10QSB 1 ccgf.txt CCGF UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 Form 10-QSB (Mark One) [X] QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2004 [ ] TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the transition period from _________to _________ Commission file number 0-8639 CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL GROWTH FUND (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter) California 94-2382571 (State or other jurisdiction of (I.R.S. Employer incorporation or organization) Identification No.) 55 Beattie Place, PO Box 1089 Greenville, South Carolina 29602 (Address of principal executive offices) (864) 239-1000 (Issuer's telephone number) PART I - FINANCIAL INFORMATION ITEM 1. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL GROWTH FUND BALANCE SHEET (Unaudited) (in thousands, except unit data) March 31, 2004
Assets Cash and cash equivalents $ 403 Receivables and deposits 417 Restricted escrows 218 Other assets 191 Investment property: Land $ 946 Buildings and related personal property 16,193 17,139 Less accumulated depreciation (12,733) 4,406 $ 5,635 Liabilities and Partners' Deficit Liabilities Accounts payable $ 207 Tenant security deposit liabilities 79 Accrued property taxes 63 Due to affiliates (Note B) 501 Other liabilities 338 Mortgage note payable 12,240 Partners' Deficit General partner $ (3,142) Limited partners (49,196 units issued and outstanding) (4,651) (7,793) $ 5,635 See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL GROWTH FUND STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS (Unaudited) (in thousands, except per unit data)
Three Months Ended March 31, 2004 2003 (Restated) Revenues: Rental income $ 655 $ 750 Other income 54 62 Casualty gain (Note D) 25 -- Total revenues 734 812 Expenses: Operating 308 331 General and administrative 53 135 Depreciation 228 227 Interest 220 218 Property taxes 64 63 Total expenses 873 974 Loss from continuing operations (139) (162) Loss from discontinued operations -- (632) Gain on sale of discontinued operations -- 8,803 Net (loss) income $ (139) $ 8,009 Net (loss) income allocated to general partner $ (1) $ 1,224 Net (loss) income allocated to limited partners (138) 6,785 $ (139) $ 8,009 Per limited partnership unit: Loss from continuing operations $ (2.80) $ (3.26) Loss from discontinued operations -- (12.72) Gain on sale of discontinued operations -- 153.90 $ (2.80) $137.92 Distribution per limited partnership unit $ -- $ 81.82 See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL GROWTH FUND STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN PARTNERS' DEFICIT (Unaudited) (in thousands, except unit data)
Limited Partnership General Limited Units Partner Partners Total Original capital contributions 49,196 $ 1 $49,196 $49,197 Partners' deficit at December 31, 2003 49,196 $(3,141) $(4,513) $(7,654) Net loss for the three months ended March 31, 2004 -- (1) (138) (139) Partners' deficit at March 31, 2004 49,196 $(3,142) $(4,651) $(7,793) See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL GROWTH FUND STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS (Unaudited) (in thousands)
Three Months Ended March 31, 2004 2003 (Restated) Cash flows from operating activities: Net (loss) income $ (139) $ 8,009 Adjustments to reconcile net (loss) income to net cash (used in) provided by operating activities: Depreciation 228 523 Amortization of loan costs 5 15 Bad debt expense 26 122 Casualty gain (25) -- Loss on early extinguishment of debt -- 689 Gain on sale of discontinued operations -- (8,803) Change in accounts: Receivables and deposits (57) (42) Other assets (82) (48) Accounts payable (260) (119) Tenant security deposit liabilities -- (44) Accrued property taxes 63 221 Due to affiliates 1 -- Other liabilities (18) 24 Net cash (used in) provided by operating activities (258) 547 Cash flows from investing activities: Property improvements and replacements (53) (230) Net (deposits to) withdrawals from restricted escrows (180) 108 Insurance proceeds received 30 -- Net proceeds from sale of investment property -- 10,991 Net cash (used in) provided by investing activities (203) 10,869 Cash flows from financing activities: Advances from affiliates 500 -- Principal payments on mortgage notes payable -- (65) Distributions to partners -- (4,632) Loan costs paid -- (5) Debt extinguishment cost -- (650) Repayment of mortgage note payable -- (6,000) Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities 500 (11,352) Net increase in cash and cash equivalents 39 64 Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period 364 559 Cash and cash equivalents at end of period $ 403 $ 623 Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information: Cash paid for interest $ 214 $ 538 See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL GROWTH FUND NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Unaudited) Note A - Basis of Presentation The accompanying unaudited financial statements of Consolidated Capital Growth Fund (the "Partnership" or "Registrant") have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles for interim financial information and with the instructions to Form 10-QSB and Article 310(b) of Regulation S-B. Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and footnotes required by generally accepted accounting principles for complete financial statements. In the opinion of ConCap Equities, Inc. (the "General Partner"), all adjustments (consisting of normal recurring accruals) considered necessary for a fair presentation have been included. Operating results for the three month period ended March 31, 2004, are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2004. For further information, refer to the financial statements and footnotes thereto included in the Partnership's Annual Report on Form 10-KSB/A No. 1 for the year ended December 31, 2003. The General Partner is a wholly owned subsidiary of Apartment Investment and Management Company ("AIMCO"), a publicly traded real estate investment trust. In accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards ("SFAS") No. 144, the accompanying consolidated statement of operations for the three months ended March 31, 2003 reflect the operations of Breckenridge Square as loss from discontinued operations due to its sale in January 2003. In addition, the same period has been restated to reflect the operations of Churchill Park and Doral Springs Apartments as loss from discontinued operations due to the sale of these properties in July and September 2003, respectively. Reclassification Certain 2003 amounts have been reclassified to conform to the 2004 presentation. Note B - Transactions with Affiliated Parties The Partnership has no employees and is dependent on the General Partner and its affiliates for the management and administration of all Partnership activities. The Partnership Agreement provides for (i) certain payments to affiliates for services and (ii) reimbursement of certain expenses incurred by affiliates on behalf of the Partnership. Affiliates of the General Partner are entitled to receive 5% of gross receipts from the Partnership's properties for providing property management services. The Partnership paid to such affiliates approximately $37,000 and $120,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively, which is included in operating expenses and (loss) income from discontinued operations. An affiliate of the General Partner received reimbursement of accountable administrative expenses amounting to approximately $29,000 and $90,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively, which is included in general and administrative expenses and investment properties. The Partnership Agreement provides for a fee equal to 9% of the total distributions made to the limited partners from "cash available for distribution" (as defined in the Partnership Agreement) to be paid to the General Partner for executive and administrative management services. During the three months ended March 31, 2003, affiliates of the General Partner received approximately $28,000 for providing these services, which is included in general and administrative expenses. No fees were earned or paid for the three months ended March 31, 2004. During the three months ended March 31, 2004, an affiliate of the General Partner advanced the Partnership approximately $500,000 to assist in paying city taxes related to the sales of two investment properties and to fund replacement reserves at The Lakes Apartments. Interest was charged at the prime rate plus 2% and was approximately $1,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2004. The Partnership insures its property up to certain limits through coverage provided by AIMCO which is generally self-insured for a portion of losses and liabilities related to workers compensation, property casualty and vehicle liability. The Partnership insures its property above the AIMCO limits through insurance policies obtained by AIMCO from insurers unaffiliated with the General Partner. During 2004, the Partnership anticipates its cost for insurance coverage and fees associated with policy claims administration provided by AIMCO and its affiliates will be approximately $40,000. The Partnership was charged approximately $127,000 for 2003. Note C- Sale of Investment Property On January 16, 2003, the Partnership sold Breckinridge Square to an unrelated third party for net proceeds of approximately $10,991,000 after payment of closing costs. The Partnership realized a gain of approximately $8,803,000 as a result of the sale. The Partnership used approximately $6,000,000 of net proceeds to repay the mortgage encumbering the property. In addition, the Partnership recorded a loss on early extinguishment of debt of approximately $689,000 as result of unamortized loan costs being written off and prepayment penalties. In accordance with SFAS No. 144, the accompanying consolidated statement of operations for the three months ended March 31, 2003 reflects the operations of Breckinridge Square as (loss) income from discontinued operations. Included in (loss) income from discontinued operations for the three months ended March 31, 2003 is approximately $88,000 of revenue generated by the property. Note D - Casualty In October 2003, the Partnership's investment property, The Lakes Apartments, incurred damage to four apartment units as a result of a fire. During the three months ended March 31, 2004, the Partnership recognized a casualty gain of approximately $25,000 which is the result of insurance proceeds received of approximately $30,000 offset by the net book value of the assets written off. Note E - Contingencies In March 1998, several putative unit holders of limited partnership units of the Partnership commenced an action entitled Rosalie Nuanes, et al. v. Insignia Financial Group, Inc., et al. (the "Nuanes action") in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Mateo. The plaintiffs named as defendants, among others, the Partnership, its General Partner and several of their affiliated partnerships and corporate entities. The action purported to assert claims on behalf of a class of limited partners and derivatively on behalf of a number of limited partnerships (including the Partnership) that are named as nominal defendants, challenging, among other things, the acquisition of interests in certain General Partner entities by Insignia Financial Group, Inc. ("Insignia") and entities that were, at one time, affiliates of Insignia; past tender offers by the Insignia affiliates to acquire limited partnership units; management of the partnerships by the Insignia affiliates; and the series of transactions which closed on October 1, 1998 and February 26, 1999 whereby Insignia and Insignia Properties Trust, respectively, were merged into AIMCO. The plaintiffs sought monetary damages and equitable relief, including judicial dissolution of the Partnership. In addition, during the third quarter of 2001, a complaint (the "Heller action") was filed against the same defendants that are named in the Nuanes action, captioned Heller v. Insignia Financial Group. On or about August 6, 2001, plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint. The Heller action was brought as a purported derivative action, and asserted claims for, among other things, breach of fiduciary duty, unfair competition, conversion, unjust enrichment, and judicial dissolution. On January 8, 2003, the parties filed a Stipulation of Settlement in proposed settlement of the Nuanes action and the Heller action. In general terms, the proposed settlement provides for certification for settlement purposes of a settlement class consisting of all limited partners in this Partnership and others (the "Partnerships") as of December 20, 2002, the dismissal with prejudice and release of claims in the Nuanes and Heller litigation, payment by AIMCO of $9.9 million (which shall be distributed to settlement class members after deduction of attorney fees and costs of class counsel and certain costs of settlement) and up to $1 million toward the cost of independent appraisals of the Partnerships' properties by a Court appointed appraiser. An affiliate of the General Partner has also agreed to make at least one round of tender offers to purchase all of the partnership interests in the Partnerships within one year of final approval, if it is granted, and to provide partners with the independent appraisals at the time of these tenders. The proposed settlement also provided for the limitation of the allowable costs which the General Partner or its affiliates will charge the Partnerships in connection with this litigation and imposes limits on the class counsel fees and costs in this litigation. On April 11, 2003, notice was distributed to limited partners providing the details of the proposed settlement. On June 13, 2003, the Court granted final approval of the settlement and entered judgment in both the Nuanes and Heller actions. On August 12, 2003, an objector ("Objector") filed an appeal seeking to vacate and/or reverse the order approving the settlement and entering judgment thereto. On November 24, 2003, the Objector filed an application requesting the Court order AIMCO to withdraw settlement tender offers it had commenced, refrain from making further offers pending the appeal and auction any units tendered to third parties, contending that the offers did not conform with the terms of the Settlement. Counsel for the Objector (on behalf of another investor) had alternatively requested the Court take certain action purportedly to enforce the terms of the settlement agreement. On December 18, 2003, the Court heard oral argument on the motions and denied them both in their entirety. On January 28, 2004, Objector filed his opening brief in his pending appeal. On April 23, 2004, the General Partner and its affiliates filed a response brief in support of the settlement and the judgment thereto. Plaintiffs have also filed a brief in support of the settlement. On May 13, 2004, Objector filed a reply to both briefs in support of the settlement and judgment entered thereto. No hearing has been scheduled in the matter. On August 8, 2003 AIMCO Properties L.P., an affiliate of the General Partner, was served with a Complaint in the United States District Court, District of Columbia alleging that AIMCO Properties L.P. willfully violated the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) by failing to pay maintenance workers overtime for all hours worked in excess of forty per week. On March 5, 2004 Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint also naming NHP Management Company, which is also an affiliate of the General Partner. The Complaint is styled as a Collective Action under the FLSA and seeks to certify state subclasses in California, Maryland, and the District of Columbia. Specifically, the plaintiffs contend that AIMCO Properties L.P. failed to compensate maintenance workers for time that they were required to be "on-call". Additionally, the Complaint alleges AIMCO Properties L.P. failed to comply with the FLSA in compensating maintenance workers for time that they worked in responding to a call The General Partner does not anticipate that any costs to the Partnership, whether legal or settlement costs, associated with these cases will be material to the Partnership's overall operations. The Partnership is unaware of any other pending or outstanding litigation matters involving it or its investment property that are not of a routine nature arising in the ordinary course of business. Pursuant to a formal order of investigation received by AIMCO on March 29, 2004, the Central Regional Office of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission is conducting an investigation relating to certain matters. AIMCO believes the areas of investigation include AIMCO's miscalculated monthly net rental income figures in third quarter 2003, forecasted guidance, accounts payable, rent concessions, vendor rebates, and capitalization of expenses and payroll. AIMCO is cooperating fully. AIMCO does not believe that the ultimate outcome will have a material adverse effect on its consolidated financial condition or results of operations taken as a whole. Similarly, the General Partner does not believe that the ultimate outcome will have a material adverse effect on the Partnership's consolidated financial condition or results of operations taken as a whole. ITEM 2. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OR PLAN OF OPERATION The matters discussed in this report contain certain forward-looking statements, including, without limitation, statements regarding future financial performance and the effect of government regulations. Actual results may differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements and will be affected by a variety of risks and factors including, without limitation: national and local economic conditions; the terms of governmental regulations that affect the Registrant and interpretations of those regulations; the competitive environment in which the Registrant operates; financing risks, including the risk that cash flows from operations may be insufficient to meet required payments of principal and interest; real estate risks, including variations of real estate values and the general economic climate in local markets and competition for tenants in such markets; litigation, including costs associated with prosecuting and defending claims and any adverse outcomes and possible environmental liabilities. Readers should carefully review the Registrant's financial statements and the notes thereto, as well as the risk factors described in the documents the Registrant files from time to time with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The Partnership's remaining investment property consists of one apartment complex. The following table sets forth the average occupancy of the property for the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2003: Average Occupancy Property 2004 2003 The Lakes 74% 84% Raleigh, North Carolina The General Partner attributes the decrease in occupancy at The Lakes Apartments to increased credit standards for tenants. The Partnership's financial results are dependent upon a number of factors including the ability to attract and maintain tenants at the investment property, interest rates on mortgage loans, costs incurred to operate the investment property, general economic conditions and weather. As part of the ongoing business plan of the Partnership, the General Partner monitors the rental market environment of its investment property to assess the feasibility of increasing rents, maintaining or increasing occupancy levels and protecting the Partnership from increases in expenses. As part of this plan, the General Partner attempts to protect the Partnership from the burden of inflation-related increases in expenses by increasing rents and maintaining a high overall occupancy level. However, the General Partner may use rental concessions and rental rate reductions to offset softening market conditions, accordingly, there is no guarantee that the General Partner will be able to sustain such a plan. Further, a number of factors which are outside the control of the Partnership such as the local economic climate and weather can adversely or positively impact the Partnership's financial results. Results of Operations The Partnership's net loss for the three months ended March 31, 2004 was approximately $139,000 compared to net income of approximately $8,009,000 for the same period in 2003. Net income decreased due to the recognition of a gain on the sale of Breckinridge Square in January 2003 partially offset by a decrease in loss from discontinued operations. In accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 144, the accompanying consolidated statements of operations for the three months ended March 31, 2003 reflect the operations of Breckinridge Square as (loss) income from discontinued operations due to its sale in January 2003. In addition, the same period has been restated to reflect the operations of Churchill Park and Doral Springs Apartments as (loss) income from discontinued operations due to the sale of these properties in July and September 2003, respectively. On January 16, 2003, the Partnership sold Breckinridge Square to an unrelated third party for net proceeds of approximately $10,991,000 after payment of closing costs. The Partnership realized a gain of approximately $8,803,000 as a result of the sale. The Partnership used approximately $6,000,000 of net proceeds to repay the mortgage encumbering the property. In addition, the Partnership recorded a loss on early extinguishment of debt of approximately $689,000 as result of unamortized loan costs being written off and prepayment penalties. Included in (loss) income from discontinued operations for the three months ended March 31, 2003 is approximately $88,000 of revenue generated by the property. Excluding the impact of the gain on sale and the loss from discontinued operations, the Partnership realized a loss from continuing operations of approximately $139,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2004 compared to a loss from continuing operations of approximately $162,000 for the corresponding period in 2003. The decrease in loss from continuing operations is due to a decrease in total expenses partially offset by a decrease in total revenues. Total revenue decreased due to a decrease in rental income which was caused by decreases in occupancy and average rental rates at The Lakes Apartments. This decrease was partially offset by a casualty gain recognized in 2004. In October 2003, the Partnership's investment property, The Lakes Apartments, incurred damage to four apartment units as a result of a fire. During the three months ended March 31, 2004, the Partnership recognized a casualty gain of approximately $25,000 which is the result of insurance proceeds received of approximately $30,000 offset by the net book value of the assets written off. Total expenses decreased due to decreases in operating and general and administrative expenses. Operating expenses decreased due to decreases in advertising and maintenance expenses partially offset by an increase in property expense. Advertising expense decreased due to decreases in newspaper and periodical advertising and resident relations. Maintenance expense decreased due to a decrease in contract labor at The Lakes Apartments. Property expense increased due to an increase in salaries and related benefits. General and administrative expenses decreased due to decreases in management reimbursements paid to the General Partner, as allowed under the Partnership Agreement and in Partnership management fees due to no cash from operations being distributed in 2004. For 2004 and 2003, costs associated with the quarterly and annual communications with investors and regulatory agencies and the annual audit required by the Partnership Agreement are also included in general and administrative expenses. Liquidity and Capital Resources At March 31, 2004, the Partnership had cash and cash equivalents of approximately $403,000 compared to approximately $623,000 at March 31, 2003. Cash and cash equivalents increased approximately $39,000 from December 31, 2003 due to approximately $500,000 of cash provided by financing activities, partially offset by approximately $258,000 and $203,000 of cash used in operating and investing activities, respectively. Cash provided by financing activities consisted of advances from an affiliate of the General Partner. Cash used in investing activities consisted of property improvements and replacements and net deposits to restricted escrows maintained by the mortgage lender partially offset by insurance proceeds received. The Partnership invests its working capital reserves in interest bearing accounts. The sufficiency of existing liquid assets to meet future liquidity and capital expenditure requirements is directly related to the level of capital expenditures required at the investment property to adequately maintain the physical assets and other operating needs of the Partnership and to comply with Federal, state, local, legal and regulatory requirements. The General Partner monitors developments in the area of legal and regulatory compliance and is studying new federal laws, including the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 mandates or suggests additional compliance measures with regard to governance, disclosure, audit and other areas. In light of these changes, the Partnership expects that it will incur higher expenses related to compliance, including increased legal and audit fees. Capital improvements planned for the Partnership's property are detailed below. The Lakes Apartments During the three months ended March 31, 2004, the Partnership completed approximately $53,000 of capital improvements at The Lakes Apartments, consisting primarily of major landscaping, floor covering replacements and casualty repairs. These improvements were funded from operating cash flow and insurance proceeds. The Partnership evaluates the capital improvement needs of the property during the year and currently expects to complete an additional $276,000 in capital improvements during the remainder of 2004. Additional capital improvements may be considered and will depend on the physical condition of the property as well as replacement reserves and anticipated cash flow generated by the property. Additional capital expenditures will be incurred only if cash is available from operations and Partnership reserves. To the extent that such budgeted capital improvements are completed, the Partnership's distributable cash flow, if any, may be adversely affected at least in the short term. The Partnership's assets are thought to be sufficient for any near-term needs (exclusive of capital improvements) of the Partnership. The mortgage indebtedness encumbering the investment property of approximately $12,240,000 requires monthly interest only payments until December 1, 2005 at which time a balloon payment is due. The General Partner will attempt to refinance such indebtedness and/or sell the property prior to such maturity date. If the property cannot be refinanced or sold for a sufficient amount, the Partnership will risk losing the property through foreclosure. The Partnership distributed the following amounts during the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2003 (in thousands, except per unit data):
Three Months Per Limited Three Months Per Limited Ended Partnership Ended Partnership March 31, 2004 Unit March 31, 2003 Unit Operations $ -- $ -- $ 317 $ 6.38 Sale proceeds from Breckinridge Square -- -- 4,315 75.44 $ -- $ -- $4,632 $81.82
The Partnership's cash available for distribution is reviewed on a monthly basis. Future cash distributions will depend on the levels of net cash generated from operations, the availability of cash reserves, and the timing of debt maturities, refinancings, and/or property sales. There can be no assurance that the Partnership will generate sufficient funds from operations, after required capital expenditures, to permit any distributions to its partners during the remainder of 2004 or subsequent periods. Other In addition to its indirect ownership of the general partner interest in the Partnership, AIMCO and its affiliates owned 31,142.75 limited partnership units (the "Units") in the Partnership representing 63.30% of the outstanding Units at March 31, 2004. A number of these Units were acquired pursuant to tender offers made by AIMCO or its affiliates. It is possible that AIMCO or its affiliates will acquire additional Units in exchange for cash or a combination of cash and units in AIMCO Properties, L.P., the operating partnership of AIMCO, either through private purchases or tender offers. Pursuant to the Partnership Agreement, unit holders holding a majority of the Units are entitled to take action with respect to a variety of matters that include, but are not limited to, voting on certain amendments to the Partnership Agreement and voting to remove the General Partner. As a result of its ownership of 63.30% of the outstanding Units, AIMCO and its affiliates are in a position to control all such voting decisions with respect to the Partnership. Although the General Partner owes fiduciary duties to the limited partners of the Partnership, the General Partner also owes fiduciary duties to AIMCO as its sole stockholder. As a result, the duties of the General Partner, as general partner, to the Partnership and its limited partners may come into conflict with the duties of the General Partner to AIMCO, as its sole stockholder. Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates The financial statements are prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States which require the Partnership to make estimates and assumptions. The Partnership believes that of its significant accounting policies, the following may involve a higher degree of judgment and complexity. Impairment of Long-Lived Assets Investment property is recorded at cost, less accumulated depreciation, unless considered impaired. If events or circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of a property may be impaired, the Partnership will make an assessment of its recoverability by estimating the undiscounted future cash flows, excluding interest charges, of the property. If the carrying amount exceeds the aggregate future cash flows, the Partnership would recognize an impairment loss to the extent the carrying amount exceeds the fair value of the property. Real property investments are subject to varying degrees of risk. Several factors may adversely affect the economic performance and value of the Partnership's investment property. These factors include, but are not limited to, changes in the national, regional and local economic climate; local conditions, such as an oversupply of multifamily properties; competition from other available multifamily property owners and changes in market rental rates. Any adverse changes in these factors could cause impairment of the Partnership's assets. Revenue Recognition The Partnership generally leases apartment units for twelve-month terms or less. Rental income attributable to leases is recognized monthly as it is earned. The Partnership evaluates all accounts receivable from residents and establishes an allowance, after the application of security deposits, for accounts greater than 30 days past due on current tenants and all receivables due from former tenants. The Partnership will offer rental concessions during particularly slow months or in response to heavy competition from other similar complexes in the area. Any concessions given at the inception of the lease are amortized over the life of the lease. ITEM 3. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES (a) Disclosure Controls and Procedures. The Partnership's management, with the participation of the principal executive officer and principal financial officer of the General Partner, who are the equivalent of the Partnership's principal executive officer and principal financial officer, respectively, has evaluated the effectiveness of the Partnership's disclosure controls and procedures (as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act")) as of the end of the period covered by this report. Based on such evaluation, the principal executive officer and principal financial officer of the General Partner, who are the equivalent of the Partnership's principal executive officer and principal financial officer, respectively, have concluded that, as of the end of such period, the Partnership's disclosure controls and procedures needed to be improved and were improved during the second quarter of 2004 to provide that expenses related to sold properties are more accurately estimated and are reported in the proper period. In particular, the Partnership has implemented a system to improve the coordination and communication between those departments responsible for property and tax accounting and the group responsible for the preparation and reporting of financial information. (b) Internal Control Over Financial Reporting. There have not been any changes in the Partnership's internal control over financial reporting (as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act) during the fiscal quarter to which this report relates that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the Partnership's internal control over financial reporting. PART II - OTHER INFORMATION ITEM 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS In March 1998, several putative unit holders of limited partnership units of the Partnership commenced an action entitled Rosalie Nuanes, et al. v. Insignia Financial Group, Inc., et al. (the "Nuanes action") in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Mateo. The plaintiffs named as defendants, among others, the Partnership, its General Partner and several of their affiliated partnerships and corporate entities. The action purported to assert claims on behalf of a class of limited partners and derivatively on behalf of a number of limited partnerships (including the Partnership) that are named as nominal defendants, challenging, among other things, the acquisition of interests in certain General Partner entities by Insignia Financial Group, Inc. ("Insignia") and entities that were, at one time, affiliates of Insignia; past tender offers by the Insignia affiliates to acquire limited partnership units; management of the partnerships by the Insignia affiliates; and the series of transactions which closed on October 1, 1998 and February 26, 1999 whereby Insignia and Insignia Properties Trust, respectively, were merged into AIMCO. The plaintiffs sought monetary damages and equitable relief, including judicial dissolution of the Partnership. In addition, during the third quarter of 2001, a complaint (the "Heller action") was filed against the same defendants that are named in the Nuanes action, captioned Heller v. Insignia Financial Group. On or about August 6, 2001, plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint. The Heller action was brought as a purported derivative action, and asserted claims for, among other things, breach of fiduciary duty, unfair competition, conversion, unjust enrichment, and judicial dissolution. On January 8, 2003, the parties filed a Stipulation of Settlement in proposed settlement of the Nuanes action and the Heller action. In general terms, the proposed settlement provides for certification for settlement purposes of a settlement class consisting of all limited partners in this Partnership and others (the "Partnerships") as of December 20, 2002, the dismissal with prejudice and release of claims in the Nuanes and Heller litigation, payment by AIMCO of $9.9 million (which shall be distributed to settlement class members after deduction of attorney fees and costs of class counsel and certain costs of settlement) and up to $1 million toward the cost of independent appraisals of the Partnerships' properties by a Court appointed appraiser. An affiliate of the General Partner has also agreed to make at least one round of tender offers to purchase all of the partnership interests in the Partnerships within one year of final approval, if it is granted, and to provide partners with the independent appraisals at the time of these tenders. The proposed settlement also provided for the limitation of the allowable costs which the General Partner or its affiliates will charge the Partnerships in connection with this litigation and imposes limits on the class counsel fees and costs in this litigation. On April 11, 2003, notice was distributed to limited partners providing the details of the proposed settlement. On June 13, 2003, the Court granted final approval of the settlement and entered judgment in both the Nuanes and Heller actions. On August 12, 2003, an objector ("Objector") filed an appeal seeking to vacate and/or reverse the order approving the settlement and entering judgment thereto. On November 24, 2003, the Objector filed an application requesting the Court order AIMCO to withdraw settlement tender offers it had commenced, refrain from making further offers pending the appeal and auction any units tendered to third parties, contending that the offers did not conform with the terms of the Settlement. Counsel for the Objector (on behalf of another investor) had alternatively requested the Court take certain action purportedly to enforce the terms of the settlement agreement. On December 18, 2003, the Court heard oral argument on the motions and denied them both in their entirety. On January 28, 2004, Objector filed his opening brief in his pending appeal. On April 23, 2004, the General Partner and its affiliates filed a response brief in support of the settlement and the judgment thereto. Plaintiffs have also filed a brief in support of the settlement. On May 13, 2004, Objector filed a reply to both briefs in support of the settlement and judgment entered thereto. No hearing has been scheduled in the matter. On August 8, 2003 AIMCO Properties L.P., an affiliate of the General Partner, was served with a Complaint in the United States District Court, District of Columbia alleging that AIMCO Properties L.P. willfully violated the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) by failing to pay maintenance workers overtime for all hours worked in excess of forty per week. On March 5, 2004 Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint also naming NHP Management Company, which is also an affiliate of the General Partner. The Complaint is styled as a Collective Action under the FLSA and seeks to certify state subclasses in California, Maryland, and the District of Columbia. Specifically, the plaintiffs contend that AIMCO Properties L.P. failed to compensate maintenance workers for time that they were required to be "on-call". Additionally, the Complaint alleges AIMCO Properties L.P. failed to comply with the FLSA in compensating maintenance workers for time that they worked in responding to a call while "on-call". The Defendants have filed an answer to the Amended Complaint denying the substantive allegations. Discovery is currently underway. The General Partner does not anticipate that any costs to the Partnership, whether legal or settlement costs, associated with these cases will be material to the Partnership's overall operations. ITEM 6. EXHIBITS AND REPORTS ON FORM 8-K a) Exhibits: Exhibit 3.1, Certificate of Limited Partnership (incorporated by reference to Registration Statement of Registrant (File No. 2-57960) filed March 30, 1978, as amended to date). Exhibit 3.2, Agreement of Limited Partnership (Exhibit A to the Prospectus of Registrant dated February 25, 1977 is incorporated herein by reference). Exhibit 31.1, Certification of equivalent of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Securities Exchange Act Rules 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a), as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Exhibit 31.2, Certification of equivalent of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Securities Exchange Act Rules 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a), as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Exhibit 32.1, Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. b) Reports on Form 8-K filed during the quarter ended March 31, 2004: None. SIGNATURES In accordance with the requirements of the Exchange Act, the Registrant caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized. CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL GROWTH FUND By: CONCAP EQUITIES, INC. General Partner By: /s/Martha L. Long Martha L. Long Senior Vice President By: /s/Thomas M. Herzog Thomas M. Herzog Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer Date: May 24, 2004 Exhibit 31.1 CERTIFICATION I, Martha L. Long, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Consolidated Capital Growth Fund; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and 5. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting. Date: May 24, 2004 /s/Martha L. Long Martha L. Long Senior Vice President of ConCap Equities Inc., equivalent of the chief executive officer of the Partnership Exhibit 31.2 CERTIFICATION I, Thomas M. Herzog, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Consolidated Capital Growth Fund; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and 5. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting. Date: May 24, 2004 /s/Thomas M. Herzog Thomas M. Herzog Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer of ConCap Equities Inc., equivalent of the chief financial officer of the Partnership Exhibit 32.1 Certification of CEO and CFO Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Consolidated Capital Growth Fund (the "Partnership"), for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Martha L. Long, as the equivalent of the chief executive officer of the Partnership, and Thomas M. Herzog, as the equivalent of the chief financial officer of the Partnership, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his knowledge: (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Partnership. /s/Martha L. Long Name: Martha L. Long Date: May 24, 2004 /s/Thomas M. Herzog Name: Thomas M. Herzog Date: May 24, 2004 This certification is furnished with this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Partnership for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.