UNITED STATES
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-K
ý ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2005
o TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
MACK-CALI REALTY CORPORATION
(Exact Name of Registrant as specified in its charter)
|
Maryland |
|
22-3305147 |
|
(State or other
jurisdiction of |
|
(IRS Employer |
|
|
|
|
|
11 Commerce Drive, Cranford, New Jersey |
|
07016-3599 |
|
(Address of principal executive offices) |
|
(Zip code) |
(908) 272-8000
(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
|
(Title of Each Class) |
|
(Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered) |
Common Stock, $0.01 par value |
|
New York Stock Exchange |
|
Preferred Share Purchase Rights |
|
Pacific Exchange |
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
None
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ý 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 Exchange Act. Yes o No ý
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 ý 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 registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendments to this Form 10-K. ý
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of “accelerated filer and large accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check One):
Large accelerated filer ý Accelerated filer o Non-accelerated filer o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.) Yes o No ý
As of June 30, 2005, the aggregate market value of the voting stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant was $2,768,957,517. As of February 17, 2006, the aggregate market value of the voting stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant was $2,855,247,112. The aggregate market values were computed with references to the closing prices on the New York Stock Exchange on such dates. These calculations do not reflect a determination that persons are affiliates for any other purpose.
As of February 17, 2006, 62,150,563 shares of common stock, $0.01 par value, of the Company (“Common Stock”) were outstanding.
LOCATION OF EXHIBIT INDEX: The index of exhibits is contained herein on page number 124.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE: Portions of the registrant’s definitive proxy statement for fiscal year ended December 31, 2005 to be issued in conjunction with the registrant’s annual meeting of shareholders expected to be held on May 24, 2006 are incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K. The definitive proxy statement will be filed by the registrant with the SEC not later than 120 days from the end of the registrant’s fiscal year ended December 31, 2005.
FORM 10-K
Table of Contents
2
Mack-Cali Realty Corporation, a Maryland corporation (together with its subsidiaries, the “Company”), is a fully-integrated, self-administered and self-managed real estate investment trust (“REIT”) that owns and operates a real estate portfolio comprised predominantly of Class A office and office/flex properties located primarily in the Northeast. The Company performs substantially all commercial real estate leasing, management, acquisition, development and construction services on an in-house basis. Mack-Cali Realty Corporation was incorporated on May 24, 1994. The Company’s executive offices are located at 11 Commerce Drive, Cranford, New Jersey 07016-3599, and its telephone number is (908) 272-8000. The Company has an internet website at www.mack-cali.com.
As of December 31, 2005, the Company owned or had interests in 270 properties, aggregating approximately 30.0 million square feet, plus developable land (collectively, the “Properties”). The Properties are comprised of: (a) 267 wholly-owned or Company-controlled properties consisting of 161 office buildings and 96 office/flex buildings aggregating approximately 29.1 million square feet, six industrial/warehouse buildings totaling approximately 387,400 square feet, two stand-alone retail properties totaling approximately 17,300 square feet, and two land leases (collectively, the “Consolidated Properties”); and (b) one office building and one office/flex building aggregating approximately 538,000 square feet, and a 350-room hotel, which are owned by unconsolidated joint ventures in which the Company has investment interests. Unless otherwise indicated, all references to square feet represent net rentable area. As of December 31, 2005, the office, office/flex, industrial/warehouse and stand-alone retail properties included in the Consolidated Properties were 91.0 percent leased to approximately 2,200 tenants. Percentage leased includes all leases in effect as of the period end date, some of which have commencement dates in the future (including, at December 31, 2005, leases with commencement dates substantially in the future consisting of 15,125 square feet scheduled to commence in 2009 and 10,205 square feet scheduled to commence in 2011), and leases that expire at the period end date. Leases that expire as of the period end date aggregate 311,623 square feet, or 1.1 percent of the net rentable square footage. The Properties are located in seven states, primarily in the Northeast, and the District of Columbia. See Item 2: Properties.
The Company’s strategy has been to focus its operations, acquisition and development of office properties in high-barrier-to-entry markets and sub-markets where it believes it is, or can become, a significant and preferred owner and operator. The Company plans to continue this strategy by expanding through acquisitions and/or development in Northeast markets where it has, or can achieve, similar status. The Company believes that its Properties have excellent locations and access and are well-maintained and professionally managed. As a result, the Company believes that its Properties attract high quality tenants and achieve among the highest rental, occupancy and tenant retention rates within their markets. The Company also believes that its extensive market knowledge provides it with a significant competitive advantage, which is further enhanced by its strong reputation for, and emphasis on, delivering highly responsive, professional management services. See “Business Strategies.”
As of December 31, 2005, executive officers and directors of the Company and their affiliates owned approximately 9.2 percent of the Company’s outstanding shares of Common Stock (including Units redeemable into shares of Common Stock). As used herein, the term “Units” refers to limited partnership interests in Mack-Cali Realty, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership (the “Operating Partnership”) through which the Company conducts its real estate activities. The Company’s executive officers have been employed by the Company and/or its predecessor companies for an average of approximately 19 years.
BUSINESS STRATEGIES
Operations
Reputation: The Company has established a reputation as a highly-regarded landlord with an emphasis on delivering quality tenant services in buildings it owns and/or manages. The Company believes that its continued success depends in part on enhancing its reputation as an operator of choice, which will facilitate the retention of current tenants and the
3
attraction of new tenants. The Company believes it provides a superior level of service to its tenants, which should in turn allow the Company to outperform the market with respect to occupancy rates, as well as improve tenant retention.
Communication with tenants: The Company emphasizes frequent communication with tenants to ensure first-class service to the Properties. Property managers generally are located on site at the Properties to provide convenient access to management and to ensure that the Properties are well-maintained. Property management’s primary responsibility is to ensure that buildings are operated at peak efficiency in order to meet both the Company’s and tenants’ needs and expectations. Property managers additionally budget and oversee capital improvements and building system upgrades to enhance the Properties’ competitive advantages in their markets and to maintain the quality of the Company’s properties.
Additionally, the Company’s in-house leasing representatives develop and maintain long-term relationships with the Company’s diverse tenant base and coordinate leasing, expansion, relocation and build-to-suit opportunities within the Company’s portfolio. This approach allows the Company to offer office space in the appropriate size and location to current or prospective tenants in any of its sub-markets.
Growth
The Company plans to continue to own and operate a portfolio of properties in high-barrier-to-entry markets, with a primary focus in the Northeast. The Company’s primary objectives are to maximize operating cash flow and to enhance the value of its portfolio through effective management, acquisition, development and property sales strategies, as follows:
Internal Growth: The Company seeks to maximize the value of its existing portfolio through implementing operating strategies designed to produce the highest effective rental and occupancy rates and lowest tenant installation cost within the markets that it operates. The Company continues to pursue internal growth through re-leasing space at higher effective rents with contractual rent increases and developing or redeveloping space for its diverse base of high credit tenants, including IBM Corporation, Morgan Stanley and Allstate Insurance Company. In addition, the Company seeks economies of scale through volume discounts to take advantage of its size and dominance in particular sub-markets, and operating efficiencies through the use of in-house management, leasing, marketing, financing, accounting, legal, development and construction services.
Acquisitions: The Company also believes that growth opportunities exist through acquiring operating properties or properties for redevelopment with attractive returns in its core Northeast sub-markets where, based on its expertise in leasing, managing and operating properties, it believes it is, or can become, a significant and preferred owner and operator. The Company intends to acquire, invest in or redevelop additional properties that: (i) are expected to provide attractive initial yields with potential for growth in cash flow from operations; (ii) are well-located, of high quality and competitive in their respective sub-markets; (iii) are located in its existing sub-markets or in sub-markets in which the Company can become a significant and preferred owner and operator; and (iv) it believes have been under-managed or are otherwise capable of improved performance through intensive management, capital improvements and/or leasing that should result in increased effective rental and occupancy rates.
Development: The Company seeks to selectively develop additional properties where it believes such development will result in a favorable risk-adjusted return on investment in coordination with the above operating strategies. Such development primarily will occur: (i) when leases have been executed prior to construction; (ii) in stable core Northeast sub-markets where the demand for such space exceeds available supply; and (iii) where the Company is, or can become, a significant and preferred owner and operator.
Property Sales: While management’s principal intention is to own and operate its properties on a long-term basis, it periodically assesses the attributes of each of its properties, with a particular focus on the supply and demand fundamentals of the sub-markets in which they are located. Based on these ongoing assessments, the Company may, from time to time, decide to sell any of its properties.
Financial
The Company currently intends to maintain a ratio of debt-to-undepreciated assets (total debt of the Company as a percentage of total undepreciated assets) of 50 percent or less. As of December 31, 2005, the Company’s total debt
4
constituted approximately 42.8 percent of total undepreciated assets of the Company. The Company has three investment grade credit ratings. Standard & Poor’s Rating Services (“S&P”) and Fitch, Inc. (“Fitch”) have each assigned their BBB rating to existing and prospective senior unsecured debt of the Operating Partnership. S&P and Fitch have also assigned their BBB- rating to existing and prospective preferred stock offerings of the Company. Moody’s Investors Service (“Moody’s”) has assigned its Baa2 rating to existing and prospective senior unsecured debt of the Operating Partnership and its Baa3 rating to existing and prospective preferred stock offerings of the Company. Although there is no limit in the Company’s organizational documents on the amount of indebtedness that the Company may incur or a requirement for the maintenance of investment grade credit ratings, the Company has entered into certain financial agreements which contain covenants that limit the Company’s ability to incur indebtedness under certain circumstances. The Company intends to conduct its operations so as to best be able to maintain its investment grade rated status. The Company intends to utilize the most appropriate sources of capital for future acquisitions, development, capital improvements and other investments, which may include funds from operating activities, proceeds from property and land sales, short-term and long-term borrowings (including draws on the Company’s revolving credit facility), and the issuance of additional debt or equity securities.
EMPLOYEES
As of December 31, 2005, the Company had approximately 350 full-time employees.
COMPETITION
The leasing of real estate is highly competitive. The Properties compete for tenants with lessors and developers of similar properties located in their respective markets primarily on the basis of location, rent charged, services provided, and the design and condition of the Properties. The Company also experiences competition when attempting to acquire or dispose of real estate, including competition from domestic and foreign financial institutions, other REITs, life insurance companies, pension trusts, trust funds, partnerships, individual investors and others.
REGULATIONS
Many laws and governmental regulations are applicable to the Properties and changes in these laws and regulations, or their interpretation by agencies and the courts, occur frequently.
Under various laws and regulations relating to the protection of the environment, an owner of real estate may be held liable for the costs of removal or remediation of certain hazardous or toxic substances located on or in the property. These laws often impose liability without regard to whether the owner was responsible for, or even knew of, the presence of such substances. The presence of such substances may adversely affect the owner’s ability to rent or sell the property or to borrow using such property as collateral and may expose it to liability resulting from any release of, or exposure to, such substances. Persons who arrange for the disposal or treatment of hazardous or toxic substances at another location may also be liable for the costs of removal or remediation of such substances at the disposal or treatment facility, whether or not such facility is owned or operated by such person. Certain environmental laws impose liability for the release of asbestos-containing materials into the air, and third parties may also seek recovery from owners or operators of real properties for personal injury associated with asbestos-containing materials and other hazardous or toxic substances.
In connection with the ownership (direct or indirect), operation, management and development of real properties, the Company may be considered an owner or operator of such properties or as having arranged for the disposal or treatment of hazardous or toxic substances and, therefore, potentially liable for removal or remediation costs, as well as certain other related costs, including governmental penalties and injuries to persons and property.
There can be no assurance that (i) future laws, ordinances or regulations will not impose any material environmental liability, (ii) the current environmental condition of the Properties will not be affected by tenants, by the condition of land or operations in the vicinity of the Properties (such as the presence of underground storage tanks), or by third parties unrelated to the Company, or (iii) the Company’s assessments reveal all environmental liabilities and that there are no material environmental liabilities of which the Company is aware. If compliance with the various laws and regulations, now existing or hereafter adopted, exceeds the Company’s budgets for such items, the Company’s ability to make expected distributions to stockholders could be adversely affected.
5
There are no other laws or regulations which have a material effect on the Company’s operations, other than typical federal, state and local laws affecting the development and operation of real property, such as zoning laws.
INDUSTRY SEGMENTS
The Company operates in only one industry segment — real estate. The Company does not have any foreign operations and its business is not seasonal. Please see our financial statements attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein for financial information relating to our industry segment.
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
As a result of the economic climate since 2001, substantially all of the real estate markets the Company operates in materially softened. Demand for office space declined significantly and vacancy rates increased in each of the Company’s core markets over the period. Through February 22, 2006, the Company’s core markets continued to be weak. The percentage leased in the Company’s consolidated portfolio of stabilized operating properties decreased to 91.0 percent at December 31, 2005 as compared to 91.2 percent at December 31, 2004 and 91.5 percent at December 31, 2003. Percentage leased includes all leases in effect as of the period end date, some of which have commencement dates in the future (including, at December 31, 2005, leases with commencement dates substantially in the future consisting of 15,125 square feet scheduled to commence in 2009 and 10,205 square feet scheduled to commence in 2011), and leases that expire at the period end date. Leases that expire as of the period end date aggregate 311,623 square feet, or 1.1 percent of the net rentable square footage. Excluded from percentage leased at December 31, 2004 was a non-strategic, non-core 318,224 square foot property acquired through a deed in lieu of foreclosure, which was 12.7 percent leased at December 31, 2004 and subsequently sold on February 4, 2005. Market rental rates have declined in most markets from peak levels in late 2000 and early 2001. Rental rates on the Company’s space that was re-leased (based on first rents payable) during the year ended December 31, 2005 decreased an average of 8.2 percent compared to rates that were in effect under expiring leases, as compared to a 8.7 percent decrease in 2004 and a 7.8 percent decrease in 2003. The Company believes that vacancy rates may continue to increase in most of its markets in 2006. As a result, the Company’s future earnings and cash flow may continue to be negatively impacted by current market conditions.
In 2005, the Company:
• acquired six office properties, aggregating 1,832,251 square feet, at a total cost of approximately $387.8 million and;
• sold seven office properties, aggregating 1,081,389 square feet, for aggregate net sales proceeds of approximately $115.0 million.
Additionally, in 2005, the Company sold its interest in an unconsolidated joint venture which owned two office properties aggregating 298,000 square feet, for aggregate net sales proceeds of approximately $2.7 million. See Note 4 to the Financial Statements for further information regarding joint venture activity.
Property Acquisitions
The Company acquired the following office properties during the year ended December 31, 2005:
|
Acquisition |
|
Property/Address |
|
Location |
|
# of |
|
Rentable |
|
Acquisition |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
03/02/05 |
|
101 Hudson Street (a) |
|
Jersey City, Hudson County, NJ |
|
1 |
|
1,246,283 |
|
$ |
330,302 |
|
|
03/29/05 |
|
23 Main Street (a)(b) |
|
Holmdel, Monmouth County, NJ |
|
1 |
|
350,000 |
|
23,948 |
|
|
|
07/12/05 |
|
Monmouth Executive Center (c) |
|
Freehold, Monmouth County, NJ |
|
4 |
|
235,968 |
|
33,561 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Property Acquisitions: |
|
|
|
6 |
|
1,832,251 |
|
$ |
387,811 |
|
||
(a) Transaction was funded primarily through borrowing on the Company’s revolving credit facility.
(b) In addition to its initial investment, the Company intends to make additional investments related to the property of approximately $12.1 million, of which the Company has incurred $6.2 million through December 31, 2005.
(c) Transaction was funded primarily through available cash and assumption of mortgage debt.
6
In November 2005, the Company announced that it entered into a contract to acquire all the interests in Capital Office Park, a seven-building office complex totaling approximately 842,300 square feet in Greenbelt, Maryland for aggregate purchase consideration of approximately $161.7 million. The purchase consideration for the acquisition, which is expected to close in the first quarter of 2006, will consist of the issuance of approximately $97.9 million of common operating partnership units in Mack-Cali Realty, L.P. and the assumption of approximately $63.8 million of mortgage debt. At closing, the sellers may elect to receive approximately $27.9 million in cash in lieu of common operating partnership units.
On February 16, 2006, the Company announced it had reached agreements in principle with each of SL Green Realty Corp. (“SL Green”) and The Gale Company, a privately-owned real estate services company based in New Jersey (“Gale”), pursuant to which the Company plans to acquire interests in certain assets and operations of SL Green and Gale.
Pursuant to the contemplated transactions, the Company is expected to:
• Purchase the Gale Real Estate Services Company for up to $40 million. The purchase price is expected to be based on an earn-out formula with an initial payment of $10 million in common operating partnership units in Mack-Cali Realty, L.P., and $12 million in cash, with a total consideration of up to $40 million.
• Acquire substantially all the ownership interests in 12 office properties valued at approximately $337 million and totaling 1.7 million square feet in Northern and Central New Jersey; and
• Acquire approximately one-half of the ownership interests in eight office properties valued at approximately $168 million and totaling 1.1 million square feet, also in Northern and Central New Jersey.
The Company plans to finance the transactions through a combination of approximately $240 million in drawings on its revolving credit facility, the assumption of existing and placement of new mortgage debt, and the issuance of common operating partnership units.
These planned acquisitions are subject to the execution of definitive acquisition agreements with Gale and SL Green in one instance, and with Gale alone in the other instance, which agreements shall contain mutually acceptable terms and customary closing conditions to be negotiated in good faith with such parties and entered into as soon as practicable. While the Company is confident that these transactions will be completed in accordance with the terms outlined above, there can be no assurance that either or both will close or that the structure or terms of one or both acquisition agreements may not reflect changes from the current agreements in principle.
Property Sales
The Company sold the following office properties during the year ended December 31, 2005:
|
Sale |
|
Property/Address |
|
Location |
|
# of |
|
Rentable |
|
Net |
|
Net |
|
Realized |
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
02/04/05 |
|
210 South 16th Street |
|
Omaha, Douglas County, Nebraska |
|
1 |
|
318,224 |
|
$ |
8,464 |
|
$ |
8,210 |
|
$ |
254 |
|
|
02/11/05 |
|
1122 Alma Road |
|
Richardson, Dallas County, Texas |
|
1 |
|
82,576 |
|
2,075 |
|
2,344 |
|
(269 |
) |
|||
|
02/15/05 |
|
3 Skyline Drive |
|
Hawthorne, Westchester County, New York |
|
1 |
|
75,668 |
|
9,587 |
|
8,856 |
|
731 |
|
|||
|
05/11/05 |
|
201 Willowbrook Blvd. |
|
Wayne, Passaic County, New Jersey (a) |
|
1 |
|
178,329 |
|
17,696 |
|
17,705 |
|
(9 |
) |
|||
|
06/03/05 |
|
600 Community Drive/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
111 East Shore Road |
|
North Hempstead, Nassau County, New York |
|
2 |
|
292,849 |
|
71,593 |
|
59,609 |
|
11,984 |
|
|||
|
12/29/05 |
|
3600 South Yosemite |
|
Denver, Denver County, Colorado |
|
1 |
|
133,743 |
|
5,566 |
|
11,121 |
|
(5,555 |
) |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Total Office Property Sales: |
|
7 |
|
1,081,389 |
|
$ |
114,981 |
|
$ |
107,845 |
|
$ |
7,136 |
|
||||
(a) In connection with the sale, the Company provided a mortgage loan to the buyer of $12 million which bears interest at 5.74 percent, matures in five years with a five year renewal option, and requires monthly payments of principal and interest.
In 2005, the Company purchased approximately 1.5 million shares of common stock in CarrAmerica Realty Corporation, which carried a value of approximately $50.8 million at December 31, 2005. From January 1 through January 25, 2006, the Company purchased an additional 336,500 shares in CarrAmerica for a total purchase price of approximately $11.9 million.
7
FINANCING ACTIVITY
On January 25, 2005, the Company issued $150 million face amount of 5.125 percent senior unsecured notes due January 15, 2015 with interest payable semi-annually in arrears. The proceeds from the issuance (net of selling commissions and discount) of approximately $148.1 million were used primarily to reduce outstanding borrowings under the Company’s unsecured facility.
On April 15, 2005, the Company issued $150 million face amount of 5.05 percent senior unsecured notes due April 15, 2010 with interest payable semi-annually in arrears. The proceeds from the issuance (net of selling commissions and discount) of approximately $148.8 million were used to reduce outstanding borrowings under the 2004 unsecured facility.
On November 15, 2005, the Company issued $100 million face amount of 5.80 percent senior unsecured notes due January 15, 2016 with interest payable semi-annually in arrears. The proceeds from the issuance (net of selling commissions and discount) of approximately $99 million were used to reduce outstanding borrowings under the 2004 unsecured facility.
On January 24, 2006, the Company issued $100 million face amount of 5.80 percent senior unsecured notes due January 15, 2016 with interest payable semi-annually in arrears, and $100 million face amount of 5.25 percent senior unsecured notes due January 15, 2012 with interest payable semi-annually in arrears. The total proceeds from the issuances, including accrued interest on the 5.80 percent notes of approximately $200.8 million, were used to reduce outstanding borrowings under the Company’s unsecured facility.
Revolving Credit Facility
In 2004, the Company refinanced its unsecured revolving credit facility. The $600 million unsecured facility, which is expandable to $800 million, currently carries an interest rate equal to LIBOR plus 65 basis points, representing a reduction of five basis points from the previous facility. The credit facility was refinanced for a three-year term with a one-year extension option. The interest rate and facility fee are subject to adjustment, on a sliding scale, based upon the Operating Partnership’s unsecured debt ratings.
On September 16, 2005, the Company extended and modified its unsecured facility with a group of 23 lenders (reduced from 27). The facility was extended for an additional two years and now matures in November 2009, with an extension option of one year, which would require a payment of 25 basis points of the then borrowing capacity of the facility upon exercise. In addition, the facility fee was reduced by five basis points to 15 basis points at the current BBB/Baa2 pricing level.
The Company’s internet website is www.mack-cali.com. The Company makes available free of charge on or through its website its annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, as soon as reasonably practicable after it electronically files or furnishes such materials to the Securities and Exchange Commission. In addition, the Company’s internet website includes other items related to corporate governance matters, including, among other things, the Company’s corporate governance guidelines, charters of various committees of the Board of Directors, and the Company’s code of business conduct and ethics applicable to all employees, officers and directors. The Company intends to disclose on its internet website any amendments to or waivers from its code of business conduct and ethics as well as any amendments to its corporate governance principles or the charters of various committees of the Board of Directors. Copies of these documents may be obtained, free of charge, from our internet website. Any shareholder also may obtain copies of these documents, free of charge, by sending a request in writing to: Mack-Cali Investor Relations Department, 11 Commerce Drive, Cranford, NJ 07016-3501.
We consider portions of this report, including the documents incorporated by reference, to be forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. We intend such forward-looking statements to be covered by the safe harbor provisions for forward-looking statements contained in Section 21E of such act. Such forward-looking statements relate to, without limitation, our future economic performance, plans and
8
objectives for future operations and projections of revenue and other financial items. Forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of words such as “may,” “will,” “plan,” “should,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “continue” or comparable terminology. Forward-looking statements are inherently subject to risks and uncertainties, many of which we cannot predict with accuracy and some of which we might not even anticipate. Although we believe that the expectations reflected in such forward-looking statements are based upon reasonable assumptions at the time made, we can give no assurance that such expectations will be achieved. Future events and actual results, financial and otherwise, may differ materially from the results discussed in the forward-looking statements. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements.
Among the factors about which we have made assumptions are:
• changes in the general economic climate and conditions, including those affecting industries in which our principal tenants compete;
• the extent of any tenant bankruptcies or of any early lease terminations;
• our ability to lease or re-lease space at current or anticipated rents;
• changes in the supply of and demand for office, office/flex and industrial/warehouse properties;
• changes in interest rate levels;
• changes in operating costs;
• our ability to obtain adequate insurance, including coverage for terrorist acts;
• the availability of financing;
• changes in governmental regulation, tax rates and similar matters; and
• other risks associated with the development and acquisition of properties, including risks that the development may not be completed on schedule, that the tenants will not take occupancy or pay rent, or that development or operating costs may be greater than anticipated.
For further information on factors which could impact us and the statements contained herein, see Item 1A: Risk Factors. We assume no obligation to update and supplement forward-looking statements that become untrue because of subsequent events.
Our results from operations and ability to make distributions on our equity and debt service on our indebtedness may be affected by the risk factors set forth below. All investors should consider the following risk factors before deciding to purchase securities of the Company. The Company refers to itself as “we” or “our” in the following risk factors.
Declines in economic activities in the Northeastern office markets could adversely affect our operating results.
A majority of our revenues are derived from our properties located in the Northeast, particularly in New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania and Connecticut. Adverse economic developments in this region could adversely impact the operations of our properties and, therefore, our profitability. Because our portfolio consists primarily of office and office/flex buildings (as compared to a more diversified real estate portfolio), a decline in the economy and/or a decline in the demand for office space may adversely affect our ability to make distributions or payments to our investors.
The continued economic downturn in the real estate market has resulted in the relocation of companies and an uncertain economic future for many businesses. We are uncertain how long the current downturn will last. The current economic downturn may also be having a negative economic impact on many industries, including securities, insurance services,
9
telecommunications and computer systems and other technology, businesses in which many of our tenants are involved. Such economic impact may cause our tenants to have difficulty or be unable to meet their obligations to us.
Our performance is subject to risks associated with the real estate industry.
General: Our business and our ability to make distributions or payments to our investors depend on the ability of our properties to generate funds in excess of operating expenses (including scheduled principal payments on debt and capital expenditure requirements). Events or conditions that are beyond our control may adversely affect our operations and the value of our properties. Such events or conditions could include:
• changes in the general economic climate;
• changes in local conditions such as an oversupply of office space, a reduction in demand for office space, or reductions in office market rental rates;
• decreased attractiveness of our properties to tenants;
• competition from other office and office/flex properties;
• our inability to provide adequate maintenance;
• increased operating costs, including insurance premiums, utilities and real estate taxes, due to inflation and other factors which may not necessarily be offset by increased rents;
• changes in laws and regulations (including tax, environmental, zoning and building codes, and housing laws and regulations) and agency or court interpretations of such laws and regulations and the related costs of compliance;
• changes in interest rate levels and the availability of financing;
• the inability of a significant number of tenants to pay rent;
• our inability to rent office space on favorable terms; and
• civil unrest, earthquakes, acts of terrorism and other natural disasters or acts of God that may result in uninsured losses.
Financially distressed tenants may be unable to pay rent: If a tenant defaults, we may experience delays and incur substantial costs in enforcing our rights as landlord and protecting our investments. If a tenant files for bankruptcy, a potential court judgment rejecting and terminating such tenant’s lease could adversely affect our ability to make distributions or payments to our investors.
Renewing leases or re-letting space could be costly: If a tenant does not renew its lease upon expiration or terminates its lease early, we may not be able to re-lease the space. If a tenant does renew its lease or we re-lease the space, the terms of the renewal or new lease, including the cost of required renovations or concessions to the tenant, may be less favorable than the current lease terms which could adversely affect our ability to make distributions or payments to our investors.
Our insurance coverage on our properties may be inadequate: We currently carry comprehensive insurance on all of our properties, including insurance for liability, fire and flood. We cannot guarantee that the limits of our current policies will be sufficient in the event of a catastrophe to our properties. We cannot guarantee that we will be able to renew or duplicate our current insurance coverage in adequate amounts or at reasonable prices. In addition, while our current insurance policies insure us against loss from terrorist acts and toxic mold, in the future insurance companies may no longer offer coverage against these types of losses, or, if offered, these types of insurance may be prohibitively expensive. If any or all of the foregoing should occur, we may not have insurance coverage against certain types of losses and/or there may be decreases in the limits of insurance available. Should an uninsured loss or a loss in excess of our insured limits occur, we could lose all or a portion of the capital we have invested in a property or properties, as well as the anticipated future revenue from the property or properties. Nevertheless, we might remain obligated for any mortgage debt or other financial obligations related to the property or properties. We cannot guarantee that material losses in excess of insurance proceeds will not occur in the future. If any of our 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 ability to make distributions or payments to our investors.
Illiquidity of real estate limits our ability to act quickly: Real estate investments are relatively illiquid. Such illiquidity may limit our ability to react quickly in response to changes in economic and other conditions. If we want to sell an investment, we might not be able to dispose of that investment in the time period we desire, and the sales price of that
10
investment might not recoup or exceed the amount of our investment. The prohibition in the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and related regulations on a real estate investment trust holding property for sale also may restrict our ability to sell property. In addition, we acquired a significant number of our properties from individuals to whom we issued limited partnership units as part of the purchase price. In connection with the acquisition of these properties, in order to preserve such individual’s tax deferral, we contractually agreed not to sell or otherwise transfer the properties for a specified period of time, except in a manner which does not result in recognition of any built-in-gain (which may result in an income tax liability) or which reimburses the appropriate individuals for the tax consequences of the recognition of such built-in-gains. As of December 31, 2005, 56 of our properties, with an aggregate net book value of approximately $1.3 billion, were subject to these restrictions, which expire periodically through 2010. For those properties where such restrictions have lapsed, we are generally required to use commercially reasonable efforts to prevent any sale, transfer or other disposition of the subject properties from resulting in the recognition of built-in gain to the appropriate individuals. 74 of our properties, with an aggregate net book value of approximately $667.7 million, have lapsed restrictions and are subject to these conditions. The above limitations on our ability to sell our investments could adversely affect our ability to make distributions or payments to our investors.
Americans with Disabilities Act compliance could be costly: Under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (“ADA”), all public accommodations and commercial facilities must meet certain federal requirements related to access and use by disabled persons. Compliance with the ADA requirements could involve removal of structural barriers from certain disabled persons’ entrances. Other federal, state and local laws may require modifications to or restrict further renovations of our properties with respect to such accesses. Although we believe that our properties are substantially in compliance with present requirements, noncompliance with the ADA or related laws or regulations could result in the United States government imposing fines or private litigants being awarded damages against us. Such costs may adversely affect our ability to make distributions or payments to our investors.
Environmental problems are possible and may be costly: Various federal, state and local laws and regulations subject property owners or operators to liability for the costs of removal or remediation of certain hazardous or toxic substances located on or in the property. These laws often impose liability without regard to whether the owner or operator was responsible for or even knew of the presence of such substances. The presence of or failure to properly remediate hazardous or toxic substances (such as toxic mold) may adversely affect our ability to rent, sell or borrow against contaminated property and may impose liability upon us for personal injury to persons exposed to such substances. Various laws and regulations also impose liability on persons who arrange for the disposal or treatment of hazardous or toxic substances at another location for the costs of removal or remediation of such substances at the disposal or treatment facility. These laws often impose liability whether or not the person arranging for such disposal ever owned or operated the disposal facility. Certain other environmental laws and regulations impose liability on owners or operators of property for injuries relating to the release of asbestos-containing or other materials into the air, water or otherwise into the environment. As owners and operators of property and as potential arrangers for hazardous substance disposal, we may be liable under such laws and regulations for removal or remediation costs, governmental penalties, property damage, personal injuries and related expenses. Payment of such costs and expenses could adversely affect our ability to make distributions or payments to our investors.
Competition for acquisitions may result in increased prices for properties: We plan to acquire additional properties in New Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania and in the Northeast generally. We may be competing for investment opportunities with entities that have greater financial resources. Several office building developers and real estate companies may compete with us in seeking properties for acquisition, land for development and prospective tenants. Such competition may adversely affect our ability to make distributions or payments to our investors by:
• reducing the number of suitable investment opportunities offered to us;
• increasing the bargaining power of property owners;
• interfering with our ability to attract and retain tenants;
• increasing vacancies which lowers market rental rates and limits our ability to negotiate rental rates; and/or
• adversely affecting our ability to minimize expenses of operation.
Development of real estate could be costly: As part of our operating strategy, we may acquire land for development or
11
construct on owned land, under certain conditions. Included among the risks of the real estate development business are the following, which may adversely affect our ability to make distributions or payments to our investors:
• financing for development projects may not be available on favorable terms;
• long-term financing may not be available upon completion of construction; and
• failure to complete construction on schedule or within budget may increase debt service expense and construction costs.
Property ownership through joint ventures could subject us to the contrary business objectives of our co-venturers: We, from time to time, invest in joint ventures or partnerships in which we do not hold a controlling interest. These investments involve risks that do not exist with properties in which we own a controlling interest, including the possibility that our co-venturers or partners may, at any time, have business, economic or other objectives that are inconsistent with our objectives. Because we lack a controlling interest, our co-venturers or partners may be in a position to take action contrary to our instructions or requests or contrary to our policies or objectives. While we seek protective rights against such contrary actions, there can be no assurance that we will be successful in procuring any such protective rights, or if procured, that the rights will be sufficient to fully protect us against contrary actions. Our organizational documents do not limit the amount of available funds that we may invest in joint ventures or partnerships. If the objectives of our co-venturers or partners are inconsistent with ours, it may adversely affect our ability to make distributions or payments to our investors.
Debt financing could adversely affect our economic performance.
Scheduled debt payments and refinancing could adversely affect our financial condition: We are subject to the risks normally associated with debt financing. These risks, including the following, may adversely affect our ability to make distributions or payments to our investors:
• our cash flow may be insufficient to meet required payments of principal and interest;
• payments of principal and interest on borrowings may leave us with insufficient cash resources to pay operating expenses;
• we may not be able to refinance indebtedness on our properties at maturity; and
• if refinanced, the terms of refinancing may not be as favorable as the original terms of the related indebtedness.
As of December 31, 2005, we had total outstanding indebtedness of $2.1 billion comprised of $1.4 billion of senior unsecured notes, outstanding borrowings of $227.0 million under our $600.0 million revolving credit facility and approximately $468.7 million of mortgage loans payable and other obligations indebtedness. We may have to refinance the principal due on our current or future indebtedness at maturity, and we may not be able to do so.
If we are unable to refinance our indebtedness on acceptable terms, or at all, events or conditions that may adversely affect our ability to make distributions or payments to our investors include the following:
• we may need to dispose of one or more of our properties upon disadvantageous terms;
• prevailing interest rates or other factors at the time of refinancing could increase interest rates and, therefore, our interest expense;
• if we mortgage property to secure payment of indebtedness and are unable to meet mortgage payments, the mortgagee could foreclose upon such property or appoint a receiver to receive an assignment of our rents and leases; and
• foreclosures upon mortgaged property could create taxable income without accompanying cash proceeds and, therefore, hinder our ability to meet the real estate investment trust distribution requirements of the Internal Revenue Code.
We are obligated to comply with financial covenants in our indebtedness that could restrict our range of operating activities: The mortgages on our properties contain customary negative covenants, including limitations on our ability, without the prior consent of the lender, to further mortgage the property, to enter into new leases outside of stipulated guidelines or to materially modify existing leases. In addition, our credit facility contains customary requirements,
12
including restrictions and other limitations on our ability to incur debt, debt to assets ratios, secured debt to total assets ratios, interest coverage ratios and minimum ratios of unencumbered assets to unsecured debt. The indentures under which our senior unsecured debt have been issued contain financial and operating covenants including coverage ratios and limitations on our ability to incur secured and unsecured debt. These covenants limit our flexibility in conducting our operations and create a risk of default on our indebtedness if we cannot continue to satisfy them.
Rising interest rates may adversely affect our cash flow: As of December 31, 2005, outstanding borrowings of approximately $227 million under our revolving credit facility bear interest at variable rates. We may incur additional indebtedness in the future that also bears interest at variable rates. Variable rate debt creates higher debt service requirements if market interest rates increase. Higher debt service requirements could adversely affect our ability to make distributions or payments to our investors and/or cause us to default under certain debt covenants.
Our degree of leverage could adversely affect our cash flow: We fund acquisition opportunities and development partially through short-term borrowings (including our revolving credit facility), as well as from proceeds from property sales and undistributed cash. We expect to refinance projects purchased with short-term debt either with long-term indebtedness or equity financing depending upon the economic conditions at the time of refinancing. Our Board of Directors has a general policy of limiting the ratio of our indebtedness to total undepreciated assets (total debt as a percentage of total undepreciated assets) to 50 percent or less, although there is no limit in Mack-Cali Realty, L.P.’s or our organizational documents on the amount of indebtedness that we may incur. However, we have entered into certain financial agreements which contain financial and operating covenants that limit our ability under certain circumstances to incur additional secured and unsecured indebtedness. The Board of Directors could alter or eliminate its current policy on borrowing at any time at its discretion. If this policy were changed, we could become more highly leveraged, resulting in an increase in debt service that could adversely affect our cash flow and our ability to make distributions or payments to our investors and/or could cause an increased risk of default on our obligations.
We are dependent on external sources of capital for future growth: To qualify as a real estate investment trust, we must distribute to our shareholders each year at least 90 percent of our net taxable income, excluding any net capital gain. Because of this distribution requirement, it is not likely that we will be able to fund all future capital needs, including for acquisitions and developments, from income from operations. Therefore, we will have to rely on third-party sources of capital, which may or may not be available on favorable terms or at all. Our access to third-party sources of capital depends on a number of things, including the market’s perception of our growth potential and our current and potential future earnings. Moreover, additional equity offerings may result in substantial dilution of our shareholders’ interests, and additional debt financing may substantially increase our leverage.
Competition for skilled personnel could increase our labor costs.
We compete with various other companies in attracting and retaining qualified and skilled personnel. We depend on our ability to attract and retain skilled management personnel who are responsible for the day-to-day operations of our company. Competitive pressures may require that we enhance our pay and benefits package to compete effectively for such personnel. We may not be able to offset such added costs by increasing the rates we charge our tenants. If there is an increase in these costs or if we fail to attract and retain qualified and skilled personnel, our business and operating results could be harmed.
We are dependent on our key personnel whose continued service is not guaranteed.
We are dependent upon our executive officers for strategic business direction and real estate experience. While we believe that we could find replacements for these key personnel, loss of their services could adversely affect our operations. We have entered into an employment agreement (including non-competition provisions) which provides for a continuous four-year employment term with each of Mitchell E. Hersh, Barry Lefkowitz and Roger W. Thomas, and a continuous one-year employment term with Michael A. Grossman. We do not have key man life insurance for our executive officers.
Certain provisions of Maryland law and our charter and bylaws as well as our stockholder rights plan could hinder, delay or prevent changes in control.
Certain provisions of Maryland law, our charter and our bylaws, as well as our stockholder rights plan have the effect of discouraging, delaying or preventing transactions that involve an actual or threatened change in control. These provisions include the following:
13
Classified Board of Directors: Our Board of Directors is divided into three classes with staggered terms of office of three years each. The classification and staggered terms of office of our directors make it more difficult for a third party to gain control of our board of directors. At least two annual meetings of stockholders, instead of one, generally would be required to affect a change in a majority of the board of directors.
Removal of Directors: Under our charter, subject to the rights of one or more classes or series of preferred stock to elect one or more directors, a director may be removed only for cause and only by the affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of all votes entitled to be cast by our stockholders generally in the election of directors. Neither the Maryland General Corporation Law nor our charter define the term “cause.” As a result, removal for “cause” is subject to Maryland common law and to judicial interpretation and review in the context of the facts and circumstances of any particular situation.
Number of Directors, Board Vacancies, Term of Office: We have, in our bylaws, elected to be subject to certain provisions of Maryland law which vest in the Board of Directors the exclusive right to determine the number of directors and the exclusive right, by the affirmative vote of a majority of the remaining directors, even if the remaining directors do not constitute a quorum, to fill vacancies on the board. These provisions of Maryland law, which are applicable even if other provisions of Maryland law or the charter or bylaws provide to the contrary, also provide that any director elected to fill a vacancy shall hold office for the remainder of the full term of the class of directors in which the vacancy occurred, rather than the next annual meeting of stockholders as would otherwise be the case, and until his or her successor is elected and qualifies.
Stockholder Requested Special Meetings: Our bylaws provide that our stockholders have the right to call a special meeting only upon the written request of the stockholders entitled to cast not less than a majority of all the votes entitled to be cast by the stockholders at such meeting.
Advance Notice Provisions for Stockholder Nominations and Proposals: Our bylaws require advance written notice for stockholders to nominate persons for election as directors at, or to bring other business before, any meeting of stockholders. This bylaw provision limits the ability of stockholders to make nominations of persons for election as directors or to introduce other proposals unless we are notified in a timely manner prior to the meeting.
Exclusive Authority of the Board to Amend the Bylaws: Our bylaws provide that our board of directors has the exclusive power to adopt, alter or repeal any provision of the bylaws or to make new bylaws. Thus, our stockholders may not effect any changes to our bylaws.
Preferred Stock: Under our charter, our Board of Directors has authority to issue preferred stock from time to time in one or more series and to establish the terms, preferences and rights of any such series of preferred stock, all without approval of our stockholders.
Duties of Directors with Respect to Unsolicited Takeovers: Maryland law provides protection for Maryland corporations against unsolicited takeovers by limiting, among other things, the duties of the directors in unsolicited takeover situations. The duties of directors of Maryland corporations do not require them to (a) accept, recommend or respond to any proposal by a person seeking to acquire control of the corporation, (b) authorize the corporation to redeem any rights under, or modify or render inapplicable, any stockholders rights plan, (c) make a determination under the Maryland Business Combination Act or the Maryland Control Share Acquisition Act, or (d) act or fail to act solely because of the effect of the act or failure to act may have on an acquisition or potential acquisition of control of the corporation or the amount or type of consideration that may be offered or paid to the stockholders in an acquisition. Moreover, under Maryland law the act of a director of a Maryland corporation relating to or affecting an acquisition or potential acquisition of control is not subject to any higher duty or greater scrutiny than is applied to any other act of a director. Maryland law also contains a statutory presumption that an act of a director of a Maryland corporation satisfies the applicable standards of conduct for directors under Maryland law.
Ownership Limit: In order to preserve our status as a real estate investment trust under the Code, our charter generally prohibits any single stockholder, or any group of affiliated stockholders, from beneficially owning more than 9.8 percent of our outstanding capital stock unless our Board of Directors waives or modifies this ownership limit.
14
Maryland Business Combination Act: The Maryland Business Combination Act provides that unless exempted, a Maryland corporation may not engage in business combinations, including mergers, dispositions of 10 percent or more of its assets, certain issuances of shares of stock and other specified transactions, with an “interested stockholder” or an affiliate of an interested stockholder for five years after the most recent date on which the interested stockholder became an interested stockholder, and thereafter unless specified criteria are met. An interested stockholder is generally a person owning or controlling, directly or indirectly, 10 percent or more of the voting power of the outstanding stock of the Maryland corporation. Our board of directors has exempted from this statute business combinations between the Company and certain affiliated individuals and entities. However, unless our board adopts other exemptions, the provisions of the Maryland Business Combination Act will be applicable to business combinations with other persons.
Maryland Control Share Acquisition Act: Maryland law provides that “control shares” of a corporation acquired in a “control share acquisition” shall have no voting rights except to the extent approved by a vote of two-thirds of the votes eligible to cast on the matter under the Maryland Control Share Acquisition Act. “Control Shares” means shares of stock that, if aggregated with all other shares of stock previously acquired by the acquirer, would entitle the acquirer to exercise voting power in electing directors within one of the following ranges of the voting power: one-tenth or more but less than one-third, one-third or more but less than a majority or a majority or more of all voting power. A “control share acquisition” means the acquisition of control shares, subject to certain exceptions.
If voting rights of control shares acquired in a control share acquisition are not approved at a stockholder’s meeting, then subject to certain conditions and limitations, the issuer may redeem any or all of the control shares for fair value. If voting rights of such control shares are approved at a stockholder’s meeting and the acquirer becomes entitled to vote a majority of the shares of stock entitled to vote, all other stockholders may exercise appraisal rights. Our bylaws contain a provision exempting from the Maryland Control Share Acquisition Act any acquisitions of shares by certain affiliated individuals and entities, any directors, officers or employees of the Company and any person approved by the board of directors prior to the acquisition by such person of control shares. Any control shares acquired in a control share acquisition which are not exempt under the foregoing provisions of our bylaws will be subject to the Maryland Control Share Acquisition Act.
Stockholder Rights Plan: We have adopted a stockholder rights plan that may discourage any potential acquirer from acquiring more than 15 percent of our outstanding common stock since, upon this type of acquisition without approval of our board of directors, all other common stockholders will have the right to purchase a specified amount of common stock at a substantial discount from market price.
Consequences of failure to qualify as a real estate investment trust could adversely affect our financial condition.
Failure to maintain ownership limits could cause us to lose our qualification as a real estate investment trust: In order for us to maintain our qualification as a real estate investment trust, not more than 50 percent in value of our outstanding stock may be actually and/or constructively owned by five or fewer individuals (as defined in the Internal Revenue Code to include certain entities). We have limited the ownership of our outstanding shares of our common stock by any single stockholder to 9.8 percent of the outstanding shares of our common stock. Our Board of Directors could waive this restriction if they were satisfied, based upon the advice of tax counsel or otherwise, that such action would be in our best interests and would not affect our qualifications as a real estate investment trust. Common stock acquired or transferred in breach of the limitation may be redeemed by us for the lesser of the price paid and the average closing price for the 10 trading days immediately preceding redemption or sold at the direction of us. We may elect to redeem such shares of common stock for limited partnership units, which are nontransferable except in very limited circumstances. Any transfer of shares of common stock which, as a result of such transfer, causes us to be in violation of any ownership limit will be deemed void. Although we currently intend to continue to operate in a manner which will enable us to continue to qualify as a real estate investment trust, it is possible that future economic, market, legal, tax or other considerations may cause our Board of Directors to revoke the election for us to qualify as a real estate investment trust. Under our organizational documents, our Board of Directors can make such revocation without the consent of our stockholders.
In addition, the consent of the holders of at least 85 percent of Mack-Cali Realty, L.P.’s partnership units is required: (i) to merge (or permit the merger of) us with another unrelated person, pursuant to a transaction in which Mack-Cali Realty, L.P. is not the surviving entity; (ii) to dissolve, liquidate or wind up Mack-Cali Realty, L.P.; or (iii) to convey or otherwise transfer all or substantially all of Mack-Cali Realty, L.P.’s assets. As of February 17, 2006, as general partner,
15
we own approximately 82.0 percent of Mack-Cali Realty, L.P.’s outstanding partnership units.
Tax liabilities as a consequence of failure to qualify as a real estate investment trust: We have elected to be treated and have operated so as to qualify as a real estate investment trust for federal income tax purposes since our taxable year ended December 31, 1994. Although we believe we will continue to operate in such manner, we cannot guarantee that we will do so. Qualification as a real estate investment trust involves the satisfaction of various requirements (some on an annual and some on a quarterly basis) established under highly technical and complex tax provisions of the Internal Revenue Code. Because few judicial or administrative interpretations of such provisions exist and qualification determinations are fact sensitive, we cannot assure you that we will qualify as a real estate investment trust for any taxable year.
If we fail to qualify as a real estate investment trust in any taxable year, we will be subject to the following:
• we will not be allowed a deduction for dividends paid to shareholders;
• we will be subject to federal income tax at regular corporate rates, including any alternative minimum tax, if applicable; and
• unless we are entitled to relief under certain statutory provisions, we will not be permitted to qualify as a real estate investment trust for the four taxable years following the year during which we were disqualified.
A loss of our status as a real estate investment trust could have an adverse effect on us. Failure to qualify as a real estate investment trust also would eliminate the requirement that we pay dividends to our stockholders.
Other tax liabilities: Even if we qualify as a real estate investment trust, we are subject to certain federal, state and local taxes on our income and property and, in some circumstances, certain other state and local taxes. In addition, our taxable REIT subsidiaries will be subject to federal, state and local income tax for income received in connection with certain non-customary services performed for tenants and/or third parties.
Risk of changes in the tax law applicable to real estate investment trusts: Since the Internal Revenue Service, the United States Treasury Department and Congress frequently review federal income tax legislation, we cannot predict whether, when or to what extent new federal tax laws, regulations, interpretations or rulings will be adopted. Any of such legislative action may prospectively or retroactively modify our and Mack-Cali Realty, L.P.’s tax treatment and, therefore, may adversely affect taxation of us, Mack-Cali Realty, L.P., and/or our investors.
ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS
None.
16
PROPERTY LIST
As of December 31, 2005, the Company’s Consolidated Properties consisted of 263 in-service office, office/flex and industrial/warehouse properties, as well as two stand-alone retail properties and two land leases. The Consolidated Properties are located primarily in the Northeast. The Consolidated Properties are easily accessible from major thoroughfares and are in close proximity to numerous amenities. The Consolidated Properties contain a total of approximately 29.5 million square feet, with the individual properties ranging from 6,216 to 1,246,283 square feet. The Consolidated Properties, managed by on-site employees, generally have attractively landscaped sites and atriums in addition to quality design and construction. The Company’s tenants include many service sector employers, including a large number of professional firms and national and international businesses. The Company believes that all of its properties are well-maintained and do not require significant capital improvements.
17
Office Properties
|
Property Location |
|
Year |
|
Net |
|
Percentage |
|
2005 |
|
2005 |
|
Percentage |
|
2005 |
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NEW JERSEY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Atlantic County |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Egg Harbor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100 Decadon Drive |
|
1987 |
|
40,422 |
|
100.0 |
|
951 |
|
857 |
|
0.18 |
|
23.53 |
|
21.20 |
|
|
200 Decadon Drive |
|
1991 |
|
39,922 |
|
100.0 |
|
923 |
|
801 |
|
0.17 |
|
23.12 |
|
20.06 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bergen County |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Lawn |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17-17 Route 208 North |
|
1987 |
|
143,000 |
|
100.0 |
|
3,449 |
|
2,945 |
|
0.64 |
|
24.12 |
|
20.59 |
|
|
Fort Lee |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One Bridge Plaza |
|
1981 |
|
200,000 |
|
92.2 |
|
4,778 |
|
4,384 |
|
0.88 |
|
25.91 |
|
23.77 |
|
|
2115 Linwood Avenue |
|
1981 |
|
68,000 |
|
82.6 |
|
1,297 |
|
954 |
|
0.24 |
|
23.09 |
|
16.98 |
|
|
Little Ferry |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
200 Riser Road |
|
1974 |
|
286,628 |
|
100.0 |
|
1,907 |
|
1,742 |
|
0.35 |
|
6.65 |
|
6.08 |
|
|
Montvale |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
95 Chestnut Ridge Road |
|
1975 |
|
47,700 |
|
100.0 |
|
796 |
|
729 |
|
0.15 |
|
16.69 |
|
15.28 |
|
|
135 Chestnut Ridge Road |
|
1981 |
|
66,150 |
|
92.1 |
|
1,535 |
|
1,242 |
|
0.28 |
|
25.20 |
|
20.39 |
|
|
Paramus |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15 East Midland Avenue |
|
1988 |
|
259,823 |
|
100.0 |
|
6,201 |
|
6,122 |
|
1.14 |
|
23.87 |
|
23.56 |
|
|
140 East Ridgewood Avenue |
|
1981 |
|
239,680 |
|
90.4 |
|
4,625 |
|
3,923 |
|
0.85 |
|
21.35 |
|
18.11 |
|
|
461 From Road |
|
1988 |
|
253,554 |
|
98.6 |
|
6,064 |
|
6,045 |
|
1.12 |
|
24.26 |
|
24.18 |
|
|
650 From Road |
|
1978 |
|
348,510 |
|
99.1 |
|
8,114 |
|
7,182 |
|
1.50 |
|
23.49 |
|
20.79 |
|
|
61 South Paramus Avenue |
|
1985 |
|
269,191 |
|
93.3 |
|
6,609 |
|
5,998 |
|
1.22 |
|
26.31 |
|
23.88 |
|
|
Rochelle Park |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
120 Passaic Street |
|
1972 |
|
52,000 |
|
99.6 |
|
1,398 |
|
1,318 |
|
0.26 |
|
26.99 |
|
25.45 |
|
|
365 West Passaic Street |
|
1976 |
|
212,578 |
|
94.5 |
|
4,062 |
|
3,531 |
|
0.75 |
|
20.22 |
|
17.58 |
|
|
Upper Saddle River |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 Lake Street |
|
1973/94 |
|
474,801 |
|
100.0 |
|
7,465 |
|
7,465 |
|
1.38 |
|
15.72 |
|
15.72 |
|
|
10 Mountainview Road |
|
1986 |
|
192,000 |
|
100.0 |
|
4,032 |
|
3,758 |
|
0.74 |
|
21.00 |
|
19.57 |
|
|
Woodcliff Lake |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
400 Chestnut Ridge Road |
|
1982 |
|
89,200 |
|
100.0 |
|
1,950 |
|
1,456 |
|
0.36 |
|
21.86 |
|
16.32 |
|
|
470 Chestnut Ridge Road |
|
1987 |
|
52,500 |
|
100.0 |
|
1,192 |
|
1,192 |
|
0.22 |
|
22.70 |
|
22.70 |
|
|
530 Chestnut Ridge Road |
|
1986 |
|
57,204 |
|
100.0 |
|
1,166 |
|
1,166 |
|
0.22 |
|
20.38 |
|
20.38 |
|
|
50 Tice Boulevard |
|
1984 |
|
235,000 |
|
100.0 |
|
6,041 |
|
5,432 |
|
1.12 |
|
25.71 |
|
23.11 |
|
|
300 Tice Boulevard |
|
1991 |
|
230,000 |
|
100.0 |
|
6,099 |
|
5,343 |
|
1.13 |
|
26.52 |
|
23.23 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Burlington County |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moorestown |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
224 Strawbridge Drive |
|
1984 |
|
74,000 |
|
85.4 |
|
1,371 |
|
1,252 |
|
0.25 |
|
21.69 |
|
19.81 |
|
|
228 Strawbridge Drive |
|
1984 |
|
74,000 |
|
100.0 |
|
1,043 |
|
896 |
|
0.19 |
|
14.09 |
|
12.11 |
|
|
232 Strawbridge Drive |
|
1986 |
|
74,258 |
|
98.8 |
|
1,131 |
|
1,127 |
|
0.21 |
|
15.42 |
|
15.36 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Essex County |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Millburn |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
150 J.F. Kennedy Parkway |
|
1980 |
|
247,476 |
|
100.0 |
|
7,009 |
|
6,079 |
|
1.29 |
|
28.32 |
|
24.56 |
|
18
|
Property Location |
|
Year |
|
Net |
|
Percentage |
|
2005 |
|
2005 |
|
Percentage |
|
2005 |
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Roseland |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
101 Eisenhower Parkway |
|
1980 |
|
237,000 |
|
94.8 |
|
5,395 |
|
4,953 |
|
1.00 |
|
24.01 |
|
22.05 |
|
|
103 Eisenhower Parkway |
|
1985 |
|
151,545 |
|
82.2 |
|
3,054 |
|
2,608 |
|
0.56 |
|
24.52 |
|
20.94 |
|
|
105 Eisenhower Parkway |
|
2001 |
|
220,000 |
|
71.6 |
|
3,848 |
|
2,927 |
|
0.71 |
|
24.43 |
|
18.58 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hudson County |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jersey City |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Harborside Financial Center Plaza 1 |
|
1983 |
|
400,000 |
|
44.8 |
|
2,609 |
|
2,403 |
|
0.48 |
|
14.56 |
|
13.41 |
|
|
Harborside Financial Center Plaza 2 |
|
1990 |
|
761,200 |
|
100.0 |
|
18,577 |
|
17,518 |
|
3.43 |
|
24.40 |
|
23.01 |
|
|
Harborside Financial Center Plaza 3 |
|
1990 |
|
725,600 |
|
100.0 |
|
17,045 |
|
16,035 |
|
3.15 |
|
23.49 |
|
22.10 |
|
|
Harborside Financial Center Plaza 4-A |
|
2000 |
|
207,670 |
|
97.5 |
|
6,659 |
|
5,834 |
|
1.23 |
|
32.89 |
|
28.81 |
|
|
Harborside Financial Center Plaza 5 |
|
2002 |
|
977,225 |
|
94.7 |
|
30,183 |
|
25,832 |
|
5.58 |
|
32.62 |
|
27.91 |
|
|
101 Hudson Street (g) |
|
1992 |
|
1,246,283 |
|
99.5 |
|
23,254 |
|
20,084 |
|
4.29 |
|
22.44 |
|
19.38 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mercer County |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hamilton Township |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
600 Horizon Drive |
|
2002 |
|
95,000 |
|
100.0 |
|
1,373 |
|
1,373 |
|
0.25 |
|
14.45 |
|
14.45 |
|
|
Princeton |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
103 Carnegie Center |
|
1984 |
|
96,000 |
|
100.0 |
|
1,983 |
|
1,818 |
|
0.37 |
|
20.66 |
|
18.94 |
|
|
100 Overlook Center |
|
1988 |
|
149,600 |
|
100.0 |
|
4,102 |
|
3,607 |
|
0.76 |
|
27.42 |
|
24.11 |
|
|
5 Vaughn Drive |
|
1987 |
|
98,500 |
|
94.0 |
|
2,339 |
|
2,080 |
|
0.43 |
|
25.26 |
|
22.46 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Middlesex County |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
East Brunswick |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
377 Summerhill Road |
|
1977 |
|
40,000 |
|
100.0 |
|
363 |
|
357 |
|
0.07 |
|
9.08 |
|
8.93 |
|
|
Piscataway |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30 Knightsbridge Road, Bldg 3 |
|
1977 |
|
160,000 |
|
100.0 |
|
2,464 |
|
2,464 |
|
0.45 |
|
15.40 |
|
15.40 |
|
|
30 Knightsbridge Road, Bldg 4 |
|
1977 |
|
115,000 |
|
100.0 |
|
1,771 |
|
1,771 |
|
0.33 |
|
15.40 |
|
15.40 |
|
|
30 Knightsbridge Road, Bldg 5 |
|
1977 |
|
332,607 |
|
43.6 |
|
169 |
|
166 |
|
0.03 |
|
1.17 |
|
1.14 |
|
|
30 Knightsbridge Road, Bldg 6 |
|
1977 |
|
72,743 |
|
47.2 |
|
30 |
|
30 |
|
0.01 |
|
0.87 |
|
0.87 |
|
|
Plainsboro |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
500 College Road East |
|
1984 |
|
158,235 |
|
100.0 |
|
4,365 |
|
4,187 |
|
0.81 |
|
27.59 |
|
26.46 |
|
|
South Brunswick |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 Independence Way |
|
1983 |
|
111,300 |
|
38.8 |
|
414 |
|
377 |
|
0.08 |
|
9.59 |
|
8.73 |
|
|
Woodbridge |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
581 Main Street |
|
1991 |
|
200,000 |
|
100.0 |
|
4,924 |
|
4,667 |
|
0.91 |
|
24.62 |
|
23.34 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Monmouth County |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freehold |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 Paragon Way (g) |
|
1989 |
|
44,524 |
|
86.9 |
|
336 |
|
263 |
|
0.06 |
|
18.32 |
|
14.34 |
|
|
3 Paragon Way (g) |
|
1991 |
|
66,898 |
|
69.3 |
|
288 |
|
258 |
|
0.05 |
|
13.11 |
|
11.74 |
|
|
4 Paragon Way (g) |
|
2002 |
|
63,989 |
|
100.0 |
|
545 |
|
411 |
|
0.10 |
|
17.97 |
|
13.55 |
|
|
100 Willbowbrook (g) |
|
1988 |
|
60,557 |
|
73.6 |
|
390 |
|
345 |
|
0.07 |
|
18.46 |
|
16.33 |
|
|
Holmdel |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23 Main Street (g) |
|
1977 |
|
350,000 |
|
100.0 |
|
3,782 |
|
3,610 |
|
0.70 |
|
14.19 |
|
13.54 |
|
19
|
Property Location |
|
Year |
|
Net |
|
Percentage |
|
2005 |
|
2005 |
|
Percentage |
|
2005 |
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Middletown |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One River Center Bldg 1 |
|
1983 |
|
122,594 |
|
89.2 |
|
2,099 |
|
1,950 |
|
0.39 |
|
19.19 |
|
17.83 |
|
|
One River Center Bldg 2 |
|
1983 |
|
120,360 |
|
100.0 |
|
2,769 |
|
2,736 |
|
0.51 |
|
23.01 |
|
22.73 |
|
|
One River Center Bldg 3 |
|
1984 |
|
214,518 |
|
94.7 |
|
4,362 |
|
4,311 |
|
0.81 |
|
21.47 |
|
21.22 |
|
|
Neptune |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3600 Route 66 |
|
1989 |
|
180,000 |
|
100.0 |
|
2,400 |
|
2,171 |
|
0.44 |
|
13.33 |
|
12.06 |
|
|
Wall Township |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1305 Campus Parkway |
|
1988 |
|
23,350 |
|
92.4 |
|
361 |
|
337 |
|
0.07 |
|
16.73 |
|
15.62 |
|
|
1350 Campus Parkway |
|
1990 |
|
79,747 |
|
99.9 |
|
1,599 |
|
1,454 |
|
0.30 |
|
20.07 |
|
18.25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Morris County |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Florham Park |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
325 Columbia Turnpike |
|
1987 |
|
168,144 |
|
99.4 |
|
3,972 |
|
3,634 |
|
0.73 |
|
23.77 |
|
21.74 |
|
|
Morris Plains |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
250 Johnson Road |
|
1977 |
|
75,000 |
|
100.0 |
|
1,587 |
|
1,473 |
|
0.29 |
|
21.16 |
|
19.64 |
|
|
201 Littleton Road |
|
1979 |
|
88,369 |
|
88.9 |
|
1,783 |
|
1,582 |
|
0.33 |
|
22.70 |
|
20.14 |
|
|
Morris Township |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
412 Mt. Kemble Avenue |
|
1986 |
|
475,100 |
|
— |
|
2,984 |
|
2,984 |
|
0.55 |
|
— |
|
— |
|
|
Parsippany |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 Campus Drive |
|
1983 |
|
147,475 |
|
91.1 |
|
3,482 |
|
3,282 |
|
0.64 |
|
25.92 |
|
24.43 |
|
|
6 Campus Drive |
|
1983 |
|
148,291 |
|
67.9 |
|
2,038 |
|
1,696 |
|
0.38 |
|
20.24 |
|
16.84 |
|
|
7 Campus Drive |
|
1982 |
|
154,395 |
|
100.0 |
|
2,037 |
|
1,924 |
|
0.38 |
|
13.19 |
|
12.46 |
|
|
8 Campus Drive |
|
1987 |
|
215,265 |
|
100.0 |
|
6,282 |
|
5,588 |
|
1.16 |
|
29.18 |
|
25.96 |
|
|
9 Campus Drive |
|
1983 |
|
156,495 |
|
92.5 |
|
3,659 |
|
3,142 |
|
0.68 |
|
25.28 |
|
21.71 |
|
|
4 Century Drive |
|
1981 |
|
100,036 |
|
68.2 |
|
1,163 |
|
1,163 |
|
0.21 |
|
17.05 |
|
17.05 |
|
|
5 Century Drive |
|
1981 |
|
79,739 |
|
97.3 |
|
2,073 |
|
2,073 |
|
0.38 |
|
26.72 |
|
26.72 |
|
|
6 Century Drive |
|
1981 |
|
100,036 |
|
3.0 |
|
125 |
|
125 |
|
0.02 |
|
41.65 |
|
41.65 |
|
|
2 Dryden Way |
|
1990 |
|
6,216 |
|
100.0 |
|
108 |
|
108 |
|
0.02 |
|
17.37 |
|
17.37 |
|
|
4 Gatehall Drive |
|
1988 |
|
248,480 |
|
78.8 |
|
4,895 |
|
4,416 |
|
0.90 |
|
25.00 |
|
22.55 |
|
|
2 Hilton Court |
|
1991 |
|
181,592 |
|
100.0 |
|
5,019 |
|
4,518 |
|
0.93 |
|
27.64 |
|
24.88 |
|
|
1633 Littleton Road |
|
1978 |
|
57,722 |
|
100.0 |
|
1,131 |
|
1,131 |
|
0.21 |
|
19.59 |
|
19.59 |
|
|
600 Parsippany Road |
|
1978 |
|
96,000 |
|
65.7 |
|
1,179 |
|
982 |
|
0.22 |
|
18.69 |
|
15.57 |
|
|
1 Sylvan Way |
|
1989 |
|
150,557 |
|
100.0 |
|
3,502 |
|
3,106 |
|
0.65 |
|
23.26 |
|
20.63 |
|
|
5 Sylvan Way |
|
1989 |
|
151,383 |
|
98.0 |
|
3,683 |
|
3,403 |
|
0.68 |
|
24.83 |
|
22.94 |
|
|
7 Sylvan Way |
|
1987 |
|
145,983 |
|
100.0 |
|
2,927 |
|
2,509 |
|
0.54 |
|
20.05 |
|
17.19 |
|
|
5 Wood Hollow Road |
|
1979 |
|
317,040 |
|
88.1 |
|
4,274 |
|
4,167 |
|
0.79 |
|
15.30 |
|
14.92 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Passaic County |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clifton |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
777 Passaic Avenue |
|
1983 |
|
75,000 |
|
100.0 |
|
1,532 |
|
1,338 |
|
0.28 |
|
20.43 |
|
17.84 |
|
|
Totowa |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
999 Riverview Drive |
|
1988 |
|
56,066 |
|
100.0 |
|
880 |
|
797 |
|
0.16 |
|
15.70 |
|
14.22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Somerset County |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basking Ridge |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
222 Mt. Airy Road |
|
1986 |
|
49,000 |
|
60.7 |
|
597 |
|
466 |
|
0.11 |
|
20.07 |
|
15.67 |
|
|
233 Mt. Airy Road |
|
1987 |
|
66,000 |
|
100.0 |
|
1,315 |
|
1,103 |
|
0.24 |
|
19.92 |
|
16.71 |
|
20
|
Property Location |
|
Year |
|
Net |
|
Percentage |
|
2005 |
|
2005 |
|
Percentage |
|
2005 |
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bernards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
106 Allen Road |
|
2000 |
|
132,010 |
|
93.2 |
|
2,714 |
|
2,066 |
|
0.50 |
|
22.06 |
|
16.79 |
|
|
Bridgewater |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
721 Route 202/206 |
|
1989 |
|
192,741 |
|
87.8 |
|
3,923 |
|
3,792 |
|
0.72 |
|
23.18 |
|
22.41 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Union County |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clark |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100 Walnut Avenue |
|
1985 |
|
182,555 |
|
99.5 |
|
4,551 |
|
3,996 |
|
0.84 |
|
25.05 |
|
22.00 |
|
|
Cranford |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 Commerce Drive |
|
1973 |
|
56,000 |
|
100.0 |
|
1,234 |
|
1,116 |
|
0.23 |
|
22.04 |
|
19.93 |
|
|
11 Commerce Drive (c) |
|
1981 |
|
90,000 |
|
97.1 |
|
1,242 |
|
1,068 |
|
0.23 |
|
14.21 |
|
12.22 |
|
|
12 Commerce Drive |
|
1967 |
|
72,260 |
|
95.1 |
|
873 |
|
700 |
|
0.16 |
|
12.70 |
|
10.19 |
|
|
14 Commerce Drive |
|
1971 |
|
67,189 |
|
100.0 |
|
1,341 |
|
1,335 |
|
0.25 |
|
19.96 |
|
19.87 |
|
|
20 Commerce Drive |
|
1990 |
|
176,600 |
|
98.4 |
|
3,522 |
|
3,191 |
|
0.65 |
|
20.27 |
|
18.36 |
|
|
25 Commerce Drive |
|
1971 |
|
67,749 |
|
100.0 |
|
1,395 |
|
1,319 |
|
0.26 |
|
20.59 |
|
19.47 |
|
|
65 Jackson Drive |
|
1984 |
|
82,778 |
|
100.0 |
|
1,948 |
|
1,729 |
|
0.36 |
|
23.53 |
|
20.89 |
|
|
New Providence |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
890 Mountain Avenue |
|
1977 |
|
80,000 |
|
89.6 |
|
1,830 |
|
1,721 |
|
0.34 |
|
25.53 |
|
24.01 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total New Jersey Office |
|
|
|
16,918,908 |
|
89.7 |
|
331,860 |
|
300,619 |
|
61.29 |
|
22.36 |
|
20.24 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NEW YORK |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dutchess County |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fishkill |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
300 Westage Business Center Drive |
|
1987 |
|
118,727 |
|
82.1 |
|
2,134 |
|
1,822 |
|
0.39 |
|
21.89 |
|
18.69 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rockland County |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Suffern |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
400 Rella Boulevard |
|
1988 |
|
180,000 |
|
100.0 |
|
4,209 |
|
3,656 |
|
0.78 |
|
23.38 |
|
20.31 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Westchester County |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Elmsford |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100 Clearbrook Road (c) |
|
1975 |
|
60,000 |
|
99.5 |
|
1,135 |
|
1,046 |
|
0.21 |
|
19.01 |
|
17.52 |
|
|
101 Executive Boulevard |
|
1971 |
|
50,000 |
|
45.3 |
|
678 |
|
611 |
|
0.13 |
|
29.93 |
|
26.98 |
|
|
555 Taxter Road |
|
1986 |
|
170,554 |
|
100.0 |
|
3,897 |
|
3,321 |
|
0.72 |
|
22.85 |
|
19.47 |
|
|
565 Taxter Road |
|
1988 |
|
170,554 |
|
92.8 |
|
3,836 |
|
3,491 |
|
0.71 |
|
24.24 |
|
22.06 |
|
|
570 Taxter Road |
|
1972 |
|
75,000 |
|
100.0 |
|
1,800 |
|
1,635 |
|
0.33 |
|
24.00 |
|
21.80 |
|
|
Hawthorne |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 Skyline Drive |