent decision not to sell.

Investments in Unconsolidated Joint Ventures, Net
On January 17, 2003, the FASB issued Interpretation No. 46, Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities (“FIN 46”), the primary objective of which is to provide guidance on the identification of entities for which control is achieved through means other than voting rights (“variable interest entities” or “VIEs”) and to determine when and which business enterprise should consolidate the VIE (the “primary beneficiary”). In December 2003, the FASB issued a revised FIN 46 which modifies and clarifies various aspects of the original Interpretation. FIN 46 applies when either (1) the equity investors (if any) lack one or more of the essential characteristics of a controlling financial interest, (2) the equity investment at risk is insufficient to finance that entity’s activities without additional subordinated financial support or (3) the equity investors have voting rights that are not proportionate to their economic interests, and the activities of the entity involve or are conducted on behalf of an investor with a disproportionately small voting interest. In addition, FIN 46 requires additional disclosures.

FIN 46 is effective immediately for VIEs created after January 31, 2003, and to VIEs in which an enterprise obtains an interest after that date. For variable interests in a VIE created or obtained prior to February 1, 2003, FIN 46 is effective for periods ending after March 15, 2004. As of September 30, 2004, the Company has evaluated its joint ventures with regards to FIN 46. The Company has identified its Meadowlands Xanadu joint venture with the Mills Corporation as a VIE, but is not consolidating such venture as the Company is not the primary beneficiary. Disclosure about this VIE is included in Note 4 –Investments in Unconsolidated Joint Ventures.

The Company accounts for its investments in unconsolidated joint ventures (for which FIN 46 does not apply) under the equity method of accounting as the Company exercises significant influence, but does not control these entities. These investments are recorded initially at cost, as Investments in Unconsolidated Joint Ventures, and subsequently adjusted for equity in earnings and cash contributions and distributions.

10

On a periodic basis, management assesses whether there are any indicators that the value of the Company’s investments in unconsolidated joint ventures may be impaired. An investment is impaired only if management’s estimate of the value of the investment is less than the carrying value of the investment, and such decline in value is deemed to be other than temporary. To the extent impairment has occurred, the loss shall be measured as the excess of the carrying amount of the investment over the value of the investment. Management does not believe that the value of any of the Company’s investments in unconsolidated joint ventures is impaired. See Note 4 – Investments in Unconsolidated Joint Ventures.

Cash and Cash Equivalents
All highly liquid investments with a maturity of three months or less when purchased are considered to be cash equivalents.

Deferred Financing Costs
Costs incurred in obtaining financing are capitalized and amortized on a straight-line basis, which approximates the effective interest method, over the term of the related indebtedness. Amortization of such costs is included in interest expense and was $1,155 and $1,118 for the three months ended September 30, 2004 and 2003, respectively, and $3,249 and $3,603 for the nine months ended September 30, 2004 and 2003, respectively.

Deferred Leasing Costs
Costs incurred in connection with leases are capitalized and amortized on a straight-line basis over the terms of the related leases and included in depreciation and amortization. Unamortized deferred leasing costs are charged to amortization expense upon early termination of the lease. Certain employees of the Company are compensated for providing leasing services to the Properties. The portion of such compensation, which is capitalized and amortized, approximated $1,409 and $821 for the three months ended September 30, 2004 and 2003, respectively, and $4,365 and $2,313 for the nine months ended September 30, 2004 and 2003, respectively.

Derivative Instruments
The Company measures derivative instruments, including certain derivative instruments embedded in other contracts, at fair value and records them as an asset or liability, depending on the Company’s rights or obligations under the applicable derivative contract. For derivatives designated as fair value hedges, the changes in the fair value of both the derivative instrument and the hedged item are recorded in earnings. For derivatives designated as cash flow hedges, the effective portions of the derivative are reported in other comprehensive income (“OCI”) and are subsequently reclassified into earnings when the hedged item affects earnings. Changes in fair value of derivative instruments not designated as hedging and ineffective portions of hedges are recognized in earnings in the affected period.

Revenue Recognition
Base rental revenue is recognized on a straight-line basis over the terms of the respective leases. Unbilled rents receivable represents the amount by which straight-line rental revenue exceeds rents currently billed in accordance with the lease agreements. Above-market and below-market lease values for acquired properties are recorded based on the present value (using a discount rate which reflects the risks associated with the leases acquired) of the difference between (i) the contractual amounts to be paid pursuant to each in-place lease and (ii) management’s estimate of fair market lease rates for each corresponding in-place lease, measured over a period equal to the remaining term of the lease for above-market leases and the initial term plus the term of any below-market fixed-rate renewal options for below-market leases. The capitalized above-market lease values for acquired properties are amortized as a reduction of base rental revenue over the remaining term of the respective leases, and the capitalized below-market lease values are amortized as an increase to base rental revenue over the remaining initial terms plus the terms of any below-market fixed-rate renewal options of the respective leases. Parking and other revenue includes income from parking spaces leased to tenants, income from tenants for additional services provided by the Company, income from tenants for early lease terminations and income from managing and/or leasing properties for third parties. Escalations and recoveries are received from tenants for certain costs as provided in the lease agreements. These costs generally include real estate taxes, utilities, insurance, common area maintenance and other recoverable costs. See Note 13 – Tenant Leases.

11

Allowance for Doubtful Accounts
Management periodically performs a detailed review of amounts due from tenants to determine if accounts receivable balances are impaired based on factors affecting the collectibility of those balances. Management’s estimate of the allowance for doubtful accounts requires management to exercise significant judgment about the timing, frequency and severity of collection losses, which affects the allowance and net income.

Income and Other Taxes
The Company has elected to be taxed as a REIT under Sections 856 through 860 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”). As a REIT, the Company generally will not be subject to corporate federal income tax (including alternative minimum tax) on net income that it currently distributes to its shareholders, provided that the Company satisfies certain organizational and operational requirements including the requirement to distribute at least 90 percent of its REIT taxable income to its shareholders. The Company has elected to treat certain of its corporate subsidiaries as taxable REIT subsidiaries (each a “TRS”). In general, a TRS of the Company may perform additional services for tenants of the Company and generally may engage in any real estate or non-real estate related business (except for the operation or management of health care facilities or lodging facilities or the providing to any person, under a franchise, license or otherwise, rights to any brand name under which any lodging facility or health care facility is operated). A TRS is subject to corporate federal income tax. If the Company fails to qualify as a REIT in any taxable year, the Company will be subject to federal income tax (including any applicable alternative minimum tax) on its taxable income at regular corporate tax rates. The Company is subject to certain state and local taxes.

Earnings Per Share
The Company presents both basic and diluted earnings per share (“EPS”). Basic EPS excludes dilution and is computed by dividing net income available to common shareholders by the weighted average number of shares outstanding for the period. Diluted EPS reflects the potential dilution that could occur if securities or other contracts to issue common stock were exercised or converted into common stock, where such exercise or conversion would result in a lower EPS amount.

Dividends and Distributions Payable
The dividends and distributions payable at September 30, 2004 represents dividends payable to preferred shareholders (10,000 shares), common shareholders (60,750,128 shares), distributions payable to minority interest common unitholders (7,759,360 common units) and preferred distributions payable to preferred unitholders (215,018 preferred units) for all such holders of record as of October 5, 2004 with respect to the third quarter 2004. The third quarter 2004 preferred stock dividends of $50.00 per share, common stock dividends and common unit distributions of $0.63 per common share and unit, as well as the third quarter 2004 preferred unit distributions of $18.1818 per preferred unit, were approved by the Board of Directors on September 14, 2004. The preferred stock dividends payable were paid on October 15, 2004. The common stock dividends and common and preferred unit distributions payable were paid on October 18, 2004.

The dividends and distributions payable at December 31, 2003 represents dividends payable to preferred shareholders (10,000 shares), common shareholders (59,606,504 shares), distributions payable to minority interest common unitholders (7,795,498 common units) and preferred distributions payable to preferred unitholders (215,018 preferred units) for all such holders of record as of January 6, 2004 with respect to the fourth quarter 2003. The fourth quarter 2003 preferred stock dividends of $50.00 per share, common stock dividends and common unit distributions of $0.63 per common share and unit, as well as the fourth quarter preferred unit distributions of $18.1818 per preferred unit, were approved by the Board of Directors on December 17, 2003. The preferred stock dividends payable were paid on January 15, 2004. The common stock dividends and common and preferred unit distributions payable were paid on January 16, 2004.

12

Costs Incurred For Preferred Stock Issuances
Costs incurred in connection with the Company’s preferred stock issuances are reflected as a reduction of additional paid-in capital.

Stock Compensation
The Company accounts for stock options and restricted stock awards granted prior to 2002 using the intrinsic value method prescribed in Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 25, “Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees,” and related Interpretations (“APB No. 25”). Under APB No. 25, compensation cost for stock options is measured as the excess, if any, of the quoted market price of the Company’s stock at the date of grant over the exercise price of the option granted. Compensation cost for stock options is recognized ratably over the vesting period. The Company’s policy is to grant options with an exercise price equal to the quoted closing market price of the Company’s stock on the business day preceding the grant date. Accordingly, no compensation cost has been recognized under the Company’s stock option plans for the granting of stock options made prior to 2002. Restricted stock awards granted prior to 2002 are valued at the vesting dates of such awards with compensation cost for such awards recognized ratably over the vesting period.

In 2002, the Company adopted the provisions of FASB No. 123, which requires, on a prospective basis, that the estimated fair value of restricted stock (“Restricted Stock Awards”) and stock options at the grant date be amortized ratably into expense over the appropriate vesting period. For the three month periods ended September 30, 2004 and 2003, the Company recorded restricted stock and stock options expense of $762 and $590, respectively, and $3,106 and $1,489 for the nine month period ended September 30, 2004 and 2003, respectively, for restricted stock and stock options granted or modified in 2003 and 2004. FASB No. 148, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation – Transition and Disclosure, was issued in December 2002 and amends FASB No. 123, Accounting for Stock Based Compensation. FASB No. 148 provides alternative methods of transition for a voluntary change to the fair value based method of accounting for stock based compensation. In addition, this Statement amends the disclosure requirements of FASB No. 123 to require prominent disclosures in both annual and interim financial statements about the method of accounting for stock-based employee compensation and the effect of the method used on reported results. FASB No. 148 disclosure requirements are presented as follows:

13

The following table illustrates the effect on net income and earnings per share if the fair value based method had been applied to all outstanding and unvested stock awards in each period:

Reclassifications
Certain reclassifications have been made to prior period amounts in order to conform with current period presentation.

3.   REAL ESTATE PROPERTY TRANSACTIONS

Property Acquisitions
The Company acquired the following office properties during the nine months ended September 30, 2004:

14

(d)    Properties were acquired from AT&T Corporation ("AT&T"), a tenant of the Company, for cash and assumed obligations, as follows:

More recently, on October 21, 2004, the Company acquired 232 Strawbridge Drive, a 74,000 square foot office property located in Moorestown, New Jersey, for approximately $8,700.

Land Acquisitions
On May 14, 2004, the Company acquired approximately five acres of land in Plymouth Meeting, Pennsylvania. Previously, the Company leased this land parcel, upon which the Company owns a 167,748 square foot office building. The land was acquired for approximately $6,094.

On June 25, 2004, the Company acquired approximately 59.9 acres of developable land located in West Windsor, New Jersey for approximately $20,572.

Property Sales
There were no sales of consolidated properties during the nine months ended September 30, 2004. See Note 4: Investments in Unconsolidated Joint Ventures: HPMC – Pacific Plaza for discussion of the joint venture’s sale of a property during the period.

More recently, on October 5, 2004, the Company sold Kemble Plaza I, a 387,000 square foot office property located at 340 Mount Kemble Avenue in Morris Township, New Jersey, for approximately $77,000.

4.   INVESTMENTS IN UNCONSOLIDATED JOINT VENTURES

The debt of the Company’s unconsolidated joint ventures aggregating $125,645 as of September 30, 2004 is non-recourse to the Company, except for customary exceptions pertaining to such matters as intentional misuse of funds, environmental conditions and material misrepresentations, and except as otherwise indicated below.

MEADOWLANDS XANADU
On November 25, 2003, the Company and affiliates of The Mills Corporation (“Mills”) entered into a joint venture to form Meadowlands Mills/Mack-Cali Limited Partnership (“Meadowlands Venture”) for the purpose of developing a $1.3 billion family entertainment and recreation complex with an office and hotel component to be built at the Meadowlands sports complex in East Rutherford, New Jersey (“Meadowlands Xanadu”). Meadowlands Xanadu’s approximately 4.76 million-square-foot complex is expected to feature a family entertainment destination comprising five themed zones: sports; entertainment; children’s education; fashion; and food and home, in addition to four office buildings, aggregating approximately 1.8 million square feet, and a 520-room hotel.

15

On December 3, 2003, the Meadowlands Venture entered into a redevelopment agreement (the “Redevelopment Agreement”) with the New Jersey Sports and Exposition Authority (“NJSEA”) for the redevelopment of the area surrounding the Continental Airlines Arena in East Rutherford, New Jersey and the construction of the Meadowlands Xanadu project. The Redevelopment Agreement provides for a 75-year ground lease, which requires the joint venture to pay the NJSEA a $160,000 development rights fee at the start of construction of the entertainment phase, when all permits and approvals are obtained, and the payment of fixed rent over the term. Fixed rent will be in the amount of $1 per year for the first 15 years, increasing to $7,500 from the 16^th to the 18^th year, increasing to $8,447 in the 19^th year, increasing to $8,700 in the 20^th year, increasing to $8,961 in the 21^st year, then to $9,200 in the 23^rd to 26^th year, with additional increases over the remainder of the term, as set forth in the ground lease. The ground lease also allows for the potential for participation rent payments by the venture, as described in the ground lease agreement. On October 5, 2004, the Meadowlands Venture and the NJSEA entered into the First Amendment to the Redevelopment Agreement. Pursuant to the amendment, the ground lease was also executed on October 5, 2004, but payment of the $160,000 development rights fee was postponed until the satisfaction of certain material conditions, such as the receipt of all necessary governmental permits and approvals for the project. The payment of the development rights fee is expected to be made on or about December 20, 2004, but could be deferred until March 31, 2005. If the material conditions are not satisfied by such date, the Meadowlands Venture has the right to either terminate the transaction, or tender payment of the development rights fee, subject to: (i) the NJSEA’s obligation to refund this amount if certain events adversely impacting the project occur within 12 months thereafter, and (ii) an escrow of portions of the development rights fee for up to a 12-month period. Also pursuant to the First Amendment to the Redevelopment Agreement, the Meadowlands Venture is required to convey certain vacant land, known as the Empire Tract, to a conservancy trust in exchange for a payment of $26,800 from the NJSEA. This payment will be made upon the NJSEA’s receipt of the $160,000 development rights fee.

The Company and Mills own a 20 percent and 80 percent interest, respectively, in the Meadowlands Venture. These interests were subject to certain participation rights by The New York Giants, which were subsequently terminated in April 2004. The joint venture agreement requires the Company to make an equity contribution up to a maximum of $32,500. Pursuant to the joint venture agreement, Mills has received subordinated capital credit in the venture of approximately $118,000, which represents certain costs incurred by Mills in connection with the Empire Tract prior to the creation of the Meadowlands Venture. The joint venture agreement requires Mills to contribute the balance of the capital required to complete the entertainment phase, subject to certain limitations. The Company will receive a nine percent preferred return on its equity investment, only after Mills receives a nine percent preferred return on its equity investment. Residual returns, subject to participation by other parties, will be in proportion to each partner’s respective percentage interest.

Mills will develop, lease and operate the entertainment phase of the Meadowlands Xanadu project. The joint venture agreement provides the Company an option to cause the Meadowlands Venture to form component ventures for the future development of the office and hotel phases, which the Company will develop, lease and operate. The Company will own an 80 percent interest and Mills will own a 20 percent interest in such component ventures. The agreement provides for the first office or hotel component ventures to be formed no later than four years after the grand opening of the entertainment phase, and requires that all component ventures for the office and hotel phases be formed no later than 10 years from such date, but does not require that any or all components be developed. However, under the Meadowlands Venture agreement, Mills has the ability to accelerate such formation schedule, subject to certain conditions. Should the Company fail to meet the time schedule described above for the formation of the component ventures, the Company will forfeit its rights to cause the Meadowlands Venture to form additional component ventures. If this occurs, Mills will have the ability to develop the additional phases, subject to the Company’s right to participate, or to cause the Meadowlands Venture to sell such components to a third party, subject to a sales price limitation of 95 percent of the value that would have been the amount necessary to form such component ventures.

On February 12, 2003, the New Jersey Sports and Exposition Authority (“NJSEA”) selected The Mills Corporation (“Mills”) and the Company to redevelop the Continental Airlines Arena site (“Arena Site”) for mixed uses, including retail. Hartz Mountain Industries, Inc. (“Hartz”) has challenged the NJSEA’s selection. The NJSEA denied its protest. Westfield America, Inc. (“Westfield”) also protested the NJSEA’s selection of Mills and the Company. Westfield’s protest was also denied by the NJSEA. Hartz and Westfield have appealed the denial of their protest. Hartz and Westfield also have appealed the NJSEA’s execution of the Final Redevelopment Agreement for the Arena Site. Four citizens, Elliot Braha, Richard DeLauro, George Perry and Carol Coronato (collectively, the “Braha Group,”) have also filed lawsuits challenging the NJSEA award to Mills and the Company. On May 14, 2004, the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, which has jurisdiction of all of the cases, issued an order deciding certain of the issues presented by the cases. The Appellate Division determined that the NJSEA had the statutory authority to develop the Arena Site for mixed uses, including retail, that the NJSEA, in selecting Mills and the Company, did not have to utilize a traditional low bid procurement process, and that the NJSEA complied with the Open Public Meetings Act (“OPMA”) in considering and making its selection. The Appellate Division remanded Hartz’s claims for relief under the Open Public Records Act (“OPRA”). Hartz thereafter petitioned the Supreme Court of New Jersey for certification of the Appellate Division’s decision. That petition remains pending undecided.

16

In August 2004, the Superior Court of New Jersey issued a decision on remand on the OPRA issues. The Court ordered the NJSEA to release certain documents to Hartz, but permitted the NJSEA to withhold other documents. Hartz has appealed that decision to the Appellate Division. The Court is scheduled to hear oral argument on Hartz’s appeal on November 10, 2004. The Appellate Division has stayed on further hearing before the NJSEA on Hartz’s bid protest until the appeal is decided.

In addition to Hartz’s petition for certification pending in the Supreme Court of New Jersey, there are nine pending cases in the Appellate Division which challenge the NJSEA’s selection of the redevelopment proposal by the Meadowlands Venture and the result of the consultative process between the New Jersey Department of Environment Protection (“NJDEP”) and the New Jersey Meadowlands Commission (“NJMC”), on the one hand, and the NJSEA, on the other, conducted pursuant to the requirements of the applicable NJSEA statute. Four of these appeals were filed by Hartz and two each by Westfield and the Braha Group. The ninth case was filed by the Environmental Law Clinic at Columbia Law School on behalf of the Sierra Club, Environmental Defense, New Jersey Public Interest Research Group and New Jersey Environmental Federal.

On September 30, 2004, the Borough of Carlstadt, New Jersey filed a complaint in the Superior Court of New Jersey against the NJSEA and the Meadowlands Venture asserting that: (i) the retail elements of Meadowlands Xanadu are not authorized by statute; (ii) the retail elements of Meadowlands Xanadu are not tax exempt under NJSEA’s enabling act; and (iii) the PILOT program for Meadowlands Xanadu is arbitrary and capricious. The Meadowlands Venture, along with the NJSEA, has moved to transfer this matter to the Appellate Division. The motion is scheduled to be heard on November 5, 2004.

The Company believes that its proposal fully complies with applicable laws and the request for proposals, and plans to vigorously enforce its rights concerning this project. The Company does not believe that the ultimate resolution of this matter will have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition taken as a whole.

HPMC
On April 23, 1998, the Company entered into a joint venture with HCG Development, L.L.C. and Summit Partners I, L.L.C. to form HPMC Development Partners, L.P. and, on July 21, 1998, entered into a second joint venture, HPMC Development Partners II, L.P. (formerly known as HPMC Lava Ridge Partners, L.P.), with these same parties. HPMC Development Partners, L.P.‘s efforts focused on two development projects, commonly referred to as Continental Grand II and Summit Ridge. HPMC Development Partners II, L.P.‘s efforts have focused on three development projects, commonly referred to as Lava Ridge, Pacific Plaza I & II and Stadium Gateway.

The Company has a 50 percent ownership interest and HCG Development, L.L.C. and Summit Partners I, L.L.C. (both of which are not affiliated with the Company) collectively have a 50 percent ownership interest in HPMC Development Partners, L.P. and HPMC Development Partners II, L.P. (the “HPMC Joint Ventures”). Significant terms of the applicable partnership agreements, among other things, call for the Company to provide 80 percent and HCG Development, L.L.C. and Summit Partners I, L.L.C. to collectively provide 20 percent of the development equity capital to the HPMC Joint Ventures. As the Company has agreed to fund development equity capital disproportionate to its ownership interest, it was granted a preferred return of 10 percent on its invested capital as a priority. Profits and losses of each of the HPMC Joint Ventures are allocated to the partners based upon the priority of distributions specified in the respective agreements and entitle the Company to a preferred return, as well as 50 percent of each of the HPMC Joint Ventures’ residual profits above the preferred returns. Equity in earnings recognized by the Company consists of preferred returns and the Company’s equity in the HPMC Joint Ventures’ earnings (loss) after giving effect to the HPMC Joint Ventures’ payment of such preferred returns.

17

G&G MARTCO (Convention Plaza)
The Company holds a 50 percent interest in G&G Martco, which owns Convention Plaza, a 305,618 square foot office building, located in San Francisco, California. The venture has a mortgage loan with a $43,039 balance at September 30, 2004 collateralized by its office property. The loan also provides the venture the ability to increase the balance of the loan up to an additional $4,908 for the funding of qualified leasing costs. The loan bears interest at a rate of the London Inter-Bank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) (1.84 percent at September 30, 2004) plus 162.5 basis points and matures in August 2006. The Company performs management and leasing services for the property owned by the joint venture and recognized $32 and $54 in fees for such services in the three months ended September 30, 2004 and 2003, respectively, and $105 and $177 for the nine months ended September 30, 2004 and 2003, respectively.

AMERICAN FINANCIAL EXCHANGE L.L.C./PLAZA VIII AND IX ASSOCIATES, L.L.C.
On May 20, 1998, the Company entered into a joint venture with Columbia Development Company, L.L.C. (“Columbia”) to form American Financial Exchange L.L.C. The venture was formed to acquire land for future development, located on the Hudson River waterfront in Jersey City, New Jersey, adjacent to the Company’s Harborside Financial Center office complex. Among other things, the partnership agreement provides for a preferred return on the Company’s invested capital in the venture, in addition to the Company’s proportionate share of the venture’s profit, as defined in the agreement. The joint venture acquired land on which it initially constructed a parking facility, a portion of which is currently licensed to a parking operator. Such parking facility serves a ferry service between the Company’s Harborside property and Manhattan. In the fourth quarter 2000, the joint venture started construction of Plaza 10, a 577,575 square foot office building, which was 100 percent pre-leased to Charles Schwab & Co. Inc. (“Schwab”) for a 15-year term, on certain of the land owned by the venture. The lease agreement with Schwab obligated the venture, among other things, to deliver space to the tenant by required timelines and offers expansion options, at the tenant’s election.

18

Such options may have obligated the venture to construct an additional building or, at the Company’s option, to make space available in any of its existing Harborside properties. Had the venture been unable to, or chosen not to, provide such expansion space, the venture would have been liable to Schwab for its actual damages, in no event to exceed $15,000. The amount of Schwab’s actual damages, up to $15,000, had been guaranteed by the Company. As described below, the Company no longer has any remaining obligations to Schwab following the sale of the Company’s interests in the venture. AFE has an agreement with the City of Jersey City, New Jersey, in which it is required to make payments in lieu of property taxes (“PILOT”). The agreement is for a term of 20 years. The PILOT is equal to two percent of Total Project Costs, as defined, with periodic increases, as defined. Total Project Costs, per the agreement, are the greater of $78,821 or actual Total Project Costs, as defined.

The Company performed management, leasing and development services for the Plaza 10 property when it was owned by the venture and recognized $157 in fees from the venture for such services in the three months ended September 30, 2003 and $459 for the nine months ended September 30, 2003.

On September 29, 2003, the Company sold its interest in AFE, in which it held a 50 percent interest, and received approximately $162,145 in net sales proceeds from the transaction, which the Company used primarily to repay outstanding borrowings under its revolving credit facility. The Company recognized a gain on the sale of approximately $23,952, which is recorded in gain on sale of investment in unconsolidated joint venture for the year ended December 31, 2003. Following completion of the sale of its interest, the Company no longer has any remaining obligations to Schwab.

In advance of the transaction, AFE distributed its interests in Plaza VIII and IX Associates, L.L.C., which owned the undeveloped land currently used as a parking facility, to its then partners, the Company and Columbia. The Company and Columbia subsequently entered into a new joint venture to own and manage the undeveloped land and related parking operations through Plaza VIII and IX Associates, L.L.C. The Company and Columbia each hold a 50 percent interest in the new venture.

RAMLAND REALTY ASSOCIATES L.L.C. (One Ramland Road)
On August 20, 1998, the Company entered into a joint venture with S.B. New York Realty Corp. to form Ramland Realty Associates L.L.C. The venture was formed to own, manage and operate One Ramland Road, a 232,000 square foot office/flex building and adjacent developable land, located in Orangeburg, New York. In August 1999, the joint venture completed redevelopment of the property and placed the office/flex building in service. The Company holds a 50 percent interest in the joint venture. The venture has a mortgage loan with a $14,936 balance at September 30, 2004 secured by its office/flex property. The mortgage bears interest at a rate of LIBOR plus 175 basis points and matures in January 2005. The venture is currently in discussions with the current lender regarding a long-term extension of the mortgage loan. In the event the lender does not provide an extension of the mortgage loan, the venture intends to pursue alternative financing strategies.

In 2001, the property’s then principal tenant, Superior Bank, was closed by the Office of Thrift Supervision, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) was named receiver. The tenant continued to meet its rental payment obligations through June 2002. In July 2002, the tenant vacated the premises and the FDIC notified the joint venture that it was rejecting the lease as of July 16, 2002. As a result of the uncertainty regarding the tenant’s ability to meet its obligations through the remainder of the term of its lease, the joint venture wrote off unbilled rents receivable of $1,573 and deferred lease costs of $705, which was included in the Company’s equity in earnings for the year ended December 31, 2002. Subsequently, the venture’s management determined it was unlikely a prospective tenant would retain tenant improvements previously made to Superior Bank’s space and, accordingly, the venture accelerated amortization of those tenant improvements and recorded a charge of $3,586, which is included in the Company’s equity in earnings in the nine months ended September 30, 2003. The Company performs management, leasing and other services for the property owned by the joint venture and recognized $110 and $2 in fees for such services in the three months ended September 30, 2004 and 2003, respectively, and $128 and $10 for the nine months ended September 30, 2004 and 2003, respectively.

ASHFORD LOOP ASSOCIATES L.P. (1001 South Dairy Ashford/2100 West Loop South)
On September 18, 1998, the Company entered into a joint venture with Prudential to form Ashford Loop Associates L.P. The venture was formed to own, manage and operate 1001 South Dairy Ashford, a 130,000 square foot office building acquired on September 18, 1998, and 2100 West Loop South, a 168,000 square foot office building acquired on November 25, 1998, both located in Houston, Texas. The Company holds a 20 percent interest in the joint venture. The Company performed management and leasing services through March 2002 for the properties owned by the joint venture and recognized $45 in fees for such services in the three months ended March 31, 2002. Under certain circumstances, Prudential has the right to convert its interest in the venture into common stock of the Company at a discount to the stock’s fair market value, based on the underlying fair value of Prudential’s interest in the venture at the time of conversion. The Company, at its option, can elect to exchange cash in lieu of stock in an amount equal to the fair value of Prudential’s interest.

19

SOUTH PIER AT HARBORSIDE – HOTEL DEVELOPMENT
On November 17, 1999, the Company entered into a joint venture with Hyatt Corporation (“Hyatt”) to develop a 350-room hotel on the South Pier at Harborside Financial Center, Jersey City, New Jersey, which was completed and commenced initial operations in July 2002. The Company owns a 50 percent interest in the venture.

The venture had a mortgage loan with a commercial bank with a $62,902 balance at December 31, 2003 collateralized by its hotel property. The debt bore interest at a rate of LIBOR plus 275 basis points, which was scheduled to mature in December 2003, and was extended through January 29, 2004. On that date, the venture repaid the mortgage loan using the proceeds from a new $40,000 mortgage loan, collateralized by the hotel property, as well as capital contributions from the Company and Hyatt of $10,750 each. The new loan carries an interest rate of LIBOR plus 200 basis points and matures in February 2006. The loan provides for three one-year extension options subject to certain conditions. The final two one-year extension options require payment of a fee. On May 25, 2004, the venture obtained a second mortgage loan with a commercial bank for $20,000 (with a balance as of September 30, 2004 of $17,500) collateralized by the hotel property, in which each partner, including the Company, has severally guaranteed repayment of approximately $8,750. The loan carries an interest rate of LIBOR plus 175 basis points and matures in February 2006. The loan provides for three one-year extension options subject to certain conditions. The final two one-year extension options require payment of a fee. The proceeds from this loan were used to make distributions to the Company and Hyatt in the amount of $10,000 each. Additionally, the venture has an $8,000 loan with the City of Jersey City, provided by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The loan currently bears interest at fixed rates ranging from 6.09 percent to 6.62 percent and matures in August 2020. The Company has posted an $8,000 letter of credit in support of this loan, $4,000 of which is indemnified by Hyatt.

NORTH PIER AT HARBORSIDE – RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
On April 3, 2001, the Company sold its North Pier at Harborside Financial Center, Jersey City, New Jersey to an entity which planned on developing residential housing on the site. At the time, the Company received net sales proceeds of approximately $3,357 (which included a note receivable of $2,027 subsequently repaid in 2002), and recognized a gain of $439 (before minority interest) from the transaction. On March 31, 2004, the Company received an additional $720 as additional contingent purchase consideration resulting from the achievement of certain conditions at the property subsequent to the initial sale, for which the Company recorded a gain of $637 (net of minority interest of $83) in gain on sale of investment in unconsolidated joint ventures for the nine months ended September 30, 2004.

20

SUMMARIES OF UNCONSOLIDATED JOINT VENTURES
The following is a summary of the financial position of the unconsolidated joint ventures in which the Company had investment interests as of September 30, 2004 and December 31, 2003:

21

SUMMARIES OF UNCONSOLIDATED JOINT VENTURES
The following is a summary of the results of operations of the unconsolidated joint ventures for the period in which the Company had investment interests during the three months ended September 30, 2004 and 2003:

22

SUMMARIES OF UNCONSOLIDATED JOINT VENTURES
The following is a summary of the results of operations of the unconsolidated joint ventures for the period in which the Company had investment interests during the nine months ended September 30, 2004 and 2003: