Table of Contents

 

 

 

UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, DC 20549

 

FORM 10-K

 

x      ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

 

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010

 

OR

 

o         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 001-32324

 

U-STORE-IT TRUST

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)

 

Maryland

 

20-1024732

(State or Other Jurisdiction of

 

(IRS Employer

Incorporation or Organization)

 

Identification No.)

 

 

 

460 East Swedesford Road

 

 

Suite 3000

 

 

Wayne, Pennsylvania

 

19087

(Address of Principal Executive Offices)

 

(Zip Code)

 

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code (610) 293-5700

 

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

 

 

Title of each class

 

Name of each exchange on which registered

 

 

Common Shares, $0.01 par value per share

 

New York Stock 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 x NO ¨

 

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. YES o NO x

 

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, and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. YES x  NO o

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes o  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 registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.  o

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company. See definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act:

 

Large Accelerated Filer o

 

Accelerated Filer x

 

 

 

Non-Accelerated Filer o

 

Smaller Reporting Company 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 x

 

As of June 30, 2010, the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter, the aggregate market value of common shares held by non-affiliates of the registrant was $693,467,344.

 

As of February 25, 2011 the number of common shares of the registrant outstanding was 99,427,944.

 

Documents incorporated by reference:  Portions of the Proxy Statement for the 2011 Annual Meeting of Shareholders of the Registrant to be filed subsequently with the SEC are incorporated by reference into Part III of this report.

 

 

 



Table of Contents

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

PART I

 

3

 

 

 

Item 1.

Business

4

 

 

 

Item 1A.

Risk Factors

10

 

 

 

Item 1B.

Unresolved Staff Comments

21

 

 

 

Item 2.

Properties

22

 

 

 

Item 3.

Legal Proceedings

30

 

 

 

Item 4.

Removed and Reserved

30

 

 

 

PART II

 

31

 

 

 

Item 5.

Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Shareholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

31

 

 

 

Item 6.

Selected Financial Data

33

 

 

 

Item 7.

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

36

 

 

 

Item 7A.

Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk

48

 

 

 

Item 8.

Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

48

 

 

 

Item 9.

Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure

48

 

 

 

Item 9A.

Controls and Procedures

49

 

 

 

Item 9B.

Other Information

49

 

 

 

PART III

 

50

 

 

 

Item 10.

Trustees, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance

50

 

 

 

Item 11.

Executive Compensation

50

 

 

 

Item 12.

Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Shareholder Matters

50

 

 

 

Item 13.

Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Trustee Independence

50

 

 

 

Item 14.

Principal Accountant Fees and Services

51

 

 

 

PART IV

 

51

 

 

 

Item 15.

Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules

51

 

2



Table of Contents

 

PART I

 

Forward-Looking Statements

 

This Annual Report on Form 10-K and other statements and information publicly disseminated by U- Store-It Trust (“we,” “us,” “our” or the “Company”), contains certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). Such statements are based on assumptions and expectations that may not be realized and are inherently subject to risks, uncertainties and other factors, many of which cannot be predicted with accuracy and some of which might not even be anticipated. Although we believe the expectations reflected in these forward-looking statements are based on reasonable assumptions, future events and actual results, performance, transactions or achievements, financial and otherwise, may differ materially from the results, performance, transactions or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. Risks, uncertainties and other factors that might cause such differences, some of which could be material, include, but are not limited to:

 

·         national and local economic, business, real estate and other market conditions;

 

·         the competitive environment in which we operate, including our ability to raise rental rates;

 

·         the execution of our business plan;

 

·         the availability of external sources of capital;

 

·         financing risks, including the risk of over-leverage and the corresponding risk of default on our mortgage and other debt and potential inability to refinance existing indebtedness;

 

·         increases in interest rates and operating costs;

 

·         counterparty non-performance related to the use of derivative financial instruments;

 

·         our ability to maintain our status as a real estate investment trust (“REIT”) for federal income tax purposes;

 

·         acquisition and development risks;

 

·         increases in taxes, fees, and assessments from state and local jurisdictions;

 

·         changes in real estate and zoning laws or regulations;

 

·         risks related to natural disasters;

 

·         potential environmental and other liabilities;

 

·         other factors affecting the real estate industry generally or the self-storage industry in particular; and

 

·         other risks identified in our Annual Report on Form 10-K and, from time to time, in other reports we file with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) or in other documents that we publicly disseminate.

 

We undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise these forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise except as may be required in securities laws.

 

3



Table of Contents

 

ITEM 1.  BUSINESS

 

Overview

 

We are a self-administered and self-managed real estate company focused primarily on the ownership, operation, acquisition and development of self-storage facilities in the United States.

 

As of December 31, 2010, we owned 363 self-storage facilities located in 26 states and in the District of Columbia containing an aggregate of approximately 23.6 million rentable square feet.  As of December 31, 2010, approximately 76.3% of the rentable square footage at our owned facilities was leased to approximately 152,000 tenants, and no single tenant represented a significant concentration of our revenues.  In addition, as of December 31, 2010, we managed 93 properties for third parties, bringing the total number of properties we owned and/or managed to 456.

 

Our self-storage facilities are designed to offer affordable, easily-accessible and secure storage space for our residential and commercial customers.  Our customers rent storage units for their exclusive use, typically on a month-to-month basis. Additionally, some of our facilities offer outside storage areas for vehicles and boats.  Our facilities are designed to accommodate both residential and commercial customers, with features such as security systems and wide aisles and load-bearing capabilities for large truck access.  All of our facilities have an on-site manager during business hours, and 267, or approximately 74%, of our facilities have a manager who resides in an apartment at the facility.  Our customers can access their storage units during business hours, and some of our facilities provide customers with 24-hour access through computer controlled access systems.  Our goal is to provide customers with the highest standard of facilities and service in the industry. To that end, approximately 69% of our facilities include climate controlled units, compared to the national average of 36% reported by the 2010 Self-Storage Almanac.

 

We were formed in July 2004 as a Maryland REIT.  We own our assets and conduct our business through our operating partnership, U-Store-It, L.P. (our “Operating Partnership”), and its subsidiaries.  We control the Operating Partnership as its sole general partner and, as of December 31, 2010, we owned an approximately 95.4% interest in the Operating Partnership.  Our Operating Partnership has been engaged in virtually all aspects of the self-storage business, including the development, acquisition, ownership and operation of self-storage facilities.

 

Acquisition and Disposition Activity

 

As of December 31, 2010 and 2009, we owned 363 and 367 facilities, respectively, that contained an aggregate of 23.6 million and 23.7 million rentable square feet with occupancy rates of 76.3% and 75.2%, respectively.  As of December 31, 2010 we had facilities in the District of Columbia and the following 26 states:  Alabama, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia and Wisconsin.  A complete listing of, and additional information about, our facilities is included in Item 2 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.  The following is a summary of our 2010 and 2009 acquisition and disposition activity:

 

4



Table of Contents

 

Facility/Portfolio

 

Location

 

Transaction Date

 

Number of Facilities

 

Purchase / Sales
Price (in thousands)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 Acquisitions:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Frisco Asset

 

Frisco, TX

 

July 2010

 

1

 

$

 5,800

 

New York City Assets

 

New York, NY

 

September 2010

 

2

 

26,700

 

Northeast Assets

 

Multiple locations in NJ, NY and MA

 

November 2010

 

5

 

18,560

 

Manassas Asset

 

Manassas, VA

 

November 2010

 

1

 

6,050

 

Apopka Asset

 

Orlando, FL

 

November 2010

 

1

 

4,235

 

Wyckoff Asset

 

New York, NY

 

December 2010

 

1

 

13,600

 

McLearen Asset

 

McLearen, VA

 

December 2010

 

1

 

10,200

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

12

 

$

 85,145

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 Dispositions:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sun City Asset

 

Sun City, CA

 

October 2010

 

1

 

$

 3,100

 

Inland Empire/Fayetteville Assets

 

Multiple locations in CA amd NC

 

December 2010

 

15

 

35,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

16

 

$

 38,100

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2009 Dispositions:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

68th Street Asset

 

Miami, FL

 

January 2009

 

1

 

$

 2,973

 

Albuquerque, NM Asset

 

Albuquerque, NM

 

April 2009

 

1

 

2,825

 

S. Palmetto Asset

 

Ontario, CA

 

June 2009

 

1

 

5,925

 

Hotel Circle Asset

 

Albuquerque, NM

 

July 2009

 

1

 

3,600

 

Jersey City Asset

 

Jersey City, NJ

 

August 2009

 

1

 

11,625

 

Dale Mabry Asset

 

Tampa, FL

 

August 2009

 

1

 

2,800

 

Winner Assets 1

 

Multiple locations in CO

 

September 2009

 

6

 

17,300

 

Baton Rouge Asset (Eminent Domain)

 

Baton Rouge, LA

 

September 2009

 

 

(b)

1,918

 

North H Street Asset (Eminent Domain)

 

San Bernardino, CA

 

September 2009

 

1

 

 

(c)

Boulder Assets (a)

 

Boulder, CO

 

September 2009

 

4

 

32,000

 

Winner Assets 2

 

Multiple locations in CO

 

October 2009

 

2

 

6,600

 

Brecksville Asset

 

Brecksville, OH

 

November 2009

 

1

 

3,300

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

20

 

$

 90,866

 

2008 Acquisitions:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Uptown Asset

 

Washington, DC

 

January 2008

 

1

 

$

 13,300

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2008 Dispositions:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

77th Street Asset

 

Miami, FL

 

March 2008

 

1

 

$

 2,175

 

Leesburg Asset

 

Leesburg, FL

 

March 2008

 

1

 

2,400

 

Lakeland Asset

 

Lakeland, FL

 

April 2008

 

1

 

2,050

 

Endicott Asset

 

Union, NY

 

May 2008

 

1

 

2,250

 

Linden Asset

 

Linden, NJ

 

June 2008

 

1

 

2,825

 

Baton Rouge/Prairieville Assets

 

Multiple locations in LA

 

June 2008

 

2

 

5,400

 

Churchill Assets

 

Multiple locations in MS

 

August 2008

 

4

 

8,333

 

Biloxi/Gulf Breeze Assets

 

Multiple locations in MS/FL

 

September 2008

 

2

 

10,760

 

Deland Asset

 

Deland, FL

 

September 2008

 

1

 

2,780

 

Mobile Assets

 

Mobile, AL

 

September 2008

 

2

 

6,140

 

Hudson Assets

 

Hudson, OH

 

October 2008

 

2

 

2,640

 

Stuart/Vero Beach Assets

 

Multiple locations in FL

 

October 2008

 

2

 

4,550

 

Skipper Road Assets

 

Multiple locations in FL

 

November 2008

 

2

 

5,020

 

Waterway Asset

 

Miami, FL

 

December 2008

 

1

 

4,635

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

23

 

$

 61,958

 

 

5



Table of Contents

 


(a)         We provided $17.6 million in seller financing to the buyer as part of the Boulder Assets disposition.  This financing was subsequently repaid during 2010.

(b)        Approximately one third of the Baton Rouge Asset was taken in conjunction with eminent domain proceedings.  We continue to own and operate the remaining two thirds of the asset and include the asset in our total portfolio property count.

(c)         The entirety of the North H Street Asset was taken in conjunction with eminent domain proceedings and we have removed this asset from our total portfolio asset count.  We expect to finalize compensatory terms with the State of California during 2011.

 

The comparability of our results of operations is affected by the timing of acquisition and disposition activities during the periods reported.  At December 31, 2010 and 2009, we owned 363 and 367 self-storage facilities and related assets, respectively.  The following table summarizes the change in number of owned self-storage facilities from January 1, 2009 through December 31, 2010:

 

 

 

2010

 

2009

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Balance - January 1

 

367

 

387

 

Facilities acquired

 

 

 

Facilities sold

 

 

(1

)

Balance - March 31

 

367

 

386

 

Facilities acquired

 

 

 

Facilities sold

 

 

(2

)

Balance - June 30

 

367

 

384

 

Facilities acquired

 

3

 

 

Facilities sold

 

 

(16

)

Balance - September 30

 

370

 

368

 

Facilities acquired

 

9

 

 

Facilities sold

 

(16

)

(1

)

Balance - December 31

 

363

 

367

 

 

Financing Activities

 

The following summarizes certain financing activities during the year ended December 31, 2010:

 

·

Amended Credit Facility.  On September 29, 2010, we amended our existing $450 million credit facility. The amended credit facility consists of a $200 million unsecured term loan and a $250 million unsecured revolving credit facility. The amended credit facility has a three year term expiring on December 7, 2013, is unsecured, and borrowings on the facility incur interest at a borrowing spread based on the our leverage levels plus LIBOR. We incurred $2.5 million in connection with executing this amendment. Such costs are included as a component of loan procurement costs, net of amortization on our consolidated balance sheet.

 

 

·

Third Party Management.  On April 28, 2010, we acquired 85 management contracts from United Stor-All Management, LLC (“United Stor-All”). The transaction was accounted for as a business combination. The 85 management contracts relate to facilities located in 16 states and the District of Columbia. We paid $4.1 million in cash for the contracts and recognized $1.8 million in contingent consideration. We will account for the contingent consideration in our earnings by recording the changes in fair value of the liability.

 

 

·

Facility Acquisitions.  During the year ended December 31, 2010, we acquired 12 self-storage facilities located throughout the United States for an aggregate purchase price of approximately $85.1 million. In connection with these acquisitions, we allocated a portion of the purchase price to the intangible value of in-place leases which aggregated $3.7 million.

 

6



Table of Contents

 

·

Facility Dispositions.  During the year ended December 31, 2010, we sold 16 self-storage facilities located throughout California and North Carolina for an aggregate sales price of approximately $38.1 million. These sales resulted in the recognition of gains that totaled $1.9 million.

 

 

·

Offering Proceeds.  During 2010, we sold 5.6 million common shares under our “at-the-market” program for an average sales price of $8.62 per share resulting in net proceeds of $47.6 million ($57.6 million of net proceeds and 8.1 million shares sold with an average sales price of $7.28 from program inception to December 31, 2010). We used the net proceeds to fund the acquisition of storage facilities and for general corporate purposes.

 

Business Strategy

 

Our business strategy consists of several elements:

 

·                  Maximize cash flow from our facilities — Our operating strategy focuses on maximizing sustainable rents at our facilities while achieving and sustaining occupancy targets.  We utilize our operating systems and experienced personnel to manage the balance between rental rates, discounts, and physical occupancy with an objective of maximizing our rental revenue.

 

·                  Acquire facilities within targeted markets — During 2011, we expect to complete selective acquisitions in markets that we believe have high barriers to entry, strong demographic fundamentals and demand for storage in excess of storage capacity.  We expect to focus our evaluation of acquisition opportunities in markets where we currently maintain management that can be extended to additional facilities.  We believe the self-storage industry will continue to afford us opportunities for growth through acquisitions due to the highly fragmented composition of the industry.

 

Investment and Market Selection Process

 

We maintain a disciplined and focused process in the acquisition and development of self-storage facilities.  Our investment committee, comprised of executive officers and led by Dean Jernigan, our Chief Executive Officer, oversees our investment process.  Our investment process involves six stages — identification, initial due diligence, economic assessment, investment committee approval (and when required, Board approval), final due diligence, and documentation.  Through our investment committee, we intend to focus on the following criteria:

 

·                  Targeted markets — Our targeted markets include areas where we currently maintain management that can be extended to additional facilities, or where we believe that we can acquire a significant number of facilities efficiently and within a short period of time.  We evaluate both the broader market and the immediate area, typically five miles around the facility, for their ability to support above-average demographic growth.  We seek to increase our presence primarily in areas that we expect will experience growth, including areas within Illinois, Texas, Florida, California and the Northeastern United States and to enter new markets should suitable opportunities arise.

 

·                  Quality of facility — We focus on self-storage facilities that have good visibility and are located near retail centers, which typically provide high traffic corridors and are generally located near residential communities and commercial customers.

 

·                  Growth potential — We target acquisitions that offer growth potential through increased operating efficiencies and, in some cases, through additional leasing efforts, renovations or expansions.  In addition to acquiring single facilities, we seek to invest in portfolio acquisitions, including those offering significant potential for increased operating efficiency and the ability to spread our fixed costs across a large base of facilities.

 

Segment

 

We have one reportable segment:  we own, operate, develop, manage and acquire self-storage facilities.

 

7



Table of Contents

 

Concentration

 

Our self-storage facilities are located in major metropolitan areas as well as rural areas and have numerous tenants per facility.  No single tenant represented a significant concentration of our 2010 revenues.  Our facilities in Florida, California, Texas and Illinois provided approximately 18%, 15%, 10% and 7%, respectively, of our total 2010 and 2009 revenues.

 

Seasonality

 

We typically experience seasonal fluctuations in occupancy levels at our facilities, with the levels generally slightly higher during the summer months due to increased moving activity.

 

Financing Strategy

 

Although our organizational documents do not limit the amount of debt that we may incur, we maintain a capital structure that we believe is reasonable and prudent and that will enable us to have ample cash flow to cover debt service and make distributions to our shareholders.  As of December 31, 2010, our debt to total capitalization ratio (determined by dividing the carrying value of our total indebtedness by the sum of (a) the market value of our outstanding common shares and operating partnership units and (b) the carrying value of our total indebtedness) was approximately 38.5% compared to approximately 51.9% as of December 31, 2009.  Our ratio of debt to the depreciated cost of our real estate assets as of December 31, 2010 was approximately 43.1% compared to approximately 53.7% as of December 31, 2009.  We expect to finance additional investments in self-storage facilities through the most attractive available sources of capital at the time of the transaction, in a manner consistent with maintaining a strong financial position and future financial flexibility.  These capital sources may include borrowings under the revolving portion of our unsecured credit facility and through additional secured financings, sales of common or preferred shares in public offerings or private placements, issuances of common or preferred units in our Operating Partnership in exchange for contributed properties or cash and formations of joint ventures.  We also may sell facilities that we no longer view as core assets and reallocate the sales proceeds to fund other growth.

 

Competition

 

New self-storage facility development has intensified the competition among self-storage operators in many market areas in which we operate.  Self-storage facilities compete based on a number of factors, including location, rental rates, security, suitability of the facility’s design to prospective customers’ needs and the manner in which the facility is operated and marketed.  In particular, the number of competing self-storage facilities in a particular market could have a material effect on our occupancy levels, rental rates and on the overall operating performance of our facilities.  We believe that the primary competition for potential customers of any of our self-storage facilities comes from other self-storage facilities within a three-mile radius of that facility.  We believe our facilities are well-positioned within their respective markets and we emphasize customer convenience, security and professionalism.

 

Our key competitors include local and regional operators as well as the other public self-storage REITS, including Public Storage, Sovran Self Storage and Extra Space Storage Inc.  These companies, some of which operate significantly more facilities than we do and have greater resources than we have, and other entities may generally be able to accept more risk than we determine is prudent for us, including risks with respect to the geographic proximity of facility investments and the payment of higher facility acquisition prices.  This competition may generally reduce the number of suitable acquisition opportunities available to us, increase the price required to consummate the acquisition of particular facilities and reduce the demand for self-storage space in areas where our facilities are located.  Nevertheless, we believe that our experience in operating, acquiring, developing and obtaining financing for self-storage facilities should enable us to compete effectively.

 

Government Regulation

 

We are subject to various laws, ordinances and regulations, including regulations relating to lien sale rights and procedures and various federal, state and local environmental regulations that apply generally to the ownership of real property and the operation of self-storage facilities.

 

Under various federal, state and local laws, ordinances and regulations, an owner or operator of real property may become liable for the costs of removal or remediation of hazardous substances released on or in its property.  These laws often impose liability without regard to whether the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the release of such hazardous substances.  The presence of hazardous substances, or the failure to properly remediate such substances, when released, may

 

8



Table of Contents

 

adversely affect the property owner’s ability to sell the real estate or to borrow using the real estate as collateral, and may cause the property owner to incur substantial remediation costs.  In addition to claims for cleanup costs, the presence of hazardous substances on a property could result in a claim by a private party for personal injury or a claim by an adjacent property owner or user for property damage.  We may also become liable for the costs of removal or remediation of hazardous substances stored at the facilities by a customer even though storage of hazardous substances would be without our knowledge or approval and in violation of the customer’s storage lease agreement with us.

 

Our practice is to conduct or obtain environmental assessments in connection with the acquisition or development of facilities.  Whenever the environmental assessment for one of our facilities indicates that a facility is impacted by soil or groundwater contamination from prior owners/operators or other sources, we work with our environmental consultants and, where appropriate, state governmental agencies, to ensure that the facility is either cleaned up, that no cleanup is necessary because the low level of contamination poses no significant risk to public health or the environment, or that the responsibility for cleanup rests with a third party.

 

We are not aware of any environmental cleanup liability that we believe will have a material adverse effect on us.  We cannot assure you, however, that these environmental assessments and investigations have revealed or will reveal all potential environmental liabilities, that no prior owner created any material environmental condition not known to us or the independent consultant or that future events or changes in environmental laws will not result in the imposition of environmental liability on us.

 

We have not received notice from any governmental authority of any material noncompliance, claim or liability in connection with any of our facilities, nor have we been notified of a claim for personal injury or property damage by a private party in connection with any of our facilities relating to environmental conditions.

 

We are not aware of any environmental condition with respect to any of our facilities that could reasonably be expected to have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations, and we do not expect that the cost of compliance with environmental regulations will have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations.  We cannot assure you, however, that this will continue to be the case.

 

Insurance

 

We carry comprehensive liability, fire, extended coverage and rental loss insurance covering all of the facilities in our portfolio.  We believe the policy specifications and insured limits are appropriate and adequate given the relative risk of loss, the cost of the coverage and industry practice.  We do not carry insurance for losses such as loss from riots, war or acts of God, and, in some cases, environmental hazards, because such coverage is not available or is not available at commercially reasonable rates.  Some of our policies, such as those covering losses due to terrorist activities, hurricanes, floods and earthquakes, are insured subject to limitations involving large deductibles or co-payments and policy limits that may not be sufficient to cover losses.  We also carry liability insurance to insure against personal injuries that might be sustained on our properties and director and officer liability insurance.

 

Offices

 

Our principal executive office is located at 460 E. Swedesford Road, Suite 3000, Wayne, PA  19087.  Our telephone number is (610) 293-5700.  We believe that our current facilities are adequate for our present and future operations.

 

Employees

 

As of December 31, 2010, we employed 1,172 employees, of whom 178 were corporate executive and administrative personnel and 994 were property level personnel.  We believe that our relations with our employees are good.  Our employees are not unionized.

 

Available Information

 

We file registration statements, proxy statements, our annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to those reports, with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”).  You may obtain copies of these documents by visiting the SEC’s Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20549, by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330 or by accessing the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov.  Our

 

9



Table of Contents

 

internet website address is www.ustoreit.com.  You also can obtain on our website, free of charge, a copy of our annual report on Form 10-K, our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, our current reports on Form 8-K, and any amendments to those reports, as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such reports or amendments with, or furnish them to, the SEC.  Our internet website and the information contained therein or connected thereto are not intended to be incorporated by reference into this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

 

Also available on our website, free of charge, are copies of our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, our Corporate Governance Guidelines, and the charters for each of the committees of our Board of Trustees — the Audit Committee, the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee, and the Compensation Committee. Copies of each of these documents are also available in print free of charge, upon request by any shareholder.  You can obtain copies of these documents by contacting Investor Relations by mail at 460 E. Swedesford Road, Suite 3000, Wayne, PA 19087.

 

ITEM 1A.  RISK FACTORS

 

Overview

 

Investors should carefully consider, among other factors, the risks set forth below. These risks are not the only ones that we may face. Additional risks not presently known to us or that we currently consider immaterial may also impair our business operations and hinder our ability to make expected distributions to our shareholders.

 

Risks Related to our Business and Operations

 

Adverse macroeconomic and business conditions may significantly and negatively affect our revenues, profitability and results of operations.

 

The United States has recently experienced an economic slowdown that has resulted in higher unemployment, shrinking demand for products, large-scale business failures and tight credit markets.  Our results of operations may be sensitive to changes in overall economic conditions that impact consumer spending, including discretionary spending, as well as to increased bad debts due to recessionary pressures.  A continuation of ongoing adverse economic conditions affecting disposable consumer income, such as employment levels, business conditions, interest rates, tax rates, fuel and energy costs, and other matters could reduce consumer spending or cause consumers to shift their spending to other products and services.  A general reduction in the level of discretionary spending or shifts in consumer discretionary spending could adversely affect our growth and profitability.

 

It is difficult to determine the breadth and duration of the economic and financial market problems and the many ways in which they may affect our customers and our business in general.  Nonetheless, continuation or further worsening of these difficult financial and macroeconomic conditions could have a significant adverse effect on our sales, profitability and results of operations.

 

Many states and local jurisdictions are facing severe budgetary problems which may have an adverse impact on our business and financial results.

 

Many states and jurisdictions are facing severe budgetary problems.  Action that may be taken in response to these problems, such as increases in property taxes on commercial properties, changes to sales taxes or other governmental efforts, including mandating medical insurance for employees, could adversely impact our business and results of operations.

 

Our financial performance is dependent upon the economic and other conditions of the markets in which our facilities are located.

 

We are susceptible to adverse developments in the markets in which we operate, such as business layoffs or downsizing, industry slowdowns, relocations of businesses, changing demographics and other factors.  Our facilities in Florida, California,  Texas, Ohio, Tennessee, Illinois and Arizona accounted for approximately 16%, 14%, 12%, 8%, 7%, 7% and 5%, respectively, of our total rentable square feet as of December 31, 2010.  As a result of this geographic concentration of our facilities, we are particularly susceptible to adverse market conditions in these areas.  Any adverse economic or real estate developments in these markets, or in any of the other markets in which we operate, or any decrease in demand for self-storage space resulting from the local business climate could adversely affect our rental revenues, which could impair our ability to satisfy our debt service obligations and pay distributions to our shareholders.

 

10



Table of Contents

 

We face risks associated with facility acquisitions.

 

We have in the past acquired, and intend at some time in the future to acquire, individual and portfolios of self-storage facilities that would increase our size and potentially alter our capital structure.  Although we believe that the acquisitions that we expect to undertake in the future will enhance our future financial performance, the success of such transactions is subject to a number of factors, including the risks that:

 

·                  we may not be able to obtain financing for acquisitions on favorable terms;

 

·                  acquisitions may fail to perform as expected;

 

·                  the actual costs of repositioning or redeveloping acquired facilities may be higher than our estimates;

 

·                  acquisitions may be located in new markets where we may have limited knowledge and understanding of the local economy, an absence of business relationships in the area or an unfamiliarity with local governmental and permitting procedures;

 

·                  there is only limited recourse, or no recourse, to the former owners of newly acquired facilities for unknown or undisclosed liabilities such as the clean-up of undisclosed environmental contamination; claims by tenants, vendors or other persons arising on account of actions or omissions of the former owners of the facilities; ordinary course of business expenses; and claims by local governments, adjoining property owners, property owner associations, and easement holders for fees, assessments, taxes on other property-related changes.

 

As a result, if a liability were asserted against us based upon ownership of an acquired facility, we might be required to pay significant sums to settle it, which could adversely affect our financial results and cash flow.

 

We will incur costs and will face integration challenges when we acquire additional facilities.

 

As we acquire or develop additional self-storage facilities, we will be subject to risks associated with integrating and managing new facilities, including customer retention and mortgage default risks. In the case of a large portfolio purchase, we could experience strains in our existing management information capacity.  In addition, acquisitions or developments may cause disruptions in our operations and divert management’s attention away from day-to-day operations.  Furthermore, our profitability may suffer because we will be required to expense acquisition-related costs and amortize in future periods costs for acquired goodwill and other intangible assets.  Our failure to successfully integrate any future facilities into our portfolio could have an adverse effect on our operating costs and our ability to make distributions to our shareholders.

 

The acquisition of new facilities that lack operating history with us will give rise to difficulties in predicting revenue potential.

 

We intend to continue to acquire additional facilities.  These acquisitions could fail to perform in accordance with expectations.  If we fail to accurately estimate occupancy levels, rental rates, operating costs or costs of improvements to bring an acquired facility up to the standards established for our intended market position, the performance of the facility may be below expectations.  Acquired facilities may have characteristics or deficiencies affecting their valuation or revenue potential that we have not yet discovered.  We cannot assure you that the performance of facilities acquired by us will increase or be maintained under our management.

 

We depend on external sources of capital that are outside of our control; the unavailability of capital from external sources could adversely affect our ability to acquire or develop facilities, satisfy our debt obligations and/or make distributions to shareholders.

 

We depend on external sources of capital to fund acquisitions and facility development, to satisfy our debt obligations and to make the required distributions to our shareholders in order to maintain our status as a REIT, which may or may not be available on favorable terms, if at all.  Our access to external 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 and our ability to continue to qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes.  If we are unable to obtain external sources of capital, we may not be able to acquire or develop facilities when strategic opportunities exist, satisfy our debt obligations or make distributions to shareholders that would permit us to qualify as a REIT or avoid paying tax on our REIT taxable income.

 

11



Table of Contents

 

Rising operating expenses could reduce our cash flow and funds available for future distributions.

 

Our facilities and any other facilities we acquire or develop in the future are and will be subject to operating risks common to real estate in general, any or all of which may negatively affect us.  Our facilities are subject to increases in operating expenses such as real estate and other taxes, personnel costs including the cost of providing specific medical coverage to our employees, utilities, insurance, administrative expenses and costs for repairs and maintenance.  If operating expenses increase without a corresponding increase in revenues, our profitability could diminish and limit our ability to make distributions to our shareholders.

 

We cannot assure you of our ability to pay dividends in the future.

 

Historically, we have paid quarterly distributions to our shareholders, and we intend to pay quarterly dividends and to make distributions to our shareholders in amounts such that all or substantially all of our taxable income in each year, subject to certain adjustments, is distributed.  This, along with other factors, should enable us to qualify for the tax benefits accorded to a REIT under the Internal Revenue Code.  We have not established a minimum dividends payment level and all future distributions will be made at the discretion of our Board of Trustees.  Our ability to pay dividends will depend upon, among other factors:

 

·                the operational and financial performance of our facilities;

 

·                capital expenditures with respect to existing and newly acquired facilities;

 

·                general and administrative costs associated with our operation as a publicly-held REIT;

 

·                maintenance of our REIT status;

 

·                the amount of, and the interest rates on, our debt;

 

·                the absence of significant expenditures relating to environmental and other regulatory matters; and

 

·                other risk factors described in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

 

Certain of these matters are beyond our control and any significant difference between our expectations and actual results could have a material adverse effect on our cash flow and our ability to make distributions to shareholders.

 

If we are unable to promptly re-let our units or if the rates upon such re-letting are significantly lower than expected, then our business and results of operations would be adversely affected.

 

We derive revenues principally from rents received from customers who rent units at our self-storage facilities under month-to-month leases.  Any delay in re-letting units as vacancies arise would reduce our revenues and harm our operating results.  In addition, lower than expected rental rates upon re-letting could adversely affect our revenues and impede our growth.

 

Property ownership through joint ventures may limit our ability to act exclusively in our interest.

 

We have in the past, and may continue to, co-invest with third parties through joint ventures.  In any such joint venture, we may not be in a position to exercise sole decision-making authority regarding the facilities owned through joint ventures. Investments in joint ventures may, under certain circumstances, involve risks not present when a third party is not involved, including the possibility that joint venture partners might become bankrupt or fail to fund their share of required capital contributions.  Joint venture partners may have business interests or goals that are inconsistent with our business interests or goals and may be in a position to take actions contrary to our policies or objectives.  Such investments also have the potential risk of impasse on strategic decisions, such as a sale, in cases where neither we nor the joint venture partner would have full control over the joint venture. In other circumstances, joint venture partners may have the ability without our agreement to make certain major decisions, including decisions about sales, capital expenditures and/or financing.  Any disputes that may arise between us and our joint venture partners could result in litigation or arbitration that could increase our expenses and distract our officers and/or Trustees from focusing their time and effort on our business.  In addition, we might in certain

 

12



Table of Contents

 

circumstances be liable for the actions of our joint venture partners, and the activities of a joint venture could adversely affect our ability to qualify as a REIT, even though we do not control the joint venture.

 

We face risks and significant competition associated with actions taken by our competitors.

 

Actions by our competitors may decrease or prevent increases of the occupancy and rental rates of our properties.  We compete with numerous developers, owners and operators of self-storage, including other REITs, some of which own or may in the future own properties similar to ours in the same submarkets in which our properties are located and some of which may have greater capital resources.  In addition, due to the relatively low cost of each individual self-storage facility, other developers, owners and operators have the capability to build additional facilities that may compete with our facilities.

 

If our competitors build new facilities that compete with our facilities or offer space at rental rates below current market rates or below the rental rates we currently charge our tenants, we may lose potential tenants, and we may be pressured to reduce our rental rates below those we currently charge in order to retain tenants when our tenants’ leases expire.  As a result, our financial condition, cash flow, cash available for distribution, market price of our stock and ability to satisfy our debt service obligations could be materially adversely affected.  In addition, increased competition for customers may require us to make capital improvements to facilities that we would not have otherwise made.  Any unbudgeted capital improvements we undertake may reduce cash available for distributions to our shareholders.

 

We also face significant competition for acquisitions and development opportunities.  Some of our competitors have greater financial resources than we do and a greater ability to borrow funds to acquire facilities.  These competitors may also be willing to accept more risk than we can prudently manage, including risks with respect to the geographic proximity of investments and the payment of higher facility acquisition prices.  This competition for investments may reduce the number of suitable investment opportunities available to us, may increase acquisition costs and may reduce demand for self-storage space in certain areas where our facilities are located and, as a result, adversely affect our operating results.

 

We may become subject to litigation or threatened litigation which may divert management’s time and attention, require us to pay damages and expenses or restrict the operation of our business.

 

We may become subject to disputes with commercial parties with whom we maintain relationships or other parties with whom we do business.  Any such dispute could result in litigation between us and the other parties.  Whether or not any dispute actually proceeds to litigation, we may be required to devote significant management time and attention to its successful resolution (through litigation, settlement or otherwise), which would detract from our management’s ability to focus on our business.  Any such resolution could involve the payment of damages or expenses by us, which may be significant.  In addition, any such resolution could involve our agreement with terms that restrict the operation of our business.

 

One type of commercial dispute could involve our use of our brand name and other intellectual property (for example, logos, signage and other marks), for which we generally have common law rights but no federal trademark registration.  There are other commercial parties, at both a local and national level, that may assert that our use of our brand names and other intellectual property conflict with their rights to use brand names and other intellectual property that they consider to be similar to ours.  Any such commercial dispute and related resolution would involve all of the risks described above, including, in particular, our agreement to restrict the use of our brand name or other intellectual property.

 

We also could be sued for personal injuries and/or property damage occurring on our properties.  We maintain liability insurance with limits that we believe adequate to provide for the defense and/or payment of any damages arising from such lawsuits.  There can be no assurance that such coverage will cover all costs and expenses from such suits.

 

Potential losses may not be covered by insurance, which could result in the loss of our investment in a facility and the future cash flows from the facility.

 

We carry comprehensive liability, fire, extended coverage and rental loss insurance covering all of the facilities in our portfolio.  We believe the policy specifications and insured limits are appropriate and adequate given the relative risk of loss, the cost of the coverage and industry practice.  We do not carry insurance for losses such as loss from riots, war or acts of God, and, in some cases, flooding and environmental hazards, because such coverage is not available or is not available at commercially reasonable rates.  Some of our policies, such as those covering losses due to terrorism, hurricanes, floods and earthquakes, are insured subject to limitations involving large deductibles or co-payments and policy limits that may not be

 

13



Table of Contents

 

sufficient to cover losses.  If we experience a loss at a facility that is uninsured or that exceeds policy limits, we could lose the capital invested in that facility as well as the anticipated future cash flows from that facility.  Inflation, changes in building codes and ordinances, environmental considerations, and other factors also might make it impractical or undesirable to use insurance proceeds to replace a facility after it has been damaged or destroyed.  In addition, if the damaged facilities are subject to recourse indebtedness, we would continue to be liable for the indebtedness, even if these facilities were irreparably damaged.

 

Our insurance coverage may not comply fully with certain loan requirements.

 

Certain of our properties serve as collateral for our mortgage-backed debt, some of which was assumed in connection with our acquisition of facilities that requires us to maintain insurance at levels and on terms that are not commercially reasonable in the current insurance environment.  We may be unable to obtain required insurance coverage if the cost and/or availability make it impractical or impossible to comply with debt covenants.  If we cannot comply with a lender’s requirements in any respect, the lender could declare a default that could affect our ability to obtain future financing and could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and cash flows and our ability to obtain future financing.  In addition, we may be required to self-insure against certain losses or the Company’s insurance costs may increase.

 

Potential liability for environmental contamination could result in substantial costs.

 

We are subject to federal, state and local environmental regulations that apply generally to the ownership of real property and the operation of self-storage facilities.  If we fail to comply with those laws, we could be subject to significant fines or other governmental sanctions.

 

Under various federal, state and local laws, ordinances and regulations, an owner or operator of real estate may be required to investigate and clean up hazardous or toxic substances or petroleum product releases at a facility and may be held liable to a governmental entity or to third parties for property damage and for investigation and clean up costs incurred by such parties in connection with contamination.  Such liability may be imposed whether or not the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the presence of these hazardous or toxic substances.  The cost of investigation, remediation or removal of such substances may be substantial, and the presence of such substances, or the failure to properly remediate such substances, may adversely affect the owner’s ability to sell or rent such facility or to borrow using such facility as collateral.  In addition, in connection with the ownership, operation and management of real properties, we are potentially liable for property damage or injuries to persons and property.

 

Our practice is to conduct or obtain environmental assessments in connection with the acquisition or development of additional facilities.  We obtain or examine environmental assessments from qualified and reputable environmental consulting firms (and intend to conduct such assessments prior to the acquisition or development of additional facilities).  The environmental assessments received to date have not revealed, nor do we have actual knowledge of, any environmental liability that we believe will have a material adverse effect on us.  However, we cannot assure you that any environmental assessments performed have identified or will identify all material environmental conditions, that any prior owner of any facility did not create a material environmental condition not actually known to us or that a material environmental condition does not otherwise exist with respect to any of our facilities.

 

Americans with Disabilities Act and applicable state accessibility act compliance may require unanticipated expenditures.

 

Under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and applicable state accessibility act laws (collectively, the “ADA”), all places of public accommodation are required to meet federal requirements related to physical access and use by disabled persons.  A number of other federal, state and local laws may also impose access and other similar requirements at our facilities.  A failure to comply with the ADA or similar state or local requirements could result in the governmental imposition of fines or the award of damages to private litigants affected by the noncompliance.  Although we believe that our facilities comply in all material respects with these requirements (or would be eligible for applicable exemptions from material requirements because of adaptive assistance provided), a determination that one or more of our facilities is not in compliance with the ADA or similar state or local requirements would result in the incurrence of additional costs associated with bringing the facilities into compliance.  If we are required to make substantial modifications to comply with the ADA or similar state or local requirements, we may be required to incur significant unanticipated expenditures, which could have an adverse effect on our operating costs and our ability to make distributions to our shareholders.

 

14



Table of Contents

 

Privacy concerns could result in regulatory changes that may harm our business.

 

Personal privacy has become a significant issue in the jurisdictions in which we operate.  Many jurisdictions in which we operate have imposed restrictions and requirements on the use of personal information by those collecting such information. Changes to law or regulations affecting privacy, if applicable to our business, could impose additional costs and liability on us and could limit our use and disclosure of such information.

 

We face system security risks as we depend upon automated processes and the Internet.

 

We are increasingly dependent upon automated information technology processes.  While we attempt to mitigate this risk through offsite backup procedures and contracted data centers that include, in some cases, redundant operations, we could still be severely impacted by a catastrophic occurrence, such as a natural disaster or a terrorist attack.  In addition, an increasing portion of our business operations are conducted over the Internet, increasing the risk of viruses that could cause system failures and disruptions of operations despite our deployment of anti-virus measures.  Experienced computer programmers may be able to penetrate our network security and misappropriate our confidential information, create system disruptions or cause shutdowns.

 

Terrorist attacks and other acts of violence or war may adversely impact our performance and may affect the markets on which our securities are traded.

 

Terrorist attacks against our facilities, the United States or our interests, may negatively impact our operations and the value of our securities.  Attacks or armed conflicts could negatively impact the demand for self-storage facilities and increase the cost of insurance coverage for our facilities, which could reduce our profitability and cash flow.  Furthermore, any terrorist attacks or armed conflicts could result in increased volatility in or damage to the United States and worldwide financial markets and economy.

 

Risks Related to the Real Estate Industry

 

Our performance and the value of our self-storage facilities are subject to risks associated with our properties and with the real estate industry.

 

Our rental revenues and operating costs and the value of our real estate assets, and consequently the value of our securities, are subject to the risk that if our facilities do not generate revenues sufficient to meet our operating expenses, including debt service and capital expenditures, our cash flow and ability to pay distributions to our shareholders will be adversely affected.  Events or conditions beyond our control that may adversely affect our operations or the value of our facilities include but are not limited to:

 

·                  downturns in the national, regional and local economic climate;

 

·                  local or regional oversupply, increased competition or reduction in demand for self-storage space;

 

·                  vacancies or changes in market rents for self-storage space;

 

·                  inability to collect rent from customers;

 

·                  increased operating costs, including maintenance, insurance premiums and real estate taxes;

 

·                  changes in interest rates and availability of financing;

 

·                  hurricanes, earthquakes and other natural disasters, civil disturbances, terrorist acts or acts of war that may result in uninsured or underinsured losses;

 

·                  significant expenditures associated with acquisitions and development projects, such as debt service payments, real estate taxes, insurance and maintenance costs which are generally not reduced when circumstances cause a reduction in revenues from a property;

 

15


 


Table of Contents

 

·                  costs of complying with changes in laws and governmental regulations, including those governing usage, zoning, the environment and taxes; and

 

·                  the relative illiquidity of real estate investments.

 

In addition, prolonged periods of economic slowdown or recession, rising interest rates or declining demand for self-storage, or the public perception that any of these events may occur, could result in a general decline in rental revenues, which could impair our ability to satisfy our debt service obligations and to make distributions to our shareholders.

 

Rental revenues are significantly influenced by demand for self-storage space generally, and a decrease in such demand would likely have a greater adverse effect on our rental revenues than if we owned a more diversified real estate portfolio.

 

Because our portfolio of facilities consists primarily of self-storage facilities, we are subject to risks inherent in investments in a single industry.  A decrease in the demand for self-storage space would have a greater adverse effect on our rental revenues than if we owned a more diversified real estate portfolio.  Demand for self-storage space has been and could be adversely affected by ongoing weakness in the national, regional and local economies, changes in supply of, or demand for, similar or competing self-storage facilities in an area and the excess amount of self-storage space in a particular market. To the extent that any of these conditions occur, they are likely to affect market rents for self-storage space, which could cause a decrease in our rental revenue.  Any such decrease could impair our ability to satisfy debt service obligations and make distributions to our shareholders.

 

Because real estate is illiquid, we may not be able to sell properties when appropriate.

 

Real estate property investments generally cannot be sold quickly.  Also, the tax laws applicable to REITs require that we hold our facilities for investment, rather than sale in the ordinary course of business, which may cause us to forgo or defer sales of facilities that otherwise would be in our best interest.  Therefore, we may not be able to dispose of facilities promptly, or on favorable terms, in response to economic or other market conditions, which may adversely affect our financial position.

 

Risks Related to our Qualification and Operation as a REIT

 

Failure to qualify as a REIT would subject us to U.S. federal income tax which would reduce the cash available for distribution to our shareholders.

 

We operate our business to qualify to be taxed as a REIT for federal income tax purposes.  We have not requested and do not plan to request a ruling from the IRS that we qualify as a REIT, and the statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K are not binding on the IRS or any court.  As a REIT, we generally will not be subject to federal income tax on the income that we distribute currently to our shareholders.  Many of the REIT requirements, however, are highly technical and complex.  The determination that we are a REIT requires an analysis of various factual matters and circumstances that may not be totally within our control.  For example, to qualify as a REIT, at least 95% of our gross income must come from specific passive sources, such as rent, that are itemized in the REIT tax laws.  In addition, to qualify as a REIT, we cannot own specified amounts of debt and equity securities of some issuers.  We also are required to distribute to our shareholders with respect to each year at least 90% of our REIT taxable income ,excluding net capital gains.  The fact that we hold substantially all of our assets through the Operating Partnership and its subsidiaries further complicates the application of the REIT requirements for us.  Even a technical or inadvertent mistake could jeopardize our REIT status and, given the highly complex nature of the rules governing REITs and the ongoing importance of factual determinations, we cannot provide any assurance that we will continue to qualify as a REIT.  Furthermore, Congress and the IRS might make changes to the tax laws and regulations, and the courts might issue new rulings, that make it more difficult, or impossible, for us to remain qualified as a REIT.  If we fail to qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes and are able to avail ourselves of one or more of the statutory savings provisions in order to maintain our REIT status, we would nevertheless be required to pay penalty taxes of $50,000 or more for each such failure.

 

If we fail to qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes, and are unable to avail ourselves of certain savings provisions set forth in the Internal Revenue Code, we would be subject to federal income tax at regular corporate rates on all of our income.  As a taxable corporation, we would not be allowed to take a deduction for distributions to shareholders in computing our taxable income or pass through long term capital gains to individual shareholders at favorable rates.  We also could be subject to the federal alternative minimum tax and possibly increased state and local taxes.  We would not be able to

 

16



Table of Contents

 

elect to be taxed as a REIT for four years following the year we first failed to qualify unless the IRS were to grant us relief under certain statutory provisions.  If we failed to qualify as a REIT, we would have to pay significant income taxes, which would reduce our net earnings available for investment or distribution to our shareholders.  This likely would have a significant adverse effect on our earnings and likely would adversely affect the value of our securities. In addition, we would no longer be required to pay any distributions to shareholders.

 

Failure of the Operating Partnership (or a subsidiary partnership) to be treated as a partnership would have serious adverse consequences to out shareholders.

 

If the IRS were to successfully challenge the tax status of the Operating Partnership or any of its subsidiary partnerships for federal income tax purposes, the Operating Partnership or the affected subsidiary partnership would be taxable as a corporation.  In such event we would cease to qualify as a REIT and the imposition of a corporate tax on the Operating Partnership or a subsidiary partnership would reduce the amount of cash available for distribution from the Operating Partnership to us and ultimately to our shareholders.

 

To maintain our REIT status, we may be forced to borrow funds on a short term basis during unfavorable market conditions.

 

As a REIT, we are subject to certain distribution requirements, including the requirement to distribute 90% of our REIT taxable income, that may result in our having to make distributions at a disadvantageous time or to borrow funds at unfavorable rates.  Compliance with this requirement may hinder our ability to operate solely on the basis of maximizing profits.

 

We will pay some taxes even if we qualify as a REIT, which will reduce the cash available for distribution to our shareholders.

 

Even if we qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes, we will be required to pay certain federal, state and local taxes on our income and property.  For example, we will be subject to income tax to the extent we distribute less than 100% of our REIT taxable income, including capital gains.  Additionally, we will be subject to a 4% nondeductible excise tax on the amount, if any, by which dividends paid by us in any calendar year are less than the sum of 85% of our ordinary income, 95% of our capital gain net income and 100% of our undistributed income from prior years. Moreover, if we have net income from “prohibited transactions,” that income will be subject to a 100% penalty tax.  In general, prohibited transactions are sales or other dispositions of property held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of business.  The determination as to whether a particular sale is a prohibited transaction depends on the facts and circumstances related to that sale.  We cannot guarantee that sales of our properties would not be prohibited transactions unless we comply with certain statutory safe-harbor provisions.

 

In addition, any net taxable income earned directly by our taxable REIT subsidiaries, or through entities that are disregarded for federal income tax purposes as entities separate from our taxable REIT subsidiaries, will be subject to federal and possibly state corporate income tax.  We have elected to treat some of our subsidiaries as taxable REIT subsidiaries, including U-Store-It Mini Warehouse Co., and we may elect to treat other subsidiaries as taxable REIT subsidiaries in the future.  In this regard, several provisions of the laws applicable to REITs and their subsidiaries ensure that a taxable REIT subsidiary will be subject to an appropriate level of federal income taxation.  For example, a taxable REIT subsidiary is limited in its ability to deduct certain interest payments made to an affiliated REIT.  In addition, the REIT has to pay a 100% penalty tax on some payments that it receives or on some deductions taken by a taxable REIT subsidiary if the economic arrangements between the REIT, the REIT’s customers, and the taxable REIT subsidiary are not comparable to similar arrangements between unrelated parties.  Finally, some state and local jurisdictions may tax some of our income even though as a REIT we are not subject to federal income tax on that income because not all states and localities follow the federal income tax treatment of REITs.  To the extent that we and our affiliates are required to pay federal, state and local taxes, we will have less cash available for distributions to our shareholders.

 

We face possible federal, state and local tax audits.

 

Because we are organized and qualify as a REIT, we are generally not subject to federal income taxes, but are subject to certain state and local taxes.  Certain entities through which we own real estate either have undergone, or are currently undergoing, tax audits.  Although we believe that we have substantial arguments in favor of our positions in the ongoing audits, in some instances there is no controlling precedent or interpretive guidance on the specific point at issue.  Collectively, tax deficiency notices received to date from the jurisdictions conducting the ongoing audits have not been

 

17



Table of Contents

 

material.  However, there can be no assurance that future audits will not occur with increased frequency or that the ultimate result of such audits will not have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.

 

Risks Related to our Debt Financings

 

We face risks related to current debt maturities, including refinancing and counterparty risk.

 

Certain of our mortgages will have significant outstanding balances on their maturity dates, commonly known as “balloon payments.”  We may not have the cash resources available to repay those amounts, and we may have to raise funds for such repayment either through the issuance of capital stock, additional borrowings (which may include extension of maturity dates), joint ventures or asset sales.  There can be no assurance that we will be able to refinance the debt on favorable terms or at all.  To the extent we cannot refinance debt on favorable terms or at all, we may be forced to dispose of properties on disadvantageous terms or pay higher interest rates, either of which would have an adverse impact on our financial performance and ability to pay dividends to investors

 

In addition, we may be exposed to the potential risk of counterparty default or non-payment with respect to interest rate hedges, swap agreements, floors, caps and other interest rate hedging contracts that we may enter into from time to time, in which event we could suffer a material loss on the value of those agreements.  Although these agreements may lessen the impact of rising interest rates on us, they also expose us to the risk that other parties to the agreements will not perform or that we cannot enforce the agreements.  There is no assurance that our potential counterparties on these agreements are likely to perform their obligations under such agreements.

 

Financing our future growth plan or refinancing existing debt maturities could be impacted by negative capital market conditions.

 

Recently, domestic financial markets have experienced extreme volatility and uncertainty.  Overall liquidity has tightened in the domestic financial markets, including the investment grade debt and equity capital markets for which we historically sought financing.  Consequently, there is greater uncertainty regarding our ability to access the credit markets in order to attract financing on reasonable terms nor can there be any assurance we can issue common or preferred equity securities at a reasonable price.  Our ability to finance new acquisitions and refinance future debt maturities could be adversely impacted by our inability to secure permanent financing on reasonable terms, if at all.

 

The terms and covenants relating to our indebtedness could adversely impact our economic performance.

 

Like other real estate companies that incur debt, we are subject to risks associated with debt financing, such as the insufficiency of cash flow to meet required debt service payment obligations and the inability to refinance existing indebtedness.  If our debt cannot be paid, refinanced or extended at maturity, we may not be able to make distributions to shareholders at expected levels or at all and may not be able to acquire new properties.  Failure to make distributions to our shareholders could result in our failure to qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes.  Furthermore, an increase in our interest expense could adversely affect our cash flow and ability to make distributions to shareholders.  If we do not meet our debt service obligations, any facilities securing such indebtedness could be foreclosed on, which would have a material adverse effect on our cash flow and ability to make distributions and, depending on the number of facilities foreclosed on, could threaten our continued viability.

 

Our credit facility contains (and any new or amended facility we may enter into from time to time will likely contain) customary affirmative and negative covenants, including financial covenants that, among other things, require us to comply with certain liquidity and net worth tests.  Our ability to borrow under our credit facility is (and any new or amended facility we may enter into from time to time will be) subject to compliance with such financial and other covenants.  In the event that we fail to satisfy these covenants, we would be in default under the credit facility and may be required to repay such debt with capital from other sources.  Under such circumstances, other sources of debt or equity capital may not be available to us, or may be available only on unattractive terms.  Moreover, the presence of such covenants in our credit agreements could cause us to operate our business with a view toward compliance with such covenants, which might not produce optimal returns for shareholders.

 

Increases in interest rates on variable rate indebtedness would increase our interest expense, which could adversely affect our cash flow and ability to make distributions to shareholders.  Rising interest rates could also restrict our ability to refinance existing debt when it matures.  In addition, an increase in interest rates could decrease the amounts that third parties

 

18



Table of Contents

 

are willing to pay for our assets, thereby limiting our ability to alter our portfolio promptly in relation to economic or other conditions.

 

Our organizational documents contain no limitation on the amount of debt we may incur.  As a result, we may become highly leveraged in the future.

 

Our organizational documents contain no limitations on the amount of indebtedness that we or our Operating Partnership may incur.  We could alter the balance between our total outstanding indebtedness and the value of our assets at any time.  If we become more highly leveraged, then the resulting increase in debt service could adversely affect our ability to make payments on our outstanding indebtedness and to pay our anticipated distributions and/or the distributions required to maintain our REIT status, and could harm our financial condition.

 

Risks Related to our Organization and Structure

 

We are dependent upon our senior management team whose continued service is not guaranteed.

 

Our executive team, including our Named Executive Officers, have extensive self-storage, real estate and public company experience.  Although we have employment agreements with these members of our senior management team, we cannot provide any assurance that any of them will remain in our employment.  The loss of services of one or more members of our senior management team could adversely affect our operations and our future growth.

 

We are dependent upon our on-site personnel to maximize customer satisfaction; any difficulties we encounter in hiring, training and retaining skilled field personnel may adversely affect our rental revenues.

 

As of December 31, 2010, we had 994 field personnel involved in the management and operation of our facilities.  The customer service, marketing skills and knowledge of local market demand and competitive dynamics of our facility managers are contributing factors to our ability to maximize our rental income and to achieve the highest sustainable rent levels at each of our facilities.  We compete with various other companies in attracting and retaining qualified and skilled personnel. Competitive pressures may require that we enhance our pay and benefits package to compete effectively for such personnel.  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.

 

Certain provisions of Maryland law could inhibit changes in control, which may discourage third parties from conducting a tender offer or seeking other change of control transactions that could involve a premium price for our shares or otherwise benefit our shareholders.

 

Certain provisions of Maryland law may have the effect of inhibiting a third party from making a proposal to acquire us or of impeding a change of control under circumstances that otherwise could provide the holders of our common shares with the opportunity to realize a premium over the then-prevailing market price of those shares, including:

 

·         “business combination moratorium/fair price” provisions that, subject to limitations, prohibit certain business combinations between us and an “interested shareholder” (defined generally as any person who beneficially owns 10% or more of the voting power of our shares or an affiliate thereof) for five years after the most recent date on which the shareholder becomes an interested shareholder, and thereafter imposes stringent fair price and super-majority shareholder voting requirements on these combinations; and

 

·         “control share” provisions that provide that “control shares” of our company (defined as shares which, when aggregated with other shares controlled by the shareholder, entitle the shareholder to exercise one of three increasing ranges of voting power in electing Trustees) acquired in a “control share acquisition” (defined as the direct or indirect acquisition of ownership or control of “control shares” from a party other than the issuer) have no voting rights except to the extent approved by our shareholders by the affirmative vote of at least two thirds of all the votes entitled to be cast on the matter, excluding all interested shares, and are subject to redemption in certain circumstances.

 

We have opted out of these provisions of Maryland law.  However, our Board of Trustees may opt to make these provisions applicable to us at any time without shareholder approval.

 

19



Table of Contents

 

Our Trustees also have the discretion, granted in our bylaws and Maryland law, without shareholder approval to, among other things (1) create a staggered Board of Trustees, and (2) amend our bylaws or repeal individual bylaws in a manner that provides the Board of Trustees with greater authority.  Any such action could inhibit or impede a third party from making a proposal to acquire us at a price that could be beneficial to our shareholders.

 

Robert J. Amsdell, our former Chairman and Chief Executive Officer; Barry L. Amsdell, a former Trustee; Todd C. Amsdell, our former Chief Operating Officer and former President of our development subsidiary; and the Amsdell Entities (collectively, “The Amsdell Family”) collectively own an approximate 13.3% beneficial interest in our company on a fully diluted basis and therefore have the ability to exercise significant influence on any matter presented to our shareholders.

 

The Amsdell Family collectively owns approximately 11.97% of our outstanding common shares, and an approximate 13.3% beneficial interest in our company on a fully diluted basis.  Consequently, the Amsdell Family may be able to significantly influence the outcome of matters submitted for shareholder action, including the election of our Board of Trustees and approval of significant corporate transactions, including business combinations, consolidations and mergers.  As a result, Robert J. Amsdell, Barry L. Amsdell and Todd C. Amsdell have substantial influence on us and could exercise their influence in a manner that conflicts with the interests of our other shareholders.

 

Our shareholders have limited control to prevent us from making any changes to our investment and financing policies.

 

Our Board of Trustees has adopted policies with respect to certain activities.  These policies may be amended or revised from time to time at the discretion of our Board of Trustees without a vote of our shareholders.  This means that our shareholders have limited control over changes in our policies.  Such changes in our policies intended to improve, expand or diversify our business may not have the anticipated effects and consequently may adversely affect our business and prospects, results of operations and share price.

 

Our rights and the rights of our shareholders to take action against our Trustees and officers are limited.

 

Maryland law provides that a trustee or officer has no liability in that capacity if he or she performs his or her duties in good faith, in a manner he or she reasonably believes to be in our best interests and with the care that an ordinarily prudent person in a like position would use under similar circumstances.  Our declaration of trust and bylaws require us to indemnify our Trustees and officers for actions taken on behalf of the Company by them in those capacities to the extent permitted by Maryland law.  Accordingly, in the event that actions taken in good faith by any Trustee or officer impede our performance, our shareholders’ ability to recover damages from that Trustee or officer will be limited.

 

Our declaration of trust permits our Board of Trustees to issue preferred shares with terms that may discourage third parties from conducting a tender offer or seeking other change of control transactions that could involve a premium price for our shares or otherwise benefit our shareholders.

 

Our declaration of trust permits our Board of Trustees to issue up to 40,000,000 preferred shares, having those preferences, conversion or other rights, voting powers, restrictions, limitations as to distributions, qualifications, or terms or conditions of redemption as determined by our Board.  In addition, our Board may reclassify any unissued common shares into one or more classes or series of preferred shares.  Thus, our Board could authorize, without shareholder approval, the issuance of preferred shares with terms and conditions that could have the effect of discouraging a takeover or other transaction in which holders of some or a majority of our shares might receive a premium for their shares over the then-prevailing market price of our shares.  We currently do not expect that the Board would require shareholder approval prior to such a preferred issuance.  In addition, any preferred shares that we issue would rank senior to our common shares with respect to the payment of distributions, in which case we could not pay any distributions on our common shares until full distributions have been paid with respect to such preferred shares.

 

Risks Related to our Securities

 

Additional issuances of equity securities may be dilutive to shareholders.

 

The interests of our shareholders could be diluted if we issue additional equity securities to finance future acquisitions or developments or to repay indebtedness.  Our Board of Trustees may authorize the issuance of additional equity securities without shareholder approval.  Our ability to execute our business strategy depends upon our access to an appropriate blend

 

20



Table of Contents

 

of debt financing, including unsecured lines of credit and other forms of secured and unsecured debt, and equity financing, including the issuance of common and preferred equity.

 

Many factors could have an adverse effect on the market value of our securities.

 

A number of factors might adversely affect the price of our securities, many of which are beyond our control.  These factors include:

 

·                  increases in market interest rates, relative to the dividend yield on our shares.  If market interest rates go up, prospective purchasers of our securities may require a higher yield.  Higher market interest rates would not, however, result in more funds for us to distribute and, to the contrary, would likely increase our borrowing costs and potentially decrease funds available for distribution.  Thus, higher market interest rates could cause the market price of our common shares to go down;

 

·                  anticipated benefit of an investment in our securities as compared to investment in securities of companies in other industries (including benefits associated with tax treatment of dividends and distributions);

 

·                  perception by market professionals of REITs generally and REITs comparable to us in particular;

 

·                  level of institutional investor interest in our securities;

 

·                  relatively low trading volumes in securities of REITs;

 

·                  our results of operations and financial condition;

 

·                  investor confidence in the stock market generally; and

 

·                  additions and departures of key personnel.

 

The market value of our common shares is based primarily upon the market’s perception of our growth potential and our current and potential future earnings and cash distributions.  Consequently, our common shares may trade at prices that are higher or lower than our net asset value per common share.  If our future earnings or cash distributions are less than expected, it is likely that the market price of our common shares will diminish.

 

The market price of our common shares has been, and may continue to be, particularly volatile, and our shareholders may be unable to resell their shares at a profit.

 

The market price of our common shares has been subject to significant fluctuations and may continue to fluctuate or decline.  Between 2009 and December 31, 2010, our common stock has been particularly volatile as the price of our common stock has ranged from a high of $9.62 to a low of $1.50.  In the past several years, REIT stocks have experienced high levels of volatility and significant declines in value from their historic highs.  Additionally, as a result of the current global credit crisis and the concurrent economic downturn in the U.S. and globally, there have been significant declines in the values of equity securities generally in the U.S. and abroad.

 

In the past, following periods of volatility in the market price of a company’s securities, securities class action litigation has often been brought against that company.  If our stock price is volatile, we may become the target of securities litigation. Securities litigation could result in substantial costs and divert our management’s attention and resources from our business.

 

ITEM 1B.  UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

 

None.

 

21



Table of Contents

 

ITEM 2.  PROPERTIES

 

Overview

 

As of December 31, 2010, we owned 363 self-storage facilities located in 26 states and the District of Columbia; and aggregating approximately 23.6 million rentable square feet.  The following table sets forth certain summary information regarding our facilities by state as of December 31, 2010.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total

 

% of Total

 

 

 

 

 

Number of

 

Number of

 

Rentable

 

Rentable

 

 

 

State

 

Facilities

 

Units

 

Square Feet

 

Square Feet

 

Occupancy

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Florida

 

52

 

36,595

 

3,871,103

 

16.3

%

75.9

%

California

 

44

 

27,849

 

3,203,558

 

13.5

%

70.0

%

Texas

 

44

 

21,374

 

2,718,409

 

11.5

%

79.9

%

Ohio

 

33

 

15,336

 

1,873,017

 

7.8

%

75.9

%

Illinois

 

27

 

13,875

 

1,608,368

 

6.8

%

82.0

%

Tennessee

 

24

 

12,821

 

1,683,937

 

7.1

%

77.7

%

Arizona

 

24

 

11,569

 

1,246,379

 

5.3

%

80.7

%

Connecticut

 

17

 

7,091

 

847,311

 

3.6

%

78.0

%

New Jersey

 

16

 

10,366

 

1,039,610

 

4.4

%

67.5

%

Georgia

 

9

 

6,033

 

759,575

 

3.2

%

75.8

%

Indiana

 

9

 

5,157

 

592,790

 

2.5

%

73.3

%

New York

 

9

 

7,269

 

559,239

 

2.4

%

75.1

%

New Mexico

 

9

 

3,408

 

387,340

 

1.6

%

82.4

%

Colorado

 

8

 

4,061

 

492,344

 

2.1

%

83.9

%

North Carolina

 

6

 

3,859

 

462,998

 

2.0

%

74.0

%

Maryland

 

5

 

4,162

 

518,252

 

2.2

%

80.2

%

Virginia

 

4

 

2,517

 

273,267

 

1.2

%

72.3

%

Michigan

 

4

 

1,885

 

270,869

 

1.2

%

72.7

%

Utah

 

4

 

2,253

 

241,523

 

1.0

%

73.0

%

Massachusetts

 

4

 

2,378

 

207,326

 

0.9

%

65.3

%

Louisiana

 

3

 

1,415

 

195,017

 

0.8

%

80.1

%

Pennsylvania

 

2

 

1,615

 

173,819

 

0.7

%

83.2

%

Nevada

 

2

 

893

 

96,732

 

0.4

%

84.9

%

Alabama

 

1

 

797

 

128,999

 

0.6

%

73.5

%

Washington DC

 

1

 

752

 

63,085

 

0.3

%

89.9

%

Mississippi

 

1

 

507

 

61,251

 

0.3

%

80.9

%

Wisconsin

 

1

 

485

 

58,500

 

0.3

%

76.2

%

Total/Weighted Average

 

363

 

206,322

 

23,634,618

 

100.0

%

76.3

%

 

Our Facilities

 

The following table sets forth certain additional information with respect to each of our facilities as of December 31, 2010. Our ownership of each facility consists of a fee interest in the facility held by our Operating Partnership, or one of its subsidiaries, except for our Morris Township, NJ facility, that is subject to a ground lease.  In addition, small parcels of land at five of our other facilities are subject to ground leases.

 

22



Table of Contents

 

 

 

Year Acquired/

 

Year

 

Rentable

 

 

 

 

 

Manager

 

% Climate

 

Facility Location

 

Developed (1)

 

Built

 

Square Feet

 

Occupancy (2)

 

Units

 

Apartment (3)

 

Controlled (4)

 

Mobile, AL †

 

1997

 

1974/90

 

128,999

 

73.5

%

797

 

Y

 

1.4

%

Chandler, AZ

 

2005

 

1985

 

47,520

 

77.4

%

437

 

Y

 

6.9

%

Glendale, AZ

 

1998

 

1987

 

56,850

 

78.6

%

517

 

Y

 

0.0

%

Green Valley, AZ

 

2005

 

1985

 

25,100

 

62.2

%

253

 

N

 

8.2

%

Mesa I, AZ

 

2006

 

1985

 

52,375

 

85.9

%

482

 

N

 

0.0

%

Mesa II, AZ

 

2006

 

1981

 

45,445

 

87.3

%

383

 

Y

 

8.4

%

Mesa III, AZ

 

2006

 

1986

 

58,264

 

75.1

%

489

 

Y

 

4.5

%

Phoenix I, AZ

 

2006

 

1987

 

100,762

 

76.4

%

756

 

Y

 

8.8

%

Phoenix II, AZ

 

2006

 

1974

 

45,270

 

89.0

%

402

 

Y

 

4.7

%

Scottsdale, AZ

 

1998

 

1995

 

80,425

 

83.2

%

657

 

Y

 

9.6

%

Tempe, AZ

 

2005

 

1975

 

53,890

 

77.8

%

403

 

Y

 

13.0

%

Tucson I, AZ

 

1998

 

1974

 

59,350

 

82.2

%

483

 

Y

 

0.0

%

Tucson II, AZ

 

1998

 

1988

 

43,950

 

82.7

%

528

 

Y

 

100.0

%

Tucson III, AZ

 

2005

 

1979

 

49,822

 

84.6

%

481

 

Y

 

0.0

%

Tucson IV, AZ

 

2005

 

1982

 

48,008

 

78.5

%

494

 

Y

 

3.6

%

Tucson V, AZ

 

2005

 

1982

 

45,234

 

75.8

%

416

 

Y

 

3.0

%

Tucson VI, AZ

 

2005

 

1982

 

40,766

 

81.5

%

408

 

Y

 

3.4

%

Tucson VII, AZ

 

2005

 

1982

 

52,688

 

86.4

%

595

 

Y

 

2.0

%

Tucson VIII, AZ

 

2005

 

1979

 

46,650

 

84.4

%

445

 

Y

 

0.0

%

Tucson IX, AZ

 

2005

 

1984

 

67,648

 

74.1

%

604

 

Y

 

2.0

%

Tucson X, AZ

 

2005

 

1981

 

46,350

 

73.0

%

421

 

N

 

0.0

%

Tucson XI, AZ

 

2005

 

1974

 

42,800

 

84.1

%

423

 

Y

 

0.0

%

Tucson XII, AZ

 

2005

 

1974

 

42,325

 

86.9

%

435

 

Y

 

4.8

%

Tucson XIII, AZ

 

2005

 

1974

 

45,792

 

80.4

%

509

 

Y

 

0.0

%

Tucson XIV, AZ

 

2005

 

1976

 

49,095

 

88.4

%

548

 

Y

 

8.8

%

Apple Valley I, CA

 

1997

 

1984

 

73,440

 

59.3

%

527

 

Y

 

0.0

%

Apple Valley II, CA

 

1997

 

1988

 

61,555

 

75.1

%

458

 

Y

 

5.3

%

Benecia, CA

 

2005

 

1988/93/05

 

74,770

 

85.8

%

736

 

Y

 

0.0

%

Cathedral City, CA †

 

2006

 

1982/92

 

109,340

 

59.2

%

708

 

Y

 

2.3

%

Citrus Heights, CA

 

2005

 

1987

 

75,620

 

70.8

%

659

 

Y

 

0.0

%

Diamond Bar, CA

 

2005

 

1988

 

103,034

 

75.0

%

898

 

Y

 

0.0

%

Escondido, CA

 

2007

 

2002

 

142,870

 

80.0

%

1,228

 

Y

 

6.5

%

Fallbrook, CA

 

1997

 

1985/88

 

46,620

 

87.5

%

449

 

Y

 

0.0

%

Lancaster, CA

 

2001

 

1987

 

60,625

 

53.8

%

367

 

N

 

0.0

%

Long Beach, CA

 

2006

 

1974

 

125,163

 

62.0

%

1,351

 

Y

 

0.0

%

Murrieta, CA

 

2005

 

1996

 

49,815

 

83.5

%

421

 

Y

 

2.9

%

North Highlands, CA

 

2005

 

1980

 

57,244

 

85.7

%

469

 

Y

 

0.0

%

Orangevale, CA

 

2005

 

1980

 

50,392

 

75.1

%

525

 

Y

 

0.0

%

Palm Springs I, CA

 

2006

 

1989

 

72,675

 

62.0

%

572

 

Y

 

0.0

%

Palm Springs II, CA †

 

2006

 

1982/89

 

122,370

 

54.9

%

627

 

Y

 

8.5

%

Pleasanton, CA

 

2005

 

2003

 

85,055

 

88.0

%

692

 

Y

 

0.0

%

Rancho Cordova, CA

 

2005

 

1979

 

54,128

 

73.0

%

454

 

Y

 

0.0

%

Rialto I, CA

 

1997

 

1987

 

57,411

 

59.7

%

505

 

Y

 

0.0

%

Rialto II, CA

 

2006

 

1980

 

99,783

 

72.0

%

749

 

N

 

0.0

%

Riverside I, CA

 

2006

 

1977

 

67,170

 

80.6

%

641

 

Y

 

0.0

%

Riverside II, CA

 

2006

 

1985

 

85,196

 

50.9

%

828

 

Y

 

3.9

%

Roseville, CA

 

2005

 

1979

 

59,869

 

78.2

%

549

 

Y

 

0.0

%

Sacramento I, CA

 

2005

 

1979

 

51,114

 

77.9

%

540

 

Y

 

0.0

%

Sacramento II, CA

 

2005

 

1986

 

61,856

 

61.7

%

551

 

Y

 

0.0

%

San Bernardino I, CA

 

1997

 

1987

 

31,070

 

61.4

%

250

 

N

 

0.0

%

San Bernardino II, CA

 

1997

 

1991

 

41,546

 

69.3

%

375

 

Y

 

0.0

%

San Bernardino IV, CA

 

1997

 

1985/92

 

35,671

 

73.0

%

398

 

N

 

0.0

%

San Bernardino V, CA

 

2005

 

2002/04

 

83,507

 

61.6

%

733

 

Y

 

11.8

%

San Bernardino VI, CA

 

2006

 

1974

 

57,145

 

52.8

%

501

 

Y

 

4.2

%

San Bernardino VII, CA

 

2006

 

1975

 

103,860

 

55.8

%

951

 

Y

 

0.0

%

San Bernardino VIII, CA

 

2006

 

1978

 

78,729

 

82.0

%

623

 

Y

 

1.3

%

San Bernardino IX, CA

 

2006

 

1977

 

95,129

 

52.5

%

890

 

Y

 

0.0

%

San Marcos, CA

 

2005

 

1979

 

37,430

 

76.4

%

244

 

Y

 

0.0

%

Santa Ana, CA

 

2006

 

1984

 

63,571

 

81.4

%

714

 

Y

 

2.4

%

South Sacramento, CA

 

2005

 

1979

 

51,940

 

68.0

%

412

 

Y

 

0.0

%

Spring Valley, CA

 

2006

 

1980

 

55,045

 

79.5

%

714

 

Y

 

0.0

%

Temecula I, CA

 

1998

 

1985/2003

 

81,700

 

65.7

%

684

 

Y

 

46.4

%

Temecula II, CA

 

2006

 

2003

 

84,398

 

80.3

%

627

 

Y

 

51.3

%

Thousand Palms, CA

 

2006

 

1988/01

 

75,445

 

57.8

%

766

 

Y

 

27.1

%

Vista I, CA

 

2001

 

1988

 

74,405

 

83.9

%

615

 

Y

 

0.0

%

Vista II, CA

 

2005

 

2001/02/03

 

147,281

 

74.7

%

1,270

 

Y

 

2.3

%

Walnut, CA

 

2005

 

1987

 

50,708

 

72.5

%

536

 

Y

 

9.2

%

West Sacramento, CA

 

2005

 

1984

 

39,715

 

78.1

%

484

 

Y

 

0.0

%

Westminster, CA

 

2005

 

1983/98

 

68,148

 

75.2

%

558

 

Y

 

0.0

%

Aurora, CO

 

2005

 

1981

 

75,827

 

80.9

%

603

 

Y

 

0.0

%

Colorado Springs I, CO

 

2005

 

1986

 

47,975

 

92.0

%

455

 

Y

 

0.0

%

Colorado Springs II, CO

 

2006

 

2001

 

62,400

 

92.9

%

425

 

Y

 

0.0

%

Denver, CO

 

2006

 

1997

 

59,200

 

83.2

%

451

 

Y

 

0.0

%

 

23



Table of Contents

 

 

 

Year Acquired/

 

Year

 

Rentable

 

 

 

 

 

Manager

 

% Climate

 

Facility Location

 

Developed (1)

 

Built

 

Square Feet

 

Occupancy (2)

 

Units

 

Apartment (3)

 

Controlled (4)

 

Federal Heights, CO

 

2005

 

1980

 

54,770

 

84.8

%

559

 

Y

 

0.0

%

Golden, CO

 

2005

 

1985

 

86,580

 

81.6

%

623

 

Y

 

1.2

%

Littleton I , CO

 

2005

 

1987

 

53,490

 

80.8

%

447

 

Y

 

37.4

%

Northglenn, CO

 

2005

 

1980

 

52,102

 

77.2

%

498

 

Y

 

0.0

%

Bloomfield, CT

 

1997

 

1987/93/94

 

48,700

 

71.6

%

436

 

Y

 

6.6

%

Branford, CT

 

1995

 

1986

 

50,679

 

75.9

%

431

 

Y

 

2.2

%

Bristol, CT

 

2005

 

1989/99

 

47,950

 

82.2

%

443

 

N

 

22.4

%

East Windsor, CT

 

2005

 

1986/89

 

45,800

 

78.8

%

298

 

N

 

0.0

%

Enfield, CT

 

2001

 

1989

 

52,875

 

87.9

%

369

 

Y

 

0.0

%

Gales Ferry, CT

 

1995

 

1987/89

 

54,230

 

70.9

%

597

 

N

 

6.5

%

Manchester I, CT (6)

 

2002

 

1999/00/01

 

47,125

 

76.0

%

459

 

N

 

37.6

%

Manchester II, CT

 

2005

 

1984

 

52,725

 

72.4

%

394

 

N

 

0.0

%

Milford, CT

 

1994

 

1975

 

44,885

 

82.4

%

376

 

N

 

4.0

%

Monroe, CT

 

2005

 

1996/03

 

58,500

 

71.5

%

394

 

N

 

0.0

%

Mystic, CT

 

1994

 

1975/86

 

50,725

 

82.9

%

560

 

Y

 

2.3

%

Newington I, CT

 

2005

 

1978/97

 

42,520

 

68.4

%

247

 

N

 

0.0

%

Newington II, CT

 

2005

 

1979/81

 

36,140

 

89.0

%

197

 

N

 

0.0

%

Old Saybrook I, CT

 

2005

 

1982/88/00

 

86,950

 

86.1

%

716

 

N

 

5.9

%

Old Saybrook II, CT

 

2005

 

1988/02

 

26,425

 

85.1

%

254

 

N

 

54.2

%

South Windsor, CT

 

1994

 

1976

 

72,125

 

68.3

%

553

 

Y

 

1.1

%

Stamford, CT

 

2005

 

1997

 

28,957

 

84.8

%

367

 

N

 

32.8

%

Washington, DC

 

2008

 

2002

 

63,085

 

89.9

%

752

 

Y

 

96.5

%

Boca Raton, FL

 

2001

 

1998

 

37,958

 

81.2

%

605

 

N

 

68.2

%

Boynton Beach I, FL

 

2001

 

1999

 

61,977

 

81.4

%

763

 

Y

 

54.2

%

Boynton Beach II, FL

 

2005

 

2001

 

61,727

 

66.9

%

580

 

Y

 

82.3

%

Bradenton I, FL

 

2004

 

1979

 

68,391

 

63.9

%

635

 

N

 

2.7

%

Bradenton II, FL

 

2004

 

1996

 

87,815

 

81.3

%

854

 

Y

 

40.1

%

Cape Coral, FL

 

2000*

 

2000

 

76,567

 

75.6

%

865

 

Y

 

83.5

%

Dania, FL

 

1994

 

1988

 

58,270

 

69.9

%

497

 

Y

 

26.9

%

Dania Beach, FL (6)

 

2004

 

1984

 

181,463

 

64.8

%

1,969

 

N

 

20.4

%

Davie, FL

 

2001*

 

2001

 

81,135

 

81.3

%

843

 

Y

 

55.6

%

Deerfield Beach, FL

 

1998*

 

1998

 

57,280

 

84.6

%

517

 

Y

 

38.8

%

Delray Beach, FL

 

2001

 

1999

 

67,821

 

72.6

%

832

 

Y

 

39.3

%

Fernandina Beach, FL

 

1996

 

1986

 

110,785

 

74.9

%

828

 

Y

 

35.7

%

Ft. Lauderdale, FL

 

1999

 

1999

 

70,093

 

88.0

%

694

 

Y

 

46.8

%

Ft. Myers, FL

 

1998

 

1998

 

67,558

 

60.3

%

592

 

Y

 

67.2

%

Jacksonville I, FL

 

2005

 

2005

 

80,376

 

86.8

%

716

 

N

 

100.0

%

Jacksonville II, FL

 

2007

 

2004

 

65,070

 

91.4

%

650

 

N

 

100.0

%

Jacksonville III, FL

 

2007

 

2003

 

65,575

 

93.7

%

683

 

N

 

100.0

%

Jacksonville IV, FL

 

2007

 

2006

 

77,515

 

78.7

%

701

 

N

 

100.0

%

Jacksonville V, FL

 

2007

 

2004

 

82,165

 

80.4

%

702

 

N

 

82.4

%

Kendall, FL

 

2007

 

2003

 

75,395

 

85.1

%

703

 

N

 

71.0

%

Lake Worth, FL †

 

1998

 

1998/02

 

161,808

 

89.6

%

1,367

 

Y

 

37.2

%

Lakeland, FL

 

1994

 

1988

 

49,095

 

79.3

%

491

 

Y

 

79.4

%

Lutz I, FL

 

2004

 

2000

 

66,895

 

70.6

%

614

 

Y

 

37.0

%

Lutz II, FL

 

2004

 

1999

 

69,232

 

78.3

%

538

 

Y

 

20.6

%

Margate I, FL †

 

1994

 

1979/81

 

54,505

 

78.4

%

339

 

N

 

10.0

%

Margate II, FL †

 

1996

 

1985

 

65,186

 

78.2

%

425

 

Y

 

28.8

%

Merrit Island, FL

 

2000

 

2000

 

50,417

 

78.7

%

465

 

Y

 

56.7

%

Miami I, FL

 

1995

 

1995

 

46,825

 

83.9

%

560

 

Y

 

52.1

%

Miami II, FL

 

1994

 

1989

 

67,060

 

71.3

%

568

 

Y

 

8.0

%

Miami IV, FL

 

2005

 

1988/03

 

150,590

 

71.3

%

1,523

 

N

 

86.9

%

Naples I, FL

 

1996

 

1996

 

48,150

 

95.1

%

328

 

Y

 

26.6

%

Naples II, FL

 

1997

 

1985

 

65,850

 

83.1

%

637

 

Y

 

44.6

%

Naples III, FL

 

1997

 

1981/83

 

80,627

 

68.4

%

818

 

Y

 

23.8

%

Naples IV, FL

 

1998

 

1990

 

40,475

 

75.3

%

435

 

N

 

43.3

%

Ocoee, FL

 

2005

 

1997

 

76,130

 

80.1

%

627

 

Y

 

15.5

%

Orange City, FL

 

2004

 

2001

 

59,586

 

80.2

%

648

 

N

 

39.1

%

Orlando I, FL (6)

 

1997

 

1987

 

52,170

 

62.0

%

497

 

Y

 

4.9

%

Orlando II, FL

 

2005

 

2002/04

 

63,084

 

87.0

%

580

 

N

 

74.2

%

Orlando III, FL

 

2006

 

1988/90/96

 

104,140

 

65.6

%

791

 

Y

 

6.9

%

Orlando IV, FL

 

2010

 

2009

 

76,615

 

44.8

%

645

 

N

 

64.4

%

Oviedo, FL

 

2006

 

1988/1991

 

49,251

 

70.6

%

426

 

Y

 

3.2

%

Pembroke Pines, FL

 

1997

 

1997

 

67,321

 

81.6

%

697

 

Y

 

63.2

%

Royal Palm Beach I, FL †

 

1994

 

1988

 

98,961

 

61.1

%

675

 

N

 

54.5

%

Royal Palm Beach II, FL

 

2007

 

2004

 

81,415

 

69.5

%

767

 

N

 

82.3

%

Sanford, FL

 

2006

 

1988/2006

 

61,810

 

72.3

%

440

 

Y

 

28.6

%

Sarasota, FL

 

1998

 

1998

 

71,102

 

65.2

%

525

 

Y

 

42.5

%

St. Augustine, FL

 

1996

 

1985

 

59,725

 

71.9

%

698

 

Y

 

29.9

%

Stuart, FL

 

1997

 

1995