-----BEGIN PRIVACY-ENHANCED MESSAGE----- Proc-Type: 2001,MIC-CLEAR Originator-Name: webmaster@www.sec.gov Originator-Key-Asymmetric: MFgwCgYEVQgBAQICAf8DSgAwRwJAW2sNKK9AVtBzYZmr6aGjlWyK3XmZv3dTINen TWSM7vrzLADbmYQaionwg5sDW3P6oaM5D3tdezXMm7z1T+B+twIDAQAB MIC-Info: RSA-MD5,RSA, SIPWbWpxN1d3v2AO5Nd7C/VWhMCn+wOY8TEvIVA9r4fj+kGchrRHzfc7uHFWndfq 9avjG4/vlnwmdAv0SLJepA== 0000711642-05-000140.txt : 20050513 0000711642-05-000140.hdr.sgml : 20050513 20050513132207 ACCESSION NUMBER: 0000711642-05-000140 CONFORMED SUBMISSION TYPE: 10QSB PUBLIC DOCUMENT COUNT: 1 CONFORMED PERIOD OF REPORT: 20050331 FILED AS OF DATE: 20050513 DATE AS OF CHANGE: 20050513 FILER: COMPANY DATA: COMPANY CONFORMED NAME: CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL GROWTH FUND CENTRAL INDEX KEY: 0000201529 STANDARD INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION: OPERATORS OF NONRESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS [6512] IRS NUMBER: 942382571 STATE OF INCORPORATION: CA FISCAL YEAR END: 1231 FILING VALUES: FORM TYPE: 10QSB SEC ACT: 1934 Act SEC FILE NUMBER: 000-08639 FILM NUMBER: 05827890 BUSINESS ADDRESS: STREET 1: 1873 SOUTH BELLAIRE STREET STREET 2: 17TH FLOOR CITY: DENVER STATE: CO ZIP: 80222 BUSINESS PHONE: 8032391000 MAIL ADDRESS: STREET 1: 1873 SOUTH BELLAIRE STREET STREET 2: 17TH FLOOR CITY: DENVER STATE: CO ZIP: 80222 10QSB 1 ccgf.txt CCGF UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 Form 10-QSB (Mark One) [X] QUARTERLY REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2005 [ ] TRANSITION REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE EXCHANGE ACT For the transition period from _________to _________ Commission file number 0-8639 CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL GROWTH FUND (Exact name of small business issuer 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) Check whether the issuer (i) filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act during the past 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports) and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes X No ___ PART I - FINANCIAL INFORMATION ITEM 1. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL GROWTH FUND BALANCE SHEET (Unaudited) (in thousands, except unit data) March 31, 2005
Assets Cash and cash equivalents $ 36 Receivables and deposits 379 Restricted escrows 227 Other assets 165 Investment property: Land $ 946 Buildings and related personal property 16,880 17,826 Less accumulated depreciation (13,606) 4,220 $ 5,027 Liabilities and Partners' Deficit Liabilities Accounts payable $ 186 Tenant security deposit liabilities 91 Accrued property taxes 65 Other liabilities 252 Due to affiliates (Note B) 948 Mortgage note payable 12,240 Partners' Deficit General partner $ (3,152) Limited partners (49,196 units issued and outstanding) (5,603) (8,755) $ 5,027 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, 2005 2004 Revenues: Rental income $ 782 $ 655 Other income 53 54 Casualty gain (Note C) -- 25 Total revenues 835 734 Expenses: Operating 417 308 General and administrative 45 53 Depreciation 217 228 Interest 235 220 Property taxes 65 64 Total expenses 979 873 Net loss (144) (139) Net loss allocated to general partner $ (1) $ (1) Net loss allocated to limited partners (143) (138) $ (144) $ (139) Net loss per limited partnership unit $ (2.91) $ (2.80) 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, 2004 49,196 $(3,151) $(5,460) $(8,611) Net loss for the three months ended March 31, 2005 -- (1) (143) (144) Partners' deficit at March 31, 2005 49,196 $(3,152) $(5,603) $(8,755) See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL GROWTH FUND STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS (Unaudited) (in thousands)
Three Months Ended March 31, 2005 2004 Cash flows from operating activities: Net loss $ (144) $ (139) Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash provided by (used in) operating activities: Depreciation 217 228 Amortization of loan costs 5 5 Bad debt expense 14 26 Casualty gain -- (25) Change in accounts: Receivables and deposits (77) (57) Other assets (60) (82) Accounts payable 54 (260) Tenant security deposit liabilities 4 -- Accrued property taxes 65 63 Due to affiliates 49 1 Other liabilities (29) (18) Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities 98 (258) Cash flows from investing activities: Property improvements and replacements (218) (53) Net deposits to restricted escrows -- (180) Insurance proceeds received -- 30 Net cash used in investing activities (218) (203) Cash flows provided by financing activities: Advances from affiliates -- 500 Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents (120) 39 Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period 156 364 Cash and cash equivalents at end of period $ 36 $ 403 Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information: Cash paid for interest $ 213 $ 214 Supplemental disclosure of non-cash flow information: Property improvements and replacements in accounts payable $ 29 $ -- Included in property improvements and replacements for the three months ended March 31, 2005 is approximately $65,000 of improvements which were included in accounts payable at December 31, 2004. 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 months ended March 31, 2005, are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2005. For further information, refer to the financial statements and footnotes thereto included in the Partnership's Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2004. The General Partner is a wholly owned subsidiary of Apartment Investment and Management Company ("AIMCO"), a publicly traded real estate investment trust. The accompanying financial statements have been prepared assuming the Partnership will continue as a going concern. The Partnership suffers from a lack of cash and has debt of approximately $12,240,000 maturing in December of 2005. Based upon current operations, the Partnership does not anticipate that proceeds from the new financing will be sufficient to repay the existing debt. If the Partnership defaults on its scheduled debt repayment, the Partnership will risk losing its sole investment property through foreclosure. The General Partner is currently evaluating its options with respect to obtaining financing for the investment property. The General Partner is currently evaluating its means to improve the operations of the property and increase occupancy levels to improve the cash flows generated by the property. As a result of the above, there is substantial doubt about the Partnership's ability to continue as a going concern. The financial statements do not include any adjustments to reflect the possible future effects on the recoverability and classification of assets or the amounts and classification of liabilities that may result from the outcome of this uncertainty. Note B - Transactions with Affiliated Parties The Partnership has no employees and depends 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 receive 5% of gross receipts from the Partnership's property for providing property management services. The Partnership paid to such affiliates approximately $40,000 and $37,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively, which is included in operating expenses. Affiliates of the General Partner charged the Partnership for reimbursement of accountable administrative expenses amounting to approximately $46,000 and $29,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively, which is included in general and administrative expenses and investment property. The portion of these reimbursements included in investment property for the three months ended March 31, 2005 are fees related to construction management services provided by an affiliate of the General Partner of approximately $13,000. No such fees were charged in the three months ended March 31, 2004. The construction management service fees are calculated based on a percentage of additions to the investment property. At March 31, 2005, approximately $74,000 in reimbursements was due to the General Partner and is included in due to affiliates on the accompanying balance sheet. 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. No fees were earned or paid for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 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. There were no advances during the three months ended March 31, 2005. Interest on advances is charged at the prime rate plus 2% (7.75% at March 31, 2005). Interest expense was approximately $16,000 and $1,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively. At March 31, 2005, approximately $874,000 in principal and accrued interest is included in due to affiliates. Subsequent to March 31, 2005, the General Partner advanced approximately $90,000 to the Partnership to pay operating expenses at the investment property. 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 the three months ended March 31, 2005, the Partnership was charged by AIMCO and its affiliates approximately $42,000 for hazard insurance coverage and fees associated with policy claims administration. Additional charges will be incurred by the Partnership during 2005 as other insurance policies renew later in the year. The Partnership was charged by AIMCO and its affiliates approximately $62,000 for insurance coverage and fees associated with policy claims administration during the year ended December 31, 2004. Note C - 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 D - 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 captioned Heller v. Insignia Financial Group (the "Heller action") was filed against the same defendants that are named in the Nuanes action. 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 28, 2002, the trial court granted defendants motion to strike the complaint. On January 8, 2003, the parties filed a Stipulation of Settlement in proposed settlement of the Nuanes action and the Heller action. 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 (the "Appeal") seeking to vacate and/or reverse the order approving the settlement and entering judgment thereto. On May 4, 2004 the Objector filed a second appeal challenging the court's use of a referee and its order requiring Objector to pay those fees. On March 21, 2005, the Court of Appeals issued opinions in both pending appeals. With regard to the settlement and judgment entered thereto, the Court of Appeals vacated the trial court's order and remanded to the trial court for further findings on the basis that the "state of the record is insufficient to permit meaningful appellate review". With regard to the second appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed the order requiring the Objector to pay referee fees. On April 26, 2005, the Court of Appeals lifted the stay of a pending appeal related to the Heller action and the trial court's order striking the complaint. On April 28, 2005, the Objector filed a Petition for Review with the California Supreme Court in connection with the opinion vacating the order approving settlement and remanding for further findings. The General Partner and its affiliates are currently scheduled to file an answer to Objector's petition on May 18, 2005. 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. AIMCO Properties L.P. and NHP Management Company, both affiliates of the General Partner, are defendants in a lawsuit alleging that they 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. The complaint attempts to bring 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. and NHP Management Company failed to compensate maintenance workers for time that they were required to be "on-call." Additionally, the complaint alleges AIMCO Properties L.P. and NHP Management Company 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. Oral argument relating to the certification of the collective action took place on May 12, 2005 and the parties await a ruling from the Court. Although the outcome of any litigation is uncertain, AIMCO Properties, L.P. does not believe that the ultimate outcome will have a material adverse effect on its financial condition or results of operations. Similarly, the General Partner does not believe that the ultimate outcome will have a material adverse effect on the Partnership's financial condition or results of 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. Environmental Various Federal, state and local laws subject property owners or operators to liability for management, and the costs of removal or remediation, of certain hazardous substances present on a property. Such laws often impose liability without regard to whether the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the release or presence of the hazardous substances. The presence of, or the failure to manage or remedy properly, hazardous substances may adversely affect occupancy at affected apartment communities and the ability to sell or finance affected properties. In addition to the costs associated with investigation and remediation actions brought by government agencies, the presence of hazardous substances on a property could result in claims by private plaintiffs for personal injury, disease, disability or other infirmities. Various laws also impose liability for the cost of removal, remediation or disposal of hazardous substances through a licensed disposal or treatment facility. Anyone who arranges for the disposal or treatment of hazardous substances is potentially liable under such laws. These laws often impose liability whether or not the person arranging for the disposal ever owned or operated the disposal facility. In connection with the ownership and operation of its property, the Partnership could potentially be liable for environmental liabilities or costs associated with its property. Mold The Partnership is aware of lawsuits against owners and managers of multifamily properties asserting claims of personal injury and property damage caused by the presence of mold, some of which have resulted in substantial monetary judgments or settlements. The Partnership has only limited insurance coverage for property damage loss claims arising from the presence of mold and for personal injury claims related to mold exposure. Affiliates of the General Partner have implemented a national policy and procedures to prevent or eliminate mold from its properties and the General Partner believes that these measures will eliminate, or at least minimize, the effects that mold could have on residents. To date, the Partnership has not incurred any material costs or liabilities relating to claims of mold exposure or to abate mold conditions. Because the law regarding mold is unsettled and subject to change the General Partner can make no assurance that liabilities resulting from the presence of or exposure to mold will not have a material adverse effect on the Partnership's financial condition or results of operations. SEC Investigation The Central Regional Office of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") is conducting a formal investigation relating to certain matters. Although the staff of the SEC is not limited in the areas that it may investigate, 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, capitalization of payroll and certain other costs, and tax credit transactions. At the end of the first quarter of 2005, the SEC added certain tender offers for limited partnership interests as an area of investigation. AIMCO is cooperating fully. AIMCO is not able to predict when the investigation will be resolved. AIMCO does not believe that the ultimate outcome will have a material adverse effect on its consolidated financial condition or results of operations. Similarly, the General Partner does not believe that the ultimate outcome will have a material adverse effect on the Partnership's financial condition or results of operations. 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, 2005 and 2004: Average Occupancy Property 2005 2004 The Lakes 84% 74% Raleigh, North Carolina The General Partner attributes the increase in occupancy at The Lakes Apartments to capital improvements made at the property that have improved the overall appearance and helped to attract tenants. The Partnership's financial results depend 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 that are outside the control of the Partnership such as the local economic climate and weather can adversely or positively affect the Partnership's financial results. Results of Operations The Partnership's net loss for the three months ended March 31, 2005 was approximately $144,000, compared to net loss of approximately $139,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2004. Net loss remained relatively constant due to an increase in total revenues offset by an increase in total expenses. Total revenue increased due to an increase in rental income partially offset by a casualty gain recognized in 2004. Rental income increased due to increases in occupancy and the average rental rate and a decrease in bad debt expense at the Partnership's investment property. 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 increased due to increases in operating and interest expenses, partially offset by a decrease in depreciation expense. Operating expense increased due to increases in property and maintenance expenses. Property expense increased due to increases in payroll and related benefits, utilities and corporate unit expense at the investment property. Maintenance expense increased due to an increase in contract labor. Interest expense increased due to interest charged on the advances outstanding to an affiliate of the General Partner. Depreciation expense decreased due to assets at the investment property becoming fully depreciated during 2004. Included in general and administrative expense for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004 are management reimbursements to the General Partner as allowed under the Partnership Agreement. Also included in general and administrative expenses are costs associated with the quarterly and annual communications with investors and regulatory agencies and the annual audit required by the Partnership Agreement. Liquidity and Capital Resources At March 31, 2005, the Partnership had cash and cash equivalents of approximately $36,000 compared to approximately $403,000 at March 31, 2004. The decrease in cash and cash equivalents of approximately $120,000 since December 31, 2004 is due to approximately $218,000, of cash used in investing activities, partially offset by approximately $98,000 of cash provided by operating activities. Cash used in investing activities consisted of property improvements and replacements. 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. For example, 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. Capital improvements planned for the Partnership's property are detailed below. The Lakes Apartments During the three months ended March 31, 2005, the Partnership completed approximately $182,000 of capital improvements at The Lakes Apartments, consisting primarily of structural upgrades, interior lighting, building upgrades, plumbing fixtures, floor covering replacements and casualty repairs. These improvements were funded from operating cash flow. The Partnership regularly evaluates the capital improvement needs of the property. While the Partnership has no material commitments for property improvements and replacements, certain routine capital expenditures are anticipated during 2005. Such capital expenditures will depend on the physical condition of the property as well as replacement reserves and anticipated cash flow generated by the property. Capital expenditures will be incurred only if cash is available from operations or from Partnership reserves. To the extent that 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 is currently evaluating its options with respect to obtaining financing for the investment property. 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. Pursuant to the Partnership Agreement, the term of the Partnership is scheduled to expire on December 31, 2006. Accordingly, prior to such date the Partnership will need to either sell its investment property or extend the term of the Partnership. The Partnership made no distributions during the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004. Future cash distributions will depend on the levels of cash generated from operations, and the timing of the debt maturity, property sale and/or refinancing. The Partnership's cash available for distribution is reviewed on a monthly basis. 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 2005 or subsequent periods. Other In addition to its indirect ownership of the general partner interest in the Partnership, AIMCO and its affiliates owned 32,142.75 limited partnership units (the "Units") in the Partnership representing 65.34% of the outstanding Units at March 31, 2005. 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 65.34% 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. The Partnership will offer rental concessions during particularly slow months or in response to heavy competition from other similar complexes in the area. Rental income attributable to leases, net of any concessions, is recognized on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease. 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. 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 are effective. (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 captioned Heller v. Insignia Financial Group (the "Heller action") was filed against the same defendants that are named in the Nuanes action. 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 28, 2002, the trial court granted defendants motion to strike the complaint. On January 8, 2003, the parties filed a Stipulation of Settlement in proposed settlement of the Nuanes action and the Heller action. 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 (the "Appeal") seeking to vacate and/or reverse the order approving the settlement and entering judgment thereto. On May 4, 2004 the Objector filed a second appeal challenging the court's use of a referee and its order requiring Objector to pay those fees. On March 21, 2005, the Court of Appeals issued opinions in both pending appeals. With regard to the settlement and judgment entered thereto, the Court of Appeals vacated the trial court's order and remanded to the trial court for further findings on the basis that the "state of the record is insufficient to permit meaningful appellate review". With regard to the second appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed the order requiring the Objector to pay referee fees. On April 26, 2005, the Court of Appeals lifted the stay of a pending appeal related to the Heller action and the trial court's order striking the complaint. On April 28, 2005, the Objector filed a Petition for Review with the California Supreme Court in connection with the opinion vacating the order approving settlement and remanding for further findings. The General Partner and its affiliates are currently scheduled to file an answer to Objector's petition on May 18, 2005. 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. AIMCO Properties L.P. and NHP Management Company, both affiliates of the General Partner, are defendants in a lawsuit alleging that they 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. The complaint attempts to bring 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. and NHP Management Company failed to compensate maintenance workers for time that they were required to be "on-call." Additionally, the complaint alleges AIMCO Properties L.P. and NHP Management Company 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. Oral argument relating to the certification of the collective action took place on May 12, 2005 and the parties await a ruling from the Court. Although the outcome of any litigation is uncertain, AIMCO Properties, L.P. does not believe that the ultimate outcome will have a material adverse effect on its financial condition or results of operations. Similarly, the General Partner does not believe that the ultimate outcome will have a material adverse effect on the Partnership's financial condition or results of operations. ITEM 5. OTHER INFORMATION None. ITEM 6. EXHIBITS See Exhibit Index. 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/Stephen B. Waters Stephen B. Waters Vice President Date: May 13, 2005 EXHIBIT INDEX Exhibit 3 Certificate of Limited Partnership, as amended to date. 10.30 Multifamily Note dated November 30, 1995 between Consolidated Capital Growth Fund, a California limited partnership, and Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. d/b/a Lehman Capital, A Division of Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc. (Incorporate by reference to the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 1995). 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. 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. 32.1 Certification of the equivalent of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. 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 small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The small business issuer'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 small business issuer 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 small business issuer, 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 small business issuer'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 small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and 5. The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer'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 small business issuer'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 small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting. Date: May 13, 2005 /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, Stephen B. Waters, 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 small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The small business issuer'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 small business issuer 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 small business issuer, 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 small business issuer'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 small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and 5. The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer'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 small business issuer'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 small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting. Date: May 13, 2005 /s/Stephen B. Waters Stephen B. Waters Vice President 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, 2005 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 Stephen B. Waters, 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 13, 2005 /s/Stephen B. Waters Name: Stephen B. Waters Date: May 13, 2005 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. -----END PRIVACY-ENHANCED MESSAGE-----