-----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, BJohzFc8V4AvptFOeslg9YaiYULuT/F+okBAKM+i0hiyOvkI1mR0wEIkrHHObfgg TtwuKfLm1QeV+iTrQuLnDA== 0000711642-05-000182.txt : 20050516 0000711642-05-000182.hdr.sgml : 20050516 20050516165742 ACCESSION NUMBER: 0000711642-05-000182 CONFORMED SUBMISSION TYPE: 10QSB PUBLIC DOCUMENT COUNT: 1 CONFORMED PERIOD OF REPORT: 20050331 FILED AS OF DATE: 20050516 DATE AS OF CHANGE: 20050516 FILER: COMPANY DATA: COMPANY CONFORMED NAME: CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL PROPERTIES III CENTRAL INDEX KEY: 0000317331 STANDARD INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION: REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUSTS [6798] IRS NUMBER: 942653686 STATE OF INCORPORATION: CA FISCAL YEAR END: 1231 FILING VALUES: FORM TYPE: 10QSB SEC ACT: 1934 Act SEC FILE NUMBER: 000-10273 FILM NUMBER: 05835516 BUSINESS ADDRESS: STREET 1: ONE INSIGNIA FINANCIAL PLZ STREET 2: P O BOX 1089 CITY: GREENVILLE STATE: SC ZIP: 29602 BUSINESS PHONE: 8032391591 MAIL ADDRESS: STREET 1: ONE INSIGNIA FINANCIAL PLAZA STREET 2: PO BOX 1089 CITY: GREENVILLE STATE: SC ZIP: 29602 10QSB 1 ccp3.txt CCP3 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 0-10273 CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL PROPERTIES III (Exact name of small business issuer as specified in its charter) California 94-2653686 (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 (1) 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 PROPERTIES III CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET (Unaudited) (in thousands, except unit data) March 31, 2005
Assets Cash and cash equivalents $ 58 Receivables and deposits 75 Other assets 358 Investment properties: Land $ 407 Buildings and related personal property 10,209 10,616 Less accumulated depreciation (8,267) 2,349 $ 2,840 Liabilities and Partners' Deficit Liabilities Accounts payable $ 178 Tenant security deposit liabilities 57 Accrued property taxes 45 Other liabilities 184 Due to affiliates (Note B) 964 Mortgage notes payable 7,091 Partners' Deficit General partners $(1,896) Limited partners (158,582 units issued and outstanding) (3,783) (5,679) $ 2,840 See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL PROPERTIES III CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS (Unaudited) (in thousands, except per unit data)
Three Months Ended March 31, 2005 2004 Revenues: Rental income $ 626 $ 535 Other income 46 58 Total revenues 672 593 Expenses: Operating 310 329 General and administrative 65 51 Depreciation 117 113 Interest 157 145 Property taxes 45 44 Total expenses 694 682 Net loss $ (22) $ (89) Net loss allocated to general partners (4%) $ (1) $ (4) Net loss allocated to limited partners (96%) (21) (85) $ (22) $ (89) Net loss per limited partnership unit $ (0.13) $ (0.54) See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL PROPERTIES III CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN PARTNERS' DEFICIT (Unaudited) (in thousands, except unit data)
Limited Partnership General Limited Units Partners Partners Total Original capital contributions 158,945 $ 1 $ 79,473 $ 79,474 Partners' deficit at December 31, 2004 158,582 $(1,895) $ (3,762) $ (5,657) Net loss for the three months ended March 31, 2005 -- (1) (21) (22) Partners' deficit at March 31, 2005 158,582 $(1,896) $ (3,783) $ (5,679) See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL PROPERTIES III CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS (Unaudited) (in thousands)
Three Months Ended March 31, 2005 2004 Cash flows from operating activities: Net loss $ (22) $ (89) Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash provided by operating activities: Casualty loss (5) -- Depreciation 117 113 Amortization of loan costs 6 6 Change in accounts: Receivables and deposits 28 13 Other assets (44) (60) Due to affiliates 61 27 Accounts payable (57) (34) Tenant security deposit liabilities (8) (1) Accrued property taxes 45 44 Other liabilities (50) 22 Net cash provided by operating activities 71 41 Cash flows used in investing activities: Property improvements and replacements (144) (34) Cash flows from financing activities: Payments on mortgage notes payable (64) (50) Advances from affiliate 112 51 Net cash provided by financing activities 48 1 Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents (25) 8 Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period 83 52 Cash and cash equivalents at end of period $ 58 $ 60 Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information: Cash paid for interest $ 159 $ 139 Supplemental disclosure of non-cash activity: Property improvements and replacements included in accounts payable $ 141 $ -- See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL PROPERTIES III NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Unaudited) Note A - Basis of Presentation The accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements of Consolidated Capital Properties III (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 Item 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 the general partner of the Partnership, 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, 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 consolidated financial statements and footnotes thereto included in the Partnership's Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004. The General Partner is wholly-owned by Apartment Investment and Management Company ("AIMCO"), a publicly traded real estate investment trust. 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 ("Partnership Agreement") provides for payments to affiliates for services and reimbursement of certain expenses incurred by affiliates of the General Partner on behalf of the Partnership. Affiliates of the General Partner receive 5% of gross receipts from both of the Partnership's properties as compensation for providing property management services. The Partnership paid to such affiliates approximately $33,000 and $29,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively, which are included in operating expenses. Affiliates of the General Partner charged the Partnership for reimbursement of accountable administrative expenses amounting to approximately $80,000 and $39,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively. These amounts are included in general and administrative expenses and investment properties. The portion of these reimbursements included in investment properties 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 $34,000. No such fees were incurred for the three months ended March 31, 2004. The construction management service fees are calculated based on a percentage of current additions to investment properties. At March 31, 2005, approximately $278,000 of such fees were owed to affiliates of the General Partner and are included in due to affiliates. The Partnership Agreement provides for a special management fee equal to 9% of the total distributions made to the limited partners from cash flow from operations to be paid to the General Partner for executive and administrative management services. During the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, no special management fees were paid as no distributions from cash flow from operations were made. During the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, an affiliate of the General Partner advanced the Partnership approximately $112,000 and $51,000 to fund operations and capital improvements at Ventura Landing Apartments and certain audit related liabilities. Interest is accrued at the prime rate plus 2% (7.75% at March 31, 2005). Interest expense was approximately $11,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2005. Interest expense was less than $1,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2004. At March 31, 2005, the total amount of advances and accrued interest was approximately $686,000 and is included in due to affiliates. Subsequent to March 31, 2005, an affiliate of the General Partner advanced the Partnership approximately $70,000 to fund capital improvements at Ventura Landing Apartments. The Partnership insures its properties 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 properties 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 $21,000 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 $32,000 for insurance coverage and fees associated with policy claims administration during the year ended December 31, 2004. Note C - Casualty Events In August 2004, Ventura Landing Apartments experienced damage from Hurricane Charley. As of March 31, 2005, the Partnership estimates damage of approximately $210,000. The Partnership does not expect a casualty loss to result from the damage as the damaged assets were fully depreciated. In September 2004, Ventura Landing Apartments experienced damage from Hurricane Frances. As of March 31, 2005, the Partnership estimates damage of approximately $37,000. The Partnership does not expect a casualty loss to result from the damage as the damaged assets were fully depreciated. In September 2004, Village Green Apartments experienced damage from Hurricane Frances. During the three months ended March 31, 2005, the Partnership recognized a casualty gain of approximately $5,000 due to a change in the estimated building damages at the property, which is reflected in operating expense. 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, the 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 relating 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 consolidated financial condition or results of operations. The Partnership is unaware of any other pending or outstanding litigation matters involving it or its investment properties 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 properties, the Partnership could potentially be liable for environmental liabilities or costs associated with its properties. 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 consolidated 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 consolidated 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 investment properties consist of two apartment complexes. The following table sets forth the average occupancy of the properties for each of the three month periods ended March 31, 2005 and 2004: Average Occupancy Property 2005 2004 Ventura Landing Apartments 96% 94% Orlando, Florida Village Green Apartments 96% 91% Altamonte Springs, Florida The General Partner attributes the increase in occupancy at Village Green Apartments to market growth in the Altamonte Springs area. The Partnership's financial results depend upon a number of factors including the ability to attract and maintain tenants at the investment properties, interest rates on mortgage loans, costs incurred to operate the investment properties, 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 properties 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 $22,000, as compared to a net loss of approximately $89,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2004. The decrease in net loss is due to an increase in total revenues, partially offset by an increase in total expenses. The increase in total revenues is due to an increase in rental income, partially offset by a decrease in other income. The increase in rental income is primarily due to increases in occupancy and average rental rates and a decrease in bad debt expense at both of the Partnership's investment properties. The decrease in other income is primarily due to decreases in late charges and lease cancellation fees at Ventura Landing Apartments. The increase in total expenses is due to increases in both general and administrative and interest expenses, partially offset by a decrease in operating expenses. Both depreciation and property tax expense remained relatively constant for the comparable periods. The increase in interest expense is primarily due to an increase in interest on advances from an affiliate of the General Partner. The decrease in operating expenses is primarily due to a decrease in contract maintenance expense, partially offset by increases in payroll related expenses at Village Green Apartments, utility expenses at Ventura Landing Apartments, and clean up costs associated with the 2004 hurricane damage at Ventura Landing Apartments (as discussed below). General and administrative expenses increased primarily due to an increase in management reimbursements to the General Partner as allowed under the Partnership Agreement and professional expenses associated with the administration of the Partnership. Also included in general and administrative expenses for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004 are costs associated with the quarterly and annual communications with investors and regulatory agencies and the annual audit required by the Partnership Agreement. In August 2004, Ventura Landing Apartments experienced damage from Hurricane Charley. As of March 31, 2005, the Partnership estimates damage of approximately $210,000. The Partnership does not expect a casualty loss to result from the damage as the damaged assets were fully depreciated. In September 2004, Ventura Landing Apartments experienced damage from Hurricane Frances. As of March 31, 2005, the Partnership estimates damage of approximately $37,000. The Partnership does not expect a casualty loss to result from the damage as the damaged assets were fully depreciated. In September 2004, Village Green Apartments experienced damage from Hurricane Frances. During the three months ended March 31, 2005, the Partnership recognized a casualty gain of approximately $5,000 due to a change in the estimated building damages at the property, which is reflected in operating expense. Liquidity and Capital Resources At March 31, 2005, the Partnership had cash and cash equivalents of approximately $58,000, compared to approximately $60,000 at March 31, 2004. The decrease in cash and cash equivalents of approximately $25,000, from December 31, 2004, is due to approximately $144,000 of cash used in investing activities, partially offset by approximately $71,000 of cash provided by operating activities and approximately $48,000 of cash provided by financing activities. Cash used in investing activities consisted of property improvements and replacements. Cash provided by financing activities consisted of advances received from an affiliate of the General Partner, partially offset by payments of principal made on the mortgages encumbering the Partnership's investment properties. 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 properties to adequately maintain the physical assets and other operating needs of the Partnership and to comply with Federal, state, and 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 each of the Partnership's properties are detailed below. Village Green Apartments During the three months ended March 31, 2005, the Partnership completed approximately $26,000 of capital improvements at Village Green Apartments, consisting primarily of floor covering replacement. These improvements were funded from operations. 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 anticipated cash flow generated by the property. Ventura Landing Apartments During the three months ended March 31, 2005, the Partnership completed approximately $259,000 of capital improvements at Ventura Landing Apartments, consisting primarily of plumbing upgrades, and floor covering replacement and construction related to the hurricane damage, as discussed in "Results of Operations". These improvements were funded from operations and advances from an affiliate of the General Partner. 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 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 Partnership's investment properties of approximately $7,091,000 requires monthly payments of principal and interest until the loans mature between July and August 2021, at which time the loans are scheduled to be fully amortized. There were no distributions made to the partners during the three months ended March 31, 2005 or 2004. Future cash distributions will depend on the levels of net cash generated from operations, property sales and/or refinancings. The Partnership's cash available for distribution is reviewed on a monthly basis. In light of the amounts accrued and payable to affiliates of the General Partner at March 31, 2005, there can be no assurance that the Partnership will generate sufficient funds from operations after 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 interests in the Partnership, AIMCO and its affiliates owned 83,947.50 limited partnership units (the "Units") in the Partnership representing 52.94% 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, unitholders 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 52.94% of the outstanding Units, AIMCO is in a position to control all 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 consolidated 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 properties are 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 properties. 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, the 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 relating 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 consolidated 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 PROPERTIES III 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 16, 2005 CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL PARTNERS III EXHIBIT INDEX Exhibit Number 3.1 Certificate of Limited Partnership, as amended to date (Exhibit 3 to the Registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1991, is incorporated herein by reference). 3.2 Partnership Agreement dated May 22, 1980 is incorporated by reference to Exhibit A to the Prospectus of the Registration dated August 17, 1981 as filed with the Commission pursuant to Rule 424(b) under the Act. 10.51 Multifamily Note dated June 27, 2001 between Consolidated Capital Properties III, a California limited partnership, and GMAC Commercial Mortgage Corporation. (Incorporated by reference to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30, 2001). 10.52 Multifamily Note dated July 23, 2001 between ConCap Village Green Associates, Ltd., a Texas limited partnership, and GMAC Commercial Mortgage Corporation. (Incorporated by reference to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30, 2001). 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 Properties III; 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 16, 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 Properties III; 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 16, 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 Properties III (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 16, 2005 /s/Stephen B. Waters Name: Stephen B. Waters Date: May 16, 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-----