FORM 10-QSB—QUARTERLY OR TRANSITIONAL REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF

10KSB 1 sp61207.htm 10KSB FORM 10-QSB—QUARTERLY OR TRANSITIONAL REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

Form 10-KSB

(Mark One)

[X]

ANNUAL REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007

[ ]

TRANSITION REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from _________to _________

Commission file number 0-13261

SHELTER PROPERTIES VI

(Name of small business issuer in its charter)


South Carolina	57-0755618
(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

Securities registered under Section 12(b) of the Exchange Act:

None

Securities registered under Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act:

Units of Limited Partnership Interest

(Title of class)

Check whether the issuer is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act. [ ]

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___

Check if there is no disclosure of delinquent filers in response to Item 405 of Regulation S-B contained in this form, and no disclosure will be contained, to the best of the Partnership's knowledge in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-KSB or any amendment to this Form 10-KSB. [X]

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company ( as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes [] No [x]

State issuer's revenues for its most recent fiscal year. $1,216,000

State the aggregate market value of the voting partnership interests held by non-affiliates computed by reference to the price at which the partnership interests were sold, or the average bid and asked prices of such partnership interests as of December 31, 2007. No market exists for the limited partnership interests of the Registrant; and, therefore, no aggregate market value can be determined.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE None

Transitional Small Business Disclosure Format (Check one): Yes [ ]; No [X]

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 provides a “safe harbor” for forward-looking statements in certain circumstances. Certain information included in this Report contains or may contain information that is forward-looking, including, without limitation, statements regarding the effect of redevelopments, the Partnership’s future financial performance, including the Partnership’s ability to maintain current or meet projected occupancy and rent levels, and the effect of government regulations. Actual results may differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements and, in addition, will be affected by a variety of risks and factors that are beyond the Partnership’s control including, without limitation: natural disasters such as hurricanes; national and local economic conditions; the general level of interest rates; energy costs; the terms of governmental regulations that affect the Partnership’s property and interpretations of those regulations; the competitive environment in which the Partnership operates; financing risks, including the risk that the Partnership’s cash flows from operations may be insufficient to meet required payments of principal and interest; real estate risks, including fluctuations in real estate values and the general economic climate in local markets and competition for tenants in such markets; insurance risks; development risks; litigation, including costs associated with prosecuting or defending claims and any adverse outcomes; and possible environmental liabilities, including costs, fines or penalties that may be incurred due to necessary remediation of contamination of properties presently owned or previously owned by the Partnership. Readers should carefully review the Partnership’s financial statements and the notes thereto, as well as the section entitled “Risk Factors” described in Item 1 of this Annual Report and the other documents the Partnership files from time to time with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

PART I

Item 1.

Description of Business

Shelter Properties VI (the "Partnership" or "Registrant") was organized as a limited partnership under the laws of the State of South Carolina on August 3, 1983. The general partner responsible for management of the Partnership's business is Shelter Realty VI Corporation, a South Carolina corporation (the "Corporate General Partner"). The Corporate General Partner is a subsidiary of Apartment Investment and Management Company ("AIMCO"), a publicly traded real-estate investment trust. The other general partner is AIMCO Properties, L.P., an affiliate of the Corporate General Partner and AIMCO.

Commencing March 22, 1984, the Partnership offered up to 34,900 Units of Limited Partnership Interest (the "Units") at a purchase price of $1,000 per Unit with a minimum purchase of 5 Units ($5,000), or 2 Units ($2,000) for an Individual Retirement Account pursuant to a Registration Statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. By means of Supplement No. 4 dated September 28, 1984, the Partnership offered for sale an additional 15,000 Units. The Corporate General Partner purchased 100 units as required by the Partnership Agreement.

The offering terminated in October 1984. Upon termination of the offering, the Partnership had accepted subscriptions for 42,324 Units, including 100 Units purchased by the Corporate General Partner, for an aggregate of $42,324,000. Unsold Units (numbering 7,676) were deregistered pursuant to Post Effective Amendment No. 1 to Registration Statement No. 2-93285 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 13, 1984. Since its initial offering, the Partnership has not received, nor are limited partners required to make, additional capital contributions.

The Partnership is engaged in the business of operating and holding real properties for investment. In 1984 and 1985 during its acquisition phase, the Partnership invested approximately $30,300,000 in eight existing apartment properties. The Partnership sold five of its properties and lost one property to foreclosure prior to 2006. During the year ended December 31, 2006, the Partnership sold Rocky Creek Apartments to a third party. The Partnership continues to own and operate one property. See "Item 2. Description of Property". The Partnership Agreement provides that the Partnership is to terminate on December 31, 2023, unless terminated prior to such date.

The Partnership has no employees. Management and administrative services are performed by the Corporate General Partner and by agents retained by the Corporate General Partner. The property management services are performed at the Partnership's property by affiliates of the Corporate General Partner.

Risk Factors

The risk factors noted in this section and other factors noted throughout this Report describe certain risks and uncertainties that could cause the Partnership’s actual results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statement.

Failure to generate sufficient net operating income may limit the Partnership’s ability to repay advances from affiliates.

The Partnership’s ability to repay advances from affiliates depends on its ability to generate net operating income in excess of required debt payments and capital expenditure requirements. Net operating income may be adversely affected by events or conditions beyond the Partnership’s control, including:

the general economic climate;

competition from other apartment communities and other housing options;

local conditions, such as loss of jobs or an increase in the supply of apartments, that might adversely affect apartment occupancy or rental rates;

changes in governmental regulations and the related cost of compliance;

increases in operating costs (including real estate taxes) due to inflation and other factors, which may not be offset by increased rents;

changes in tax laws and housing laws, including the enactment of rent control laws or other laws regulating multifamily housing; and

changes in interest rates and the availability of financing.

The Partnership’s existing and future debt financing could render it unable to operate, result in foreclosure on its property or prevent it from making distributions on its equity.

The Partnership’s strategy is generally to incur debt to increase the return on its equity while maintaining acceptable interest coverage ratios. Payments of principal and interest may leave the Partnership with insufficient cash resources to operate its property or pay distributions. The Partnership is also subject to the risk that its cash flow from operations will be insufficient to make required payments of principal and interest, and the risk that existing indebtedness may not be refinanced or that the terms of any refinancing will not be as favorable as the terms of existing indebtedness. If the Partnership fails to make required payments of principal and interest on secured debt, its lenders could foreclose on the property securing such debt, which would result in loss of income and asset value to the Partnership.

Competition could limit the Partnership’s ability to lease apartments or increase or maintain rents.

The Partnership’s apartment property competes for residents with other housing alternatives, including other rental apartments, condominiums and single-family homes that are available for rent, as well as new and existing condominiums and single-family homes for sale. Competitive residential housing in such market area could adversely affect the Partnership’s ability to lease apartments and to increase or maintain rental rates.

Laws benefiting disabled persons may result in the Partnership’s incurrence of unanticipated expenses.

Under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, or ADA, all places intended to be used by the public are required to meet certain Federal requirements related to access and use by disabled persons. Likewise, the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, or FHAA, requires apartment properties first occupied after March 13, 1990, to be accessible to the handicapped. These and other Federal, state and local laws may require modifications to the Partnership’s property, or restrict renovations of the property. Noncompliance with these laws could result in the imposition of fines or an award of damages to private litigants and also could result in an order to correct any non-complying feature, which could result in substantial capital expenditures. Although the Partnership believes that its property is substantially in compliance with present requirements, the Partnership may incur unanticipated expenses to comply with the ADA and the FHAA.

Potential liability or other expenditures associated with potential environmental contamination may be costly.

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, and potential fines or penalties imposed by such agencies in connection therewith, 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, operation and management of its property, the Partnership could potentially be liable for environmental liabilities or costs associated with its property.

Moisture infiltration and resulting mold remediation may be costly.

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 Corporate General Partner have implemented policies, procedures, third-party audits and training and the Corporate General Partner believes that these measures will prevent or eliminate mold exposure and will minimize the effects that mold may 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 Corporate 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.

A further description of the Partnership's business is included in "Management's Discussion and Analysis or Plan of Operation" included in "Item 6" of this Form 10-KSB.

Item 2.

Description of Property

The following table sets forth the Partnership's investment in property:


	Date of
Property	Purchase	Type of Ownership	Use

Village Gardens Apartments	03/01/85	Fee ownership subject	Apartment
Fort Collins, Colorado		to first mortgage	141 units

On June 30, 2006, the Partnership sold Rocky Creek Apartments to a third party for a gross sale price of approximately $4,185,000. The net proceeds realized by the Partnership were approximately $4,114,000 after payment of closing costs and a prepayment penalty owed by the Partnership. The Partnership used approximately $2,138,000 of the net proceeds to repay the mortgage encumbering the property. The Partnership realized a gain of approximately $2,386,000 as a result of the sale, which is included in gain from sale of discontinued operations for the year ended December 31, 2006. In addition, the Partnership recorded a loss on extinguishment of debt of approximately $32,000 as a result of the write-off of unamortized loan costs and a prepayment penalty, which is included in loss from discontinued operations for the year ended December 31, 2006.

Schedule of Property

Set forth below for the Partnership's property is the gross carrying value, accumulated depreciation, depreciable life, method of depreciation and Federal tax basis.


	Gross			Method
	Carrying	Accumulated	Depreciable	of	Federal
Property	Value	Depreciation	Life	Depreciation	Tax Basis
	(in thousands)				(in thousands)

Village Gardens
Apartments	$ 5,819	$ 3,863	5-30 yrs	SL	$1,372

See "Note A – Organization and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies" to the financial statements included in "Item 7. Financial Statements" for a description of the Partnership's capitalization and depreciation policies.

Schedule of Property Indebtedness

The following table sets forth certain information relating to the loan encumbering the Partnership's property.


	Principal				Principal
	Balance At				Balance
	December 31,	Interest	Period	Maturity	Due At
Property	2007	Rate	Amortized	Date	Maturity
	(in thousands)				(in thousands)

Village Gardens
Apartments
1st mortgage	$ 3,612	7.22% (1)	20 years	01/01/21	$ --

(1)

Fixed rate mortgage.

See “Note B- Mortgage Note Payable” to the financial statements included in "Item 7. Financial Statements" for information with respect to the Partnership's ability to prepay this loan and other specific details about the loan.

Rental Rates and Occupancy

Average annual rental rates and occupancy for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006 for the property are as follows:


	Average Annual
	Rental Rates		Average Annual
	(per unit)		Occupancy
	2007	2006	2007	2006
Village Gardens
Apartments	$7,655	$7,201	97%	95%

As noted under "Item 1. Description of Business", the real estate industry is highly competitive. The property is subject to competition from other residential apartment complexes in the area. The Corporate General Partner believes that the property is adequately insured. The property is an apartment complex which leases units for lease terms of one year or less. No individual tenant leases 10% or more of the available rental space. The property is in good physical condition, subject to normal depreciation and deterioration as is typical for assets of this type and age.

Schedule of Real Estate Taxes and Rate

Real estate taxes and rate in 2007 for the property were as follows:


	2007	2007
	Billing	Rate
	(in thousands)

Village Gardens Apartments	$ 51	8.71%

Capital Improvements

Village Gardens Apartments

During the year ended December 31, 2007, the Partnership completed approximately $452,000 of capital improvements at Village Gardens Apartments, consisting primarily of lighting, sprinkler system and air conditioning upgrades, sidewalk improvements, exterior painting, and floor covering replacement. These improvements were funded from operating cash flow and advances from an affiliate of the Corporate 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 2008. 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 to the extent of cash available from operations, Partnership reserves or advances from affiliates. 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.

Item 3.

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 Corporate 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 Corporate 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. Plaintiffs took an appeal from this order.

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”. The matter was transferred back to the trial court on June 21, 2005. With regard to the second appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed the order requiring the Objector to pay referee fees. With respect to the related Heller appeal, on July 28, 2005, the Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s order striking the first amended complaint.

On August 18, 2005, Objector and his counsel filed a motion to disqualify the trial court based on a peremptory challenge and filed a motion to disqualify for cause on October 17, 2005, both of which were ultimately denied and/or struck by the trial court. On or about October 13, 2005 Objector filed a motion to intervene and on or about October 19, 2005 filed both a motion to take discovery relating to the adequacy of plaintiffs as derivative representatives and a motion to dissolve the anti-suit injunction in connection with settlement. On November 14, 2005, Plaintiffs filed a Motion For Further Findings pursuant to the remand ordered by the Court of Appeals. Defendants joined in that motion. On February 3, 2006, the Court held a hearing on the various matters pending before it and ordered additional briefing from the parties and Objector. On June 30, 2006, the trial court entered an order confirming its approval of the class action settlement and entering judgment thereto after the Court of Appeals had remanded the matter for further findings. The substantive terms of the settlement agreement remain unchanged. The trial court also entered supplemental orders on July 1, 2006, denying Objector’s Motion to File a Complaint in Intervention, Objector’s Motion for Leave of Discovery and Objector’s Motion to Dissolve the Anti-Suit Injunction. Notice of Entry of Judgment was served on July 10, 2006.

On August 31, 2006, the Objector filed a Notice of Appeal to the Court’s June 30, 2006 and July 1, 2006 orders. The matter was argued and submitted and the Court of Appeal issued an opinion on February 20, 2008 affirming the order approving the settlement and judgment entered thereto. On March 12, 2008, the Court of Appeal denied Appellant’s Petition for Re-Hearing. Appellant has until April 1, 2008 to file a Petition for Review with the California Supreme Court.

The Corporate General Partner does not anticipate that any costs to the Partnership, whether legal or settlement costs, associated with these cases will be material to the Partnership’s overall operations.

Item 4.

Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders

During the quarter ended December 31, 2007, no matter was submitted to a vote of unitholders through the solicitation of proxies or otherwise.

PART II

Item 5.

Market for the Registrant's Equity and Related Partner Matters

The Partnership, a publicly-held limited partnership, offered and sold 42,324 limited partnership units (the "Units") aggregating $42,324,000, inclusive of 100 Units purchased by the Corporate General Partner. At December 31, 2007, the Partnership had 1,496 holders of record owning an aggregate of 42,302 Units. Affiliates of the Corporate General Partner owned 28,440 Units or 67.23% at December 31, 2007. No public trading market has developed for the Units, and it is not anticipated that such a market will develop in the future.

The Partnership distributed the following amounts during the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006 (in thousands except per unit data):


	Year Ended	Per Limited	Year Ended	Per Limited
	December 31,	Partnership	December 31,	Partnership
	2007	Unit	2006	Unit
Sale (1)	$ ---	$ --	$ 1,867	$ 44.11

(1)

Proceeds from the August 2004 sale of River Reach Apartments, the October 2005 sale of Carriage House Apartments, and the June 2006 sale of Rocky Creek Apartments.

Future cash distributions will depend on the levels of net cash generated from operations, property sale and/or refinancing. The Partnership's cash available for distribution is reviewed on a monthly basis. There can be no assurance, however, that the Partnership will generate sufficient funds from operations, after planned capital improvements, to permit any distributions to its partners during 2008 or subsequent periods. See "Item 2. Description of Property – Capital Improvements" for information relating to anticipated capital expenditures at the property.

In addition to its indirect ownership of the general partner interests in the Partnership, AIMCO and its affiliates owned 28,440 Units in the Partnership representing 67.23% of the outstanding Units at December 31, 2007. 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 Corporate General Partner. As a result of its ownership of 67.23% of the outstanding Units, AIMCO and its affiliates are in a position to control all voting decisions with respect to the Partnership. Although the Corporate General Partner owes fiduciary duties to the limited partners of the Partnership, the Corporate General Partner also owes fiduciary duties to AIMCO as its sole stockholder. As a result, the duties of the Corporate General Partner, as corporate general partner, to the Partnership and its limited partners may come into conflict with the duties of the Corporate General Partner to AIMCO as its sole stockholder.

Item 6.

Management's Discussion and Analysis or Plan of Operation

This item should be read in conjunction with the financial statements and other items contained elsewhere in this report.

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 Corporate 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 Corporate 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 Corporate General Partner may use rental concessions and rental rate reductions to offset softening market conditions; accordingly, there is no guarantee that the Corporate 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 realized a net loss of approximately $211,000 for the year ended December 31, 2007 compared to net income of approximately $1,973,000 for the year ended December 31, 2006. In accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 144, “Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets”, the statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2006 reflect the operations of Rocky Creek Apartments as loss from discontinued operations due to its sale on June 30, 2006. The loss from discontinued operations for the year ended December 31, 2006 also includes the operations of Carriage House Apartments which sold in October 2005.

Also included in loss from discontinued operations for the year ended December 31, 2006 is the collection of a payroll related refund of approximately $12,000 related to Carriage House Apartments, which was sold to a third party in October 2005.

The Partnership recognized a loss from continuing operations of approximately $211,000 and $287,000 for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively. The decrease in loss from continuing operations for the year ended December 31, 2007 is due to an increase in total revenues, partially offset by an increase in total expenses. The increase in total revenues for the year ended December 31, 2007 is due to increases in both rental and other income. Rental income increased due to increases in the average rental rate and occupancy at Village Gardens Apartments. The increase in other income is primarily due to increases in tenant utility reimbursements and lease cancellation fees at Village Gardens Apartments and the one time receipt of unclaimed property that was discovered to belong to the Partnership during the year ended December 31, 2007.

Total expenses increased for the year ended December 31, 2007 due to increases in operating and depreciation expenses, partially offset by decreases in interest and general and administrative expenses. Property taxes remained relatively constant for the year ended December 31, 2007. The increase in operating expenses is primarily due to increases in maintenance expense, management fees, property and insurance expenses, partially offset by a decrease in administrative expense. Maintenance expense increased due to an increase in irrigation maintenance and contract service costs at Village Gardens Apartments. Management fees increased due to an increase in rental income on which such fee is based. Property expense increased due to increased salary expense, resident functions, and commissions and incentives. Insurance expense increased due to an increase in insurance premiums. Administrative expense decreased primarily due to the recording of a liability during the year ended December 31, 2006 relating to the forfeiture of unclaimed property pursuant to applicable state and local laws at Village Gardens Apartments. The increase in depreciation expense is due to property improvements and replacements placed into service at the property during the past twelve months. Interest expense decreased due to principal payments on the mortgage encumbering the Partnership’s investment property, partially offset by an increase in interest expense on advances from an affiliate of the Corporate General Partner as a result of an increase in advances received during the year ended December 31, 2007.

The decrease in general and administrative expenses for the year ended December 31, 2007 is mainly due to a decrease in costs associated with the annual audit required by the Partnership Agreement. Also included in general and administrative expenses for both of the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006 are management reimbursements to the Corporate General Partner as allowed under the Partnership Agreement and costs associated with the quarterly and annual communications with investors and regulatory agencies.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

At December 31, 2007 the Partnership had cash and cash equivalents of approximately $27,000, compared to approximately $93,000 at December 31, 2006. Cash and cash equivalents decreased approximately $66,000 from December 31, 2006 due to approximately $388,000 of cash used in investing activities, partially offset by approximately $178,000 and $144,000 of cash provided by financing and operating activities, respectively. 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 Corporate General Partner, partially offset by payments of principal made on the mortgage encumbering the Partnership’s investment property. 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, and local legal and regulatory requirements. The Corporate General Partner monitors developments in the area of legal and regulatory compliance. 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 2008. 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 and repayment of amounts due to affiliates) of the Partnership. The mortgage indebtedness encumbering Village Gardens Apartments of approximately $3,612,000 matures in January 2021, at which time the mortgage is scheduled to be fully amortized.

The Partnership distributed the following amounts during the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006 (in thousands except per unit data):


	Year Ended	Per Limited	Year Ended	Per Limited
	December 31,	Partnership	December 31,	Partnership
	2007	Unit	2006	Unit
Sale (1)	$ --	$ --	$ 1,867	$ 44.11

(1)

Proceeds from the August 2004 sale of River Reach Apartments, the October 2005 sale of Carriage House Apartments, and the June 2006 sale of Rocky Creek Apartments.

The Partnership Agreement provides for partners to receive distributions from the net proceeds of the sales of properties, the net proceeds from refinancings and net cash from operations as those terms are defined in the Partnership Agreement. The Partnership Agreement requires that the limited partners be furnished with a statement of Net Cash from Operations as such term is defined in the Partnership Agreement. Net Cash from Operations should not be considered an alternative to net (loss) income as an indicator of the Partnership's operating performance or to cash flows as a measure of liquidity. Below is a reconciliation of net cash provided by (used in) operating activities as disclosed in the statements of cash flows included in “Item 1. Financial Statements” to Net Cash from Operations as defined in the Partnership Agreement.


	Years ended
	December 31,
	2007	2006
	(in thousands)
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities	$ 144	$ (71)
Payments on mortgage notes payable	(161)	(179)
Property improvements and replacements	(388)	(265)
Changes in reserves for net operating
liabilities	(104)	28
Net cash used in operations	$ (509)	$ (487)

The Corporate General Partner may also designate a portion of cash generated from operations as other reserves in determining net cash from operations. Per the Partnership Agreement, the Corporate General Partner designated as other reserves an amount equal to the net liabilities related to the operations of apartment properties during the current fiscal year that are expected to require the use of cash during the next fiscal year. The changes in other reserves for the years ending December 31, 2007 and 2006 were an increase of approximately $104,000 and a decrease of approximately $28,000, respectively. These amounts were determined by considering changes in the balances of receivables and deposits, other assets, accounts payable, tenant security deposit liabilities, accrued property taxes, other liabilities and due to affiliates. At this time, the Corporate General Partner expects to continue to adjust other reserves based on the net change in the aforementioned account balances.

Other

In addition to its indirect ownership of the general partner interests in the Partnership, AIMCO and its affiliates owned 28,440 Units in the Partnership representing 67.23% of the outstanding Units at December 31, 2007. 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 Corporate General Partner. As a result of its ownership of 67.23% of the outstanding Units, AIMCO and its affiliates are in a position to control all voting decisions with respect to the Partnership. Although the Corporate General Partner owes fiduciary duties to the limited partners of the Partnership, the Corporate General Partner also owes fiduciary duties to AIMCO as its sole stockholder. As a result, the duties of the Corporate General Partner, as managing general partner, to the Partnership and its limited partners may come into conflict with the duties of the Corporate General Partner to AIMCO as its sole stockholder.

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

A summary of the Partnership’s significant accounting policies is included in "Note A – Organization and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies" which is included in the financial statements in "Item 7. Financial Statements". The Corporate General Partner believes that the consistent application of these policies enables the Partnership to provide readers of the financial statements with useful and reliable information about the Partnership’s operating results and financial condition. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States requires the Partnership to make estimates and assumptions. These estimates and assumptions affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements as well as reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from these estimates. Judgments and assessments of uncertainties are required in applying the Partnership’s accounting policies in many areas. The Partnership believes that of its significant accounting policies, the following may involve a higher degree of judgment and complexity.

Impairment of Long-Lived Asset

Investment property is recorded at cost, less accumulated depreciation, unless the carrying amount of the asset is not recoverable. If events or circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of the property may not be recoverable, the Partnership will make an assessment of its recoverability by comparing the carrying amount to the Partnership’s estimate of the undiscounted future cash flows, excluding interest charges, of the property. If the carrying amount exceeds the aggregate undiscounted future cash flows, the Partnership would recognize an impairment loss to the extent the carrying amount exceeds the estimated fair value of the property.

Real property investment is 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, general economic climate; competition from other apartment communities and other housing options; local conditions, such as loss of jobs or an increase in the supply of apartments that might adversely affect apartment occupancy or rental rates; changes in governmental regulations and the related cost of compliance; increases in operating costs (including real estate taxes) due to inflation and other factors, which may not be offset by increased rents; and changes in tax laws and housing laws, including the enactment of rent control laws or other laws regulating multi-family housing. Any adverse changes in these factors could cause impairment of the Partnership’s asset.

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 7.

Financial Statements

SHELTER PROPERTIES VI

LIST OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

Balance Sheet - December 31, 2007

Statements of Operations - Years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006

Statements of Changes in Partners' Capital (Deficiency) - Years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006

Statements of Cash Flows - Years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006

Notes to Financial Statements

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Partners

Shelter Properties VI

We have audited the accompanying balance sheet of Shelter Properties VI as of December 31, 2007, and the related statements of operations, changes in partners' capital (deficiency), and cash flows for each of the two years in the period ended December 31, 2007. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Partnership's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. We were not engaged to perform an audit of the Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Shelter Properties VI at December 31, 2007, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the two years in the period ended December 31, 2007, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.

/s/ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Greenville, South Carolina

March 20, 2008

SHELTER PROPERTIES VI

BALANCE SHEET

(in thousands, except unit data)

December 31, 2007


Assets
Cash and cash equivalents		$ 27
Receivables and deposits		41
Other assets		110
Investment property (Notes B, E, and F):
Land	$ 420
Buildings and related personal property	5,399
	5,819
Less accumulated depreciation	(3,863)	1,956
		$ 2,134

Liabilities and Partners' Capital (Deficiency)

Liabilities
Accounts payable		$ 116
Tenant security deposit liabilities		28
Accrued property taxes		56
Other liabilities		118
Due to affiliates (Note D)		408
Mortgage note payable (Note B)		3,612

Partners' Capital (Deficiency)
General partners	$ 238
Limited partners (42,302 units issued and outstanding)	(2,442)	(2,204)
		$ 2,134

See Accompanying Notes to Financial Statements

SHELTER PROPERTIES VI

STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

(in thousands, except per unit data)


	Years Ended December 31,
	2007	2006
Revenues:
Rental income	$ 1,034	$ 962
Other income	182	130
Total revenues	1,216	1,092

Expenses:
Operating	727	686
General and administrative	121	127
Depreciation	245	230
Interest	278	283
Property taxes	56	53
Total expenses	1,427	1,379

Loss from continuing operations	(211)	(287)
Loss from discontinued operations (Notes A and F)	--	(126)
Gain from sale of discontinued operations (Note F)	--	2,386
Net (loss) income (Note C)	$ (211)	$ 1,973

Net (loss) income allocated to general partners	$ (2)	$ 20
Net (loss) income allocated to limited partners	(209)	1,953
	$ (211)	$ 1,973

Per limited partnership unit:
Loss from continuing operations	$ (4.94)	$ (6.72)
Loss from discontinued operations	--	(2.95)
Gain from sale of discontinued operations	--	55.81
Net (loss) income	$ (4.94)	$ 46.14

Distributions per limited partnership unit	$ --	$ 44.11

See Accompanying Notes to Financial Statements

SHELTER PROPERTIES VI

STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN PARTNERS' CAPITAL (DEFICIENCY)

(in thousands, except unit data)


	Limited
	Partnership	General	Limited
	Units	Partners	Partners	Total

Original capital contributions	42,324	$ 2	$ 42,324	$ 42,326

Partners' capital (deficiency) at
December 31, 2005	42,324	$ 220	$ (2,319)	$ (2,099)

Distributions to partners	--	--	(1,867)	(1,867)

Net income for the year ended
December 31, 2006	--	20	1,953	1,973

Partners' capital (deficiency) at
December 31, 2006	42,324	240	(2,233)	(1,993)

Abandonment of limited
partnership units (Note A)	(22)	--	--	--

Net loss for the year ended
December 31, 2007	--	(2)	(209)	(211)

Partners' capital (deficiency) at
December 31, 2007	42,302	$ 238	$ (2,442)	$ (2,204)

See Accompanying Notes to Financial Statements

SHELTER PROPERTIES VI

STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

(in thousands)


	Years Ended
	December 31,
	2007	2006
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net (loss) income	$ (211)	$ 1,973
Adjustments to reconcile net (loss) income to net
cash provided by (used in) operating activities:
Depreciation	245	321
Amortization of loan costs	6	17
Gain from sale of discontinued operations	--	(2,386)
Loss on early extinguishment of debt	--	32
Change in accounts:
Receivables and deposits	(4)	28
Other assets	(1)	31
Accounts payable	20	(21)
Tenant security deposit liabilities	2	(13)
Accrued property taxes	2	2
Other liabilities	16	(55)
Due to affiliates	69	--
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities	144	(71)

Cash flows from investing activities:
Property improvements and replacements	(388)	(265)
Net proceeds from sale of discontinued operations	--	4,114
Net cash (used in) provided by investing activities	(388)	3,849

Cash flows from financing activities:
Repayment of mortgage notes payable	--	(2,138)
Payments on mortgage notes payable	(161)	(179)
Distributions to partners	--	(1,867)
Advances from affiliate	339	12
Repayment of advances from affiliate	--	(12)
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities	178	(4,184)

Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents	(66)	(406)

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of year	93	499

Cash and cash equivalents at end of year	$ 27	$ 93

Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information:
Cash paid for interest	$ 267	$ 341

Supplemental disclosure of non-cash activity:
Property improvements and replacements included
in accounts payable	$ 64	$ --

See Accompanying Notes to Financial Statements

SHELTER PROPERTIES VI

NOTE TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

December 31, 2007

Note A - Organization and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

Organization: Shelter Properties VI (the "Partnership" or "Registrant") was organized as a limited partnership under the laws of the State of South Carolina on August 3, 1983. The general partner responsible for management of the Partnership's business is Shelter Realty VI Corporation, a South Carolina corporation (the "Corporate General Partner"). The Corporate General Partner is a subsidiary of Apartment Investment and Management Company ("AIMCO"), a publicly traded real estate investment trust. The non-corporate general partner is AIMCO Properties, L.P., an affiliate of the Corporate General Partner and AIMCO. The Partnership Agreement provides that the Partnership is to terminate on December 31, 2023 unless terminated prior to such date. The Partnership commenced operations on June 29, 1984, and completed its acquisition of apartment properties on March 28, 1985. The Partnership operates one apartment property located in Colorado at December 31, 2007.

Basis of Presentation: In accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 144, “Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets”, the accompanying statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2006 reflects the operations of Rocky Creek Apartments as loss from discontinued operations due to its sale on June 30, 2006. Additionally some trailing activity related to Carriage House Apartments which was sold in October 2005 is also included in loss from discontinued operations for the year ended December 31, 2006 (see "Note F" for further discussion).

Use of Estimates: The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the financial statements and accompanying notes. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Allocation of Cash Distributions: Cash distributions by the Partnership are allocated between general and limited partners in accordance with the provisions of the Partnership Agreement. The Partnership Agreement defines net cash from operations as revenue received less operating expenses paid, adjusted for certain specified items which primarily include mortgage payments on debt, property improvements and replacements not previously reserved, and the effects of other adjustments to reserves including reserve amounts deemed necessary by the Corporate General Partner.

The Partnership Agreement provides that 99% of distributions of net cash from operations are allocated to the limited partners until they receive net cash from operations for such fiscal year equal to 7% of their adjusted capital values (as defined in the Partnership Agreement), at which point the general partners will be allocated all net cash from operations until they have received distributions equal to 10% of the aggregate net cash from operations distributed to partners for such fiscal year. Thereafter, the general partners will be allocated 10% of any distributions of remaining net cash from operations for such fiscal year.

All distributions of distributable net proceeds (as defined in the Partnership Agreement) from property dispositions and refinancings will be allocated to the limited partners until each limited partner has received an amount equal to a cumulative 7% per annum of the average of the limited partners' adjusted capital value, less any prior distributions of net cash from operations and distributable net proceeds, and has also received an amount equal to the limited partners'adjusted capital value. Thereafter, the general partners receive 1% of the selling price of properties sold where they acted as a broker, and then the limited partners will be allocated 85% of any remaining distributions of distributable net proceeds and the general partners will receive 15%.

Allocation of Profits, Gains, and Losses: Profits, gains and losses of the Partnership are allocated between general and limited partners in accordance with the provisions of the Partnership Agreement.

For any fiscal year, to the extent that profits, not including gains from property dispositions, do not exceed distributions of net cash from operations, such profits are allocated in the same manner as such distributions. In any fiscal year in which profits, not including gains from property dispositions, exceed distributions of net cash from operations, such excess is treated on a cumulative basis as if it constituted an equivalent of distributable net proceeds and is allocated together with, and in the same manner as, that portion of gain described in the second sentence of the following paragraph.

Any gain from property dispositions attributable to the excess, if any, of the indebtedness relating to a property immediately prior to the disposition of such property over the Partnership's adjusted basis in the property shall be allocated to each partner having a negative capital account balance, to the extent of such negative balance. The balance of any gain shall be treated on a cumulative basis as if it constituted an equivalent amount of distributable net proceeds and shall be allocated to the general partners to the extent that general partners would have received distributable net proceeds in connection therewith; the balance shall be allocated to the limited partners. However, the interest of the general partners will be equal to at least 1% of each gain at all times during the existence of the Partnership.

All losses, including losses attributable to property dispositions, are allocated 99% to the limited partners and 1% to the general partners.

Cash and Cash Equivalents: Cash and cash equivalents include cash on hand and in banks. At certain times, the amount of cash deposited at a bank may exceed the limit on insured deposits. Cash balances include approximately $7,000 at December 31, 2007 that are maintained by an affiliated management company on behalf of affiliated entities in cash concentration accounts.

Investment Property: Investment property consists of one apartment complex and is stated at cost. The Partnership capitalizes costs incurred in connection with capital expenditure activities, including redevelopment and construction projects, other tangible property improvements and replacements of existing property components. Costs including interest, property taxes and operating costs associated with redevelopment and construction projects are capitalized during periods in which redevelopment and construction projects are in progress in accordance with SFAS No. 34, “Capitalization of Interest Costs”, and SFAS No. 67, “Accounting for Costs and the Initial Rental Operations of Real Estate Properties.” Costs incurred in connection with capital projects are capitalized where the costs of the project exceed $250. Included in these capitalized costs are payroll costs associated with time spent by site employees in connection with the planning, execution and control of all capital expenditure activities at the property level. The Partnership did not capitalize any costs related to interest, property taxes or operating costs during the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006. Capitalized costs are depreciated over the useful life of the asset. Expenditures for ordinary repairs, maintenance and apartment turnover costs are expensed as incurred.

In accordance with SFAS No. 144, the Partnership records impairment losses on long-lived assets used in operations when events and circumstances indicate the assets might be impaired and the undiscounted cash flows estimated to be generated by those assets are less than the carrying amounts of those assets. No adjustments for impairment of value were necessary for the years ending December 31, 2007 and 2006.

Abandoned Units: During 2007, the number of limited partnership units decreased by 22 units due to limited partners abandoning their units. There were no abandoned units during the year ended December 31, 2006. In abandoning his or her partnership units, a limited partner relinquishes all right, title and interest in the Partnership as of the date of the abandonment.

Depreciation: Depreciation is provided by the straight-line method over the estimated lives of the apartment property and related personal property. For Federal income tax purposes, the modified accelerated cost recovery method is used for depreciation of (1) real property additions over 27.5 years and (2) personal property additions over 5 years.

Deferred Costs: Loan costs of approximately $121,000, less accumulated amortization of approximately $42,000, are included in other assets and are being amortized over the term of the related loan agreement. Amortization expense for 2007 and 2006 was approximately $6,000 and $17,000, respectively, and is included in interest expense and loss from discontinued operations. Amortization expense is expected to be approximately $6,000 for each of the years 2008 through 2012.

Leasing commissions and other direct costs incurred in connection with successful leasing efforts are deferred and amortized over the terms of the related leases. Amortization of these costs is included in operating expenses and loss from discontinued operations.

Tenant Security Deposits: The Partnership requires security deposits from lessees for the duration of the lease and such deposits are included in receivables and deposits. Deposits are refunded when the tenant vacates, provided the tenant has not damaged the space and is current on rental payments.

Leases: 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.

Segment Reporting: SFAS No. 131, "Disclosure about Segments of an Enterprise and Related Information" established standards for the way public business enterprises report information about operating segments in annual financial statements and requires that those enterprises report selected information about operating segments in interim financial reports. SFAS No. 131 also established standards for related disclosures about products and services, geographic areas, and major customers. As defined in SFAS No. 131, the Partnership has only one reportable segment.

Advertising: The Partnership expenses the costs of advertising as incurred. Advertising expense, included in operating expense and loss from discontinued operations, was approximately $30,000 and $43,000 for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively.

Fair Value of Financial Instruments: SFAS No. 107, "Disclosures about Fair Value of Financial Instruments", as amended by SFAS No. 119, "Disclosures about Derivative Financial Instruments and Fair Value of Financial Instruments", requires disclosure of fair value information about financial instruments, whether or not recognized in the balance sheet, for which it is practicable to estimate fair value. Fair value is defined in the SFAS as the amount at which the instruments could be exchanged in a current transaction between willing parties, other than in a forced or liquidation sale. The Partnership believes that the carrying amounts of its financial instruments (except for long term debt) approximate their fair value due to the short term maturity of these instruments. The Partnership estimates the fair value of its long-term debt by discounting future cash flows using a discount rate commensurate with that currently believed to be available to the Partnership for similar term, fully amortizing long-term debt. The fair value of the Partnership's long term debt at the Partnership’s incremental borrowing rate is approximately $3,925,000.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements: In September 2006, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued SFAS No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements”. SFAS No. 157 defines fair value as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. SFAS No. 157 applies whenever other standards require assets or liabilities to be measured at fair value and does not expand the use of fair value in any new circumstances. SFAS No. 157 establishes a hierarchy that prioritizes the information used in developing fair value estimates. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to quoted prices in active markets and the lowest priority to unobservable data such as the reporting entity’s own data. SFAS No. 157 requires fair value measurements to be disclosed by level within the fair value hierarchy. In February 2008, the FASB issued FASB Staff Position No. FAS 157-2, “Effective Date of FASB Statement No. 157”, which deferred the effective date of SFAS No. 157 for all nonrecurring fair value measurements of non-financial assets and non-financial liabilities until fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2008. The provisions of SFAS No. 157 are applicable to recurring fair value measurements of financial assets and liabilities for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007, which for the Partnership is generally limited to annual disclosures required by SFAS No. 107. The Partnership is in the process of implementing SFAS No. 157; however, it has not completed its evaluation and thus has not yet determined the effect that SFAS No. 157 will have on the Partnership’s financial statements.

In February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159, “The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities”. SFAS No. 159 permits entities to choose to measure many financial instruments and certain other items at fair value that are not currently required to be measured at fair value. The objective is to improve financial reporting by providing entities with the opportunity to mitigate volatility in reported earnings caused by measuring related assets and liabilities differently without having to apply complex hedge accounting provisions. SFAS No. 159 also establishes presentation and disclosure requirements designed to facilitate comparisons between entities that choose different measurement attributes for similar types of assets and liabilities. SFAS No. 159 is effective for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007. The Partnership adopted SFAS No. 159 on January 1, 2008, and at that time did not elect the fair value option for any of its financial instruments or other items within the scope of SFAS No. 159.

In June 2007, the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (“the AICPA”) issued Statement of Position No. 07-1, “Clarification of the Scope of the Audit and Accounting Guide Investment Companies and Accounting by Parent Companies and Equity Method Investors for Investments in Investment Companies” ("SOP 07-1"). SOP 07-1 provides guidance for determining whether the accounting principles of the AICPA Audit and Accounting Guide “Investment Companies” are required to be applied to an entity by clarifying the definition of an investment company and, whether investment company accounting should be retained by a parent company upon consolidation of an investment company subsidiary, or by an investor in the application of the equity method of accounting to an investment company investee. In February 2008, the FASB issued FASB Staff Position SOP 07-1-1 that indefinitely defers the effective date of SOP 07-1.

Note B - Mortgage Note Payable


	Principal	Monthly			Principal
	Balance At	Payment	Stated		Balance
	December 31,	Including	Interest	Maturity	Due At
Property	2007	Interest	Rate	Date	Maturity
	(in thousands)				(in thousands)
Village Gardens Apartments Apartments
1st mortgage	$ 3,612	$ 36	7.22% (1)	01/01/21	$ --

(1)

Fixed rate mortgage.

The mortgage note payable is non-recourse and is secured by a pledge of the Partnership’s rental property and by a pledge of revenues from the rental property. The note includes a prepayment penalty if repaid prior to maturity. Further, the property may not be sold subject to existing indebtedness.

Scheduled principal payments of the mortgage note payable subsequent to December 31, 2007 are as follows (in thousands):


2008	$ 172
2009	185
2010	199
2011	214
2012	230
Thereafter	2,612
	$ 3,612

Note C - Income Taxes

The Partnership is classified as a partnership for Federal income tax purposes. Accordingly, no provision for income taxes is made in the financial statements of the Partnership. Taxable income or loss of the Partnership is reported in the income tax returns of its partners.

The following is a reconciliation of reported net (loss) income and Federal taxable (loss) income (in thousands, except per unit data):


	2007	2006

Net (loss) income as reported	$ (211)	$ 1,973
Add (deduct):
Depreciation differences	41	145
Change in prepaid rental income	18	(8)
Gain on disposal	--	1,201
Other	(13)	278
Federal taxable (loss) income	$ (165)	$ 3,589
Federal taxable income per limited
partnership Unit (1)	$ 9.25	$ 85.94

(1)

For 2007 and 2006, allocations under Internal Revenue Code section 704(b) result in the limited partners being allocated a non-pro rata amount of taxable (loss) income.

The following is a reconciliation between the Partnership's reported amounts and Federal tax basis of net assets and liabilities (in thousands):


Net liabilities as reported	$(2,204)
Land and buildings	192
Accumulated depreciation	(776)
Syndication	5,286
Other	93

Net assets - tax basis	$ 2,591

Note D - Transactions with Affiliated Parties

The Partnership has no employees and depends on the Corporate General Partner and its affiliates for the management and administration of all Partnership activities. The Partnership Agreement provides for certain payments to affiliates for services and reimbursement of certain expenses incurred by affiliates on behalf of the Partnership.

Affiliates of the Corporate General Partner receive 5% of gross receipts from all of the Partnership's properties as compensation for providing property management services. The Partnership paid to such affiliates approximately $59,000 and $71,000 for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively, which are included in operating expenses and loss from discontinued operations.

Affiliates of the Corporate General Partner charged the Partnership for reimbursement of accountable administrative expenses amounting to approximately $102,000 and $75,000 for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively, which are included in general and administrative expenses, investment property, and gain from sale of discontinued operations. The portion of these reimbursements included in investment property and gain from sale of discontinued operations for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006 are amounts related to construction management services provided by an affiliate of the Corporate General Partner of approximately $45,000 and $20,000, respectively. At December 31, 2007, approximately $59,000 of accountable administrative expenses remain unpaid and are included in due to affiliates.

During the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, AIMCO Properties, L.P., an affiliate of the Corporate General Partner advanced the Partnership approximately $339,000 and $12,000, respectively, to cover operating expenses and capital improvements at Village Gardens Apartments. During the year ended December 31, 2006 the Partnership repaid the advance and accrued interest. There were no such repayments during the year ended December 31, 2007. Interest is charged at the prime rate plus 2% (9.25% at December 31, 2007) and was approximately $10,000 and $1,000 for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively. At December 31, 2007, approximately $349,000 of advances and associated accrued interest remained unpaid to and is included in due to affiliates. The Partnership may receive additional advances of funds from AIMCO Properties, L.P. although AIMCO Properties, L.P. is not obligated to provide such advances. For more information on AIMCO Properties, L.P., including copies of its audited balance sheet, please see its reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Subsequent to December 31, 2007, AIMCO Properties, L.P. advanced the Partnership approximately $112,000 to cover expenses related to operations at Village Gardens Apartments.

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, general liability and vehicle liability. The Partnership insures its property above the AIMCO limits through insurance policies obtained by AIMCO from insurers unaffiliated with the Corporate General Partner. During the year ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, the Partnership was charged by AIMCO and its affiliates approximately $27,000 and $47,000, respectively, for insurance coverage and fees associated with policy claims administration.

Note E – Investment Property and Accumulated Depreciation



		Initial Cost
		To Partnership
		(in thousands)
			Buildings	Net Cost
			and Related	Capitalized
			Personal	Subsequent to
Description	Encumbrances	Land	Property	Acquisition
	(in thousands)			(in thousands)
Village Gardens
Apartments	$ 3,612	$ 420	$ 3,050	$ 2,349


	Gross Amount At Which Carried
	At December 31, 2007
	(in thousands)

		Buildings And
		Related			Date of
		Personal		Accumulated	Construc-	Date	Depreciable
Description	Land	Property	Total	Depreciation	tion	Acquired	Life
Village Gardens Apartments
Fort Collins, Colorado	$ 420	$ 5,399	$ 5,819	$ 3,863	1974	03/01/85	5-30 yrs

Reconciliation of "investment property and accumulated depreciation" (in thousands):


	Years Ended
	December 31,
	2007	2006
Investment Property
Balance at beginning of year	$ 5,367	$ 10,321
Property improvements	452	265
Sale of investment property	--	(5,219)
Balance at end of year	$ 5,819	$ 5,367

Accumulated Depreciation

Balance at beginning of year	$ 3,618	$ 6,797
Additions charged to expense	245	321
Sale of investment property	--	(3,500)
Balance at end of year	$ 3,863	$ 3,618

The aggregate cost of the real estate for Federal income tax purposes at December 31, 2007 and 2006 is approximately $6,011,000 and $5,572,000, respectively. The accumulated depreciation taken for Federal income tax purposes at December 31, 2007 and 2006 is approximately $4,639,000 and $4,435,000, respectively.

Note F – Disposition of Investment Properties

On June 30, 2006, the Partnership sold Rocky Creek Apartments to a third party for a gross sale price of approximately $4,185,000. The net proceeds realized by the Partnership were approximately $4,114,000 after payment of closing costs and a prepayment penalty owed by the Partnership. The Partnership used approximately $2,138,000 of the net proceeds to repay the mortgage encumbering the property. The Partnership realized a gain of approximately $2,386,000 as a result of the sale, which is included in gain from sale of discontinued operations for the year ended December 31, 2006. In addition, the Partnership recorded a loss on the early extinguishment of debt of approximately $32,000 as a result of the write-off of unamortized loan costs and a prepayment penalty, which is included in loss from discontinued operations for the year ended December 31, 2006. Also included in the loss from discontinued operations for the year ended December 31, 2006 is a loss of approximately $106,000, including revenues of approximately $368,000.

Note G – 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 Corporate 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 Corporate 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. Plaintiffs took an appeal from this order.

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, and potential fines or penalties imposed by such agencies in conjunction therewith, 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, operation and management of its property, the Partnership could potentially be liable for environmental liabilities or costs associated with its property.

Mold

ITEM 8.

Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure

None.

Item 8A.

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 Corporate 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 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 Corporate 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.

Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

The Partnership’s management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting. Internal control over financial reporting is defined in Rule 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act as a process designed by, or under the supervision of, the principal executive and principal financial officers of the Corporate General Partner, who are the equivalent of the Partnership’s principal executive officer and principal financial officer, respectively, and effected by the Partnership’s management and other personnel to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and includes those policies and procedures that:

pertain to the maintenance of records that in reasonable detail accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of assets;

provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures are being made only in accordance with authorizations of the Partnership’s management; and

provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risks that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

The Partnership’s management assessed the effectiveness of the Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2007. In making this assessment, the Partnership’s management used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) in Internal Control-Integrated Framework.

Based on their assessment, the Partnership’s management concluded that, as of December 31, 2007, the Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting is effective.

This annual report does not include an attestation report of the Partnership’s registered public accounting firm regarding internal control over financial reporting. Management’s report was not subject to the attestation by the Partnership’s registered public accounting firm pursuant to temporary rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission that permit the Partnership to provide only management’s report in this annual report.

(b)

Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting.

There have been no significant changes in the Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act) during the fourth quarter of 2007 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting.

Item 8B.

Other Information

None.

PART III

Item 9.

Directors, Executive Officers, Promoters and Control Persons and Corporate Governance; Compliance with Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act

Shelter Properties VI (the “Partnership” or the “Registrant”) has no officers or directors. Shelter Realty VI Corporation (the “Corporate General Partner”) manages and controls substantially all of the Partnership’s affairs and has general responsibility in all matters affecting its business.

The names and ages of, as well as the positions and offices held by, the present directors and officers of the Corporate General Partner are set forth below. There are no family relationships between or among any officers or directors.


Name	Age	Position

Martha L. Long	48	Director and Senior Vice President
Harry G. Alcock	45	Director and Executive Vice President
Timothy Beaudin	49	Executive Vice President and Chief Development Officer
Lisa R. Cohn	39	Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary
Patti K. Fielding	44	Executive Vice President – Securities and Debt; Treasurer
Thomas M. Herzog	45	Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
Scott W. Fordham	40	Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer
Stephen B. Waters	46	Vice President

Martha L. Long has been a Director and Senior Vice President of the Corporate General Partner since February 2004. Ms. Long has been with AIMCO since October 1998 and has served in various capacities. From 1998 to 2001, Ms. Long served as Senior Vice President and Controller of AIMCO and the Corporate General Partner. During 2002 and 2003, Ms. Long served as Senior Vice President of Continuous Improvement for AIMCO.

Harry G. Alcock was appointed as a Director of the Corporate General Partner in October 2004 and was appointed Executive Vice President of the Corporate General Partner in February 2004 and has been Executive Vice President of AIMCO since October 1999. Mr. Alcock has had responsibility for acquisition and financing activities of AIMCO since July 1994, serving as Vice President from July 1996 to October 1997 and as Senior Vice President from October 1997 to October 1999. Mr. Alcock focuses on transactions related to AIMCO’s portfolio of properties in the western portion of the United States.

Timothy Beaudin was appointed Executive Vice President and Chief Development Officer of the Corporate General Partner and AIMCO in October 2005. Prior to this time, beginning in 1995, Mr. Beaudin was with Catellus Development Corporation, a San Francisco, California-based real estate investment trust. During his last five years at Catellus, Mr. Beaudin served as Executive Vice President, with management responsibility for development, construction and asset management.

Lisa R. Cohn was appointed Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary of the Corporate General Partner and AIMCO in December 2007. From January 2004 to December 2007, Ms. Cohn served as Senior Vice President and Assistant General Counsel of AIMCO. Ms. Cohn joined AIMCO in July 2002 as Vice President and Assistant General Counsel. Prior to joining AIMCO, Ms. Cohn was in private practice with the law firm of Hogan and Hartson LLP.

Patti K. Fielding was appointed Executive Vice President - Securities and Debt of the Corporate General Partner in February 2004 and of AIMCO in February 2003. Ms. Fielding was appointed Treasurer of AIMCO and the Corporate General Partner in January 2005. Ms. Fielding is responsible for debt financing and the treasury department. Ms. Fielding previously served as Senior Vice President - Securities and Debt of AIMCO from January 2000 to February 2003. Ms. Fielding joined AIMCO in February 1997 as a Vice President.

Thomas M. Herzog was appointed Chief Financial Officer of the Corporate General Partner and AIMCO in November 2005 and was appointed Executive Vice President of the Corporate General Partner and AIMCO in July 2005. In January 2004, Mr. Herzog joined AIMCO as Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer and of the Corporate General Partner in February 2004. Prior to joining AIMCO in January 2004, Mr. Herzog was at GE Real Estate, serving as Chief Accounting Officer & Global Controller from April 2002 to January 2004 and as Chief Technical Advisor from March 2000 to April 2002. Prior to joining GE Real Estate, Mr. Herzog was at Deloitte & Touche LLP from 1990 to 2000.

Scott W. Fordham was appointed Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer in January 2007 of the Corporate General Partner and AIMCO. Prior to joining AIMCO, Mr. Fordham served as Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer of Brandywine Realty Trust from January 2006 through December 2006. Prior to the merger of Prentiss Properties Trust with Brandywine Realty Trust, Mr. Fordham served as Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer of Prentiss Properties Trust and was in charge of the corporate accounting and financial reporting groups. Prior to joining Prentiss Properties Trust in 1992, Mr. Fordham worked in public accounting with PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP.

Stephen B. Waters was appointed Vice President of the Corporate General Partner and AIMCO in April 2004. Mr. Waters previously served as a Director of Real Estate Accounting since joining AIMCO in September 1999. Mr. Waters has responsibility for partnership accounting with AIMCO and serves as the principal financial officer of the Corporate General Partner.

One or more of the above persons are also directors and/or officers of a general partner (or general partner of a general partner) of limited partnerships which either have a class of securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or are subject to the reporting requirements of Section 15(d) of such Act. Further, one or more of the above persons are also officers of Apartment Investment and Management Company and the general partner of AIMCO Properties, L.P., entities that have a class of securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or are subject to the reporting requirements of Section 15(d) of such Act.

The board of directors of the Corporate General Partner does not have a separate audit committee. As such, the board of directors of the Corporate General Partner fulfills the functions of an audit committee. The board of directors has determined that Martha L. Long meets the requirement of an "audit committee financial expert".

The directors and officers of the Corporate General Partner with authority over the Partnership are all employees of subsidiaries of AIMCO. AIMCO has adopted a code of ethics that applies to such directors and officers that is posted on AIMCO's website (www.AIMCO.com). AIMCO's website is not incorporated by reference to this filing.

Item 10.

Executive Compensation

None of the directors and officers of the Corporate General Partner received any remuneration from the Partnership during the year ended December 31, 2007.

Item 11.

Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management

Except as noted below, no person or entity was known by the Registrant to be the beneficial owner of more than 5% of the Limited Partnership Units (the “Units”) of the Registrant as of December 31, 2007.


Entity	Number of Units	Percentage

Cooper River Properties, LLC
(an affiliate of AIMCO)	3,364	7.95%
AIMCO IPLP, L.P.
(an affiliate of AIMCO)	11,547	27.28%
AIMCO Properties, L.P.
(an affiliate of AIMCO)	13,529	32.00%

Cooper River Properties LLC and AIMCO IPLP, L.P. are indirectly ultimately owned by AIMCO. Their business address is 55 Beattie Place, Greenville, South Carolina 29602.

AIMCO Properties, L.P. is indirectly ultimately owned by AIMCO. Its business address is 4582 S. Ulster St. Parkway, Suite 1100, Denver, Colorado 80237.

No director or officer of the Corporate General Partner owns any units. The Corporate General Partner owns 100 units as required by the terms of the Partnership Agreement.

Item 12.

Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence

Neither of the Corporate General Partner’s directors is independent under the independence standards established for New York Stock Exchange listed companies as both directors are employed by the parent of the Corporate General Partner.

Item 13.

Exhibits

See Exhibit Index.

Item 14.

Principal Accountant Fees and Services

The Corporate General Partner has reappointed Ernst & Young LLP as independent auditors to audit the financial statements of the Partnership for 2008. The aggregate fees billed for services rendered by Ernst & Young LLP for 2007 and 2006 are described below.

Audit Fees. Fees for audit services totaled approximately $38,000 and $40,000 for 2007 and 2006, respectively. Fees for audit services also include fees for the reviews of the Partnership’s Quarterly Reports on Form 10-QSB.

Tax Fees. Fees for tax services totaled approximately $7,000 and $12,000 for 2007 and 2006, respectively.

SIGNATURES

In accordance with Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act, the registrant has caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.


	SHELTER PROPERTIES VI

	By: Shelter Realty VI Corporation
	Corporate General Partner

	By: /s/Martha L. Long
	Martha L. Long
	Senior Vice President

	By: /s/Stephen B. Waters
	Stephen B. Waters
	Vice President

	Date: March 25, 2008

In accordance with the Exchange Act, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.


/s/Harry G. Alcock	Director and Executive	Date: March 25, 2008
Harry G. Alcock	Vice President

/s/Martha L. Long	Director and Senior	Date: March 25, 2008
Martha L. Long	Vice President

/s/Stephen B. Waters	Vice President	Date: March 25, 2008
Stephen B. Waters

SHELTER PROPERTIES VI

EXHIBIT INDEX

Exhibit Number

Description of Exhibit

See Exhibit 4 (a)

(a)

Amended and Restated Certificate and Agreement of Limited Partnership (included as Exhibit A to the Prospectus of Registrant dated March 22, 1984 contained in Amendment No. 1 to Registration Statement No. 2-86995, of Registrant filed March 21, 1984 (the “Prospectus”) and incorporated herein by reference.)

(b)

Subscription Agreement and Signature Page (included as Exhibits 4 (A) and 4 (B) 8 to the Prospectus and incorporated herein by reference).

10(iii)

Contracts related to refinancing of debt:

(g)

Multifamily Note dated December 15, 2000 between Shelter Properties VI and Reilly Mortgage Group, Inc., a District of Columbia corporation, securing Village Gardens Apartments filed as Exhibit 10(iii)(g) to the Partnership’s Current Report on Form 8-K Filed February 1, 2001 and incorporated herein by reference.

(h)

Multifamily Deed of Trust, Assignment of Rents, and Security Agreement dated December 15, 2000 between Shelter VI and Reilly Mortgage Group, Inc., a District of Columbia corporation, securing Village Gardens Apartments. Filed as Exhibit 10(iii)(h) to the Partnership’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed February 1, 2001 and incorporated herein by reference.

10(iv)

Contracts related to disposition of property:

(m)

Purchase and Sale Contract between Shelter Properties VI, a South Carolina limited partnership, and Chartwell Augusta, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, dated October 20, 2005, incorporated by reference to the Partnership’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 20, 2005.

(n)

Reinstatement and First Amendment to Purchase and Sale Contract between Shelter Properties VI, a South Carolina limited partnership, and the affiliated Selling Partnerships and Chartwell Augusta, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, dated April 27, 2006, incorporated by reference to the Partnership’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated April 27, 2006.

31.1

Certification of equivalent of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Securities Exchange Act Rules 13a-14(a)/15d-4(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.