-----BEGIN PRIVACY-ENHANCED MESSAGE----- Proc-Type: 2001,MIC-CLEAR Originator-Name: webmaster@www.sec.gov Originator-Key-Asymmetric: MFgwCgYEVQgBAQICAf8DSgAwRwJAW2sNKK9AVtBzYZmr6aGjlWyK3XmZv3dTINen TWSM7vrzLADbmYQaionwg5sDW3P6oaM5D3tdezXMm7z1T+B+twIDAQAB MIC-Info: RSA-MD5,RSA, FTnH0X88DB5MOpft/a+JOYja/U9p6v5l16wvCWfTlPj+bbJTn4Kqh9sjUG6p2NJO URay9xIsXwSAlK9KpTR/wA== 0000711642-03-000020.txt : 20030114 0000711642-03-000020.hdr.sgml : 20030114 20030108164938 ACCESSION NUMBER: 0000711642-03-000020 CONFORMED SUBMISSION TYPE: 10QSB/A PUBLIC DOCUMENT COUNT: 1 CONFORMED PERIOD OF REPORT: 20020930 FILED AS OF DATE: 20030108 FILER: COMPANY DATA: COMPANY CONFORMED NAME: ANGELES OPPORTUNITY PROPERTIES LTD CENTRAL INDEX KEY: 0000789282 STANDARD INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION: REAL ESTATE [6500] IRS NUMBER: 954052473 STATE OF INCORPORATION: CA FISCAL YEAR END: 1231 FILING VALUES: FORM TYPE: 10QSB/A SEC ACT: 1934 Act SEC FILE NUMBER: 000-16116 FILM NUMBER: 03508229 BUSINESS ADDRESS: STREET 1: 1873 SOUTH BELLAIRE STREET STREET 2: 17TH FLOOR CITY: DENVER STATE: CO ZIP: 80222 BUSINESS PHONE: 3037578101 MAIL ADDRESS: STREET 1: 1873 SOUTH BELLAIRE STREET STREET 2: 17TH FLOOR CITY: DENVER STATE: CO ZIP: 80222 10QSB/A 1 aopla.txt AOPLA UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 Form 10-QSB/A (Mark One) [X] QUARTERLY REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the quarterly period ended September 30, 2002 [ ]TRANSITION REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the transition period from _________to _________ Commission file number 0-16116 ANGELES OPPORTUNITY PROPERTIES, LTD. (Exact name of small business issuer as specified in its charter) California 95-4052473 (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) The issuer recently discovered that it had inadvertently omitted conformed signatures on certain certifications included in its 10-QSB filing made November 13, 2002. Original signatures were complete and on file with the issuer at the time the 10-QSB filing was made in November; however, due to a clerical error, conformed signatures were not included in the electronic filing. This amendment is being filed solely to correct this inadvertent clerical error. PART I - FINANCIAL INFORMATION ITEM 1. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS ANGELES OPPORTUNITY PROPERTIES, LTD. CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET (Unaudited) (in thousands, except unit data) September 30, 2002
Assets Cash and cash equivalents $ 234 Receivables and deposits 26 Restricted escrows 38 Other assets 281 Investment properties: Land $ 1,013 Buildings and related personal property 8,319 9,332 Less accumulated depreciation (3,484) 5,848 $ 6,427 Liabilities and Partners' Deficit Liabilities Accounts payable $ 32 Tenant security deposit liabilities 31 Accrued property taxes 204 Other liabilities 142 Mortgage notes payable 6,813 Partners' Deficit General partner $ (163) Limited partners (12,425 units issued and outstanding) (632) (795) $ 6,427 See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
ANGELES OPPORTUNITY PROPERTIES, LTD. CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS (Unaudited) (in thousands, except per unit data)
Three Months Ended Nine Months Ended September 30, September 30, 2002 2001 2002 2001 Revenues: Rental income $ 540 $ 646 $ 1,745 $ 1,904 Other income 77 31 162 107 Total revenues 617 677 1,907 2,011 Expenses: Operating 268 268 768 777 General and administrative 34 41 111 121 Depreciation 85 85 263 261 Interest 127 109 386 326 Property taxes 68 71 206 201 Total expenses 582 574 1,734 1,686 Net income $ 35 $ 103 $ 173 $ 325 Net income allocated to general partner (1%) $ -- $ 1 $ 2 $ 3 Net income allocated to limited partners (99%) 35 102 171 322 $ 35 $ 103 $ 173 $ 325 Net income per limited partnership unit $ 2.82 $ 8.21 $ 13.76 $ 25.92 Distributions per limited partnership unit $ 14.81 $ 13.04 $ 43.86 $ 51.11 See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
ANGELES OPPORTUNITY PROPERTIES, LTD. CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN PARTNERS' DEFICIT (Unaudited) (in thousands, except unit data)
Limited Partnership General Limited Units Partner Partners Total Original capital contributions 12,425 $ 1 $12,425 $12,426 Partners' deficit at December 31, 2001 12,425 $ (154) $ (258) $ (412) Distributions to partners -- (11) (545) (556) Net income for the nine months ended September 30, 2002 -- 2 171 173 Partners' deficit at September 30, 2002 12,425 $ (163) $ (632) $ (795) See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
ANGELES OPPORTUNITY PROPERTIES, LTD. CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS (Unaudited) (in thousands)
Nine Months Ended September 30, 2002 2001 Cash flows from operating activities: Net income $ 173 $ 325 Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities: Depreciation 263 261 Amortization of loan costs and discount 13 24 Change in accounts: Receivables and deposits 148 98 Other assets (40) (7) Accounts payable (11) (36) Tenant security deposit liabilities 7 (1) Accrued property taxes 119 (56) Other liabilities 80 82 Net cash provided by operating activities 752 690 Cash flows from investing activities: Property improvements and replacements (111) (131) Net withdrawals from restricted escrows 2 38 Net cash used in investing activities (109) (93) Cash flows from financing activities: Payments on mortgage notes payable (107) (22) Distributions to partners (556) (647) Net cash used in financing activities (663) (669) Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents (20) (72) Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period 254 393 Cash and cash equivalents at end of period $ 234 $ 321 Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information: Cash paid for interest $ 342 $ 301 See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
ANGELES OPPORTUNITY PROPERTIES, LTD. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Unaudited) Note A - Basis of Presentation The accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements of Angeles Opportunity Properties, Ltd. (the "Partnership" or the "Registrant") have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles for interim financial information and with the instructions to Form 10-QSB and Item 310(b) of Regulation S-B. Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and footnotes required by generally accepted accounting principles for complete financial statements. In the opinion of Angeles Realty Corporation II (the "General Partner") all adjustments (consisting of normal recurring accruals) considered necessary for a fair presentation have been included. Operating results for the three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2002, are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2002. For further information, refer to the consolidated financial statements and footnotes thereto included in the Partnership's Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2001. The General Partner is a subsidiary of Apartment Investment and Management Company ("AIMCO"), a publicly traded real estate investment trust. Note B - Transactions with Affiliated Parties The Partnership has no employees and is dependent on the 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 General Partner are entitled to receive 5% of gross receipts from both of the Partnership's properties as compensation for providing property management services. The Partnership paid to such affiliates approximately $97,000 and $101,000 for the nine months ended September 30, 2002 and 2001, respectively, which is included in operating expenses. An affiliate of the General Partner received reimbursements of accountable administrative expense amounting to approximately $67,000 and $83,000 for the nine months ended September 30, 2002 and 2001, respectively, which is included in general and administrative expense. Beginning in 2001, the Partnership began insuring its properties up to certain limits through coverage provided by AIMCO which is generally self-insured for a portion of losses and liabilities related to workers compensation, property casualty and vehicle liability. The Partnership insures its properties above the AIMCO limits through insurance policies obtained by AIMCO from insurers unaffiliated with the General Partner. During the nine months ended September 30, 2002 and 2001, the Partnership was charged by AIMCO and its affiliates approximately $32,000 and $24,000, respectively, for insurance coverage and fees associated with policy claims administration. Note C - Legal Proceedings In March 1998, several putative unit holders of limited partnership units of the Partnership commenced an action entitled Rosalie Nuanes, et al. v. Insignia Financial Group, Inc., et al. (the "Nuanes action") in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Mateo. The plaintiffs named as defendants, among others, the Partnership, its General Partner and several of their affiliated partnerships and corporate entities. The action purports to assert claims on behalf of a class of limited partners and derivatively on behalf of a number of limited partnerships (including the Partnership) which are named as nominal defendants, challenging, among other things, the acquisition of interests in certain General Partner entities by Insignia Financial Group, Inc. ("Insignia") and entities which 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 seek monetary damages and equitable relief, including judicial dissolution of the Partnership. On June 25, 1998, the General Partner filed a motion seeking dismissal of the action. In lieu of responding to the motion, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint. The General Partner filed demurrers to the amended complaint which were heard February 1999. Pending the ruling on such demurrers, settlement negotiations commenced. On November 2, 1999, the parties executed and filed a Stipulation of Settlement, settling claims, subject to court approval, on behalf of the Partnership and all limited partners who owned units as of November 3, 1999. Preliminary approval of the settlement was obtained on November 3, 1999 from the Court, at which time the Court set a final approval hearing for December 10, 1999. Prior to the December 10, 1999 hearing, the Court received various objections to the settlement, including a challenge to the Court's preliminary approval based upon the alleged lack of authority of prior lead counsel to enter the settlement. On December 14, 1999, the General Partner and its affiliates terminated the proposed settlement. In February 2000, counsel for some of the named plaintiffs filed a motion to disqualify plaintiff's lead and liaison counsel who negotiated the settlement. On June 27, 2000, the Court entered an order disqualifying them from the case and an appeal was taken from the order on October 5, 2000. On December 4, 2000, the Court appointed the law firm of Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein LLP as new lead counsel for plaintiffs and the putative class. Plaintiffs filed a third amended complaint on January 19, 2001. On March 2, 2001, the General Partner and its affiliates filed a demurrer to the third amended complaint. On May 14, 2001, the Court heard the demurrer to the third amended complaint. On July 10, 2001, the Court issued an order sustaining defendants' demurrer on certain grounds. On July 20, 2001, Plaintiffs filed a motion for reconsideration of the Court's July 10, 2001 order granting in part and denying in part defendants' demurrer. On September 7, 2001, Plaintiffs filed a fourth amended class and derivative action complaint. On September 12, 2001, the Court denied Plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration. On October 5, 2001, the General Partner and affiliated defendants filed a demurrer to the fourth amended complaint, which was heard on December 11, 2001. On February 2, 2002, the Court served its order granting in part the demurrer. The Court has dismissed without leave to amend certain of the plaintiffs' claims. On February 11, 2002, plaintiffs filed a motion seeking to certify a putative class comprised of all non-affiliated persons who own or have owned units in the partnerships. The General Partner and affiliated defendants oppose the motion. On April 29, 2002, the Court held a hearing on plaintiffs' motion for class certification and took the matter under submission after further briefing, as ordered by the court, was submitted by the parties. On July 10, 2002, the Court entered an order vacating the current trial date of January 13, 2003 (as well as the pre-trial and discovery cut-off dates) and stayed the case in its entirety through November 7, 2002 so that the parties can have an opportunity to discuss settlement. On October 30, 2002, the court entered an order extending the stay in effect through January 10, 2003. During the third quarter of 2001, a complaint (the "Heller action") was filed against the same defendants that are named in the Nuanes action, captioned Heller v. Insignia Financial Group. On or about August 6, 2001, plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint. The first amended complaint in the Heller action is brought as a purported derivative action, and asserts claims for among other things breach of fiduciary duty; unfair competition; conversion, unjust enrichment; and judicial dissolution. Plaintiffs in the Nuanes action filed a motion to consolidate the Heller action with the Nuanes action and stated that the Heller action was filed in order to preserve the derivative claims that were dismissed without leave to amend in the Nuanes action by the Court order dated July 10, 2001. On October 5, 2001, the General Partner and affiliated defendants moved to strike the first amended complaint in its entirety for violating the Court's July 10, 2001 order granting in part and denying in part defendants' demurrer in the Nuanes action, or alternatively, to strike certain portions of the complaint based on the statute of limitations. Other defendants in the action demurred to the fourth amended complaint, and, alternatively, moved to strike the complaint. On December 11, 2001, the court heard argument on the motions and took the matters under submission. On February 4, 2002, the Court served notice of its order granting defendants' motion to strike the Heller complaint as a violation of its July 10, 2001 order in the Nuanes action. On March 27, 2002, the plaintiffs filed a notice appealing the order striking the complaint. The parties are currently in the midst of briefing that appeal. The General Partner does not anticipate that any costs, whether legal or settlement costs, associated with these cases will be material to the Partnership's overall operations. The Partnership is unaware of any other pending or outstanding litigation that is not of a routine nature arising in the ordinary course of business. ITEM 2. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OR PLAN OF OPERATIONS The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 provides a "safe harbor" for forward-looking statements in certain circumstances. The matters discussed in this report contain certain forward-looking statements, including, without limitation, statements regarding future financial performance and the effect of government regulations. The discussions of the Registrant's business and results of operations, including forward-looking statements pertaining to such matters, do not take into account the effects of any changes to the Registrant's business and results of operations. Actual results may differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements and will be affected by a variety of risks and factors including, without limitation: national and local economic conditions; the terms of governmental regulations that affect the Registrant and interpretations of those regulations; the competitive environment in which the Registrant operates; financing risks, including the risk that cash flows from operations may be insufficient to meet required payments of principal and interest; real estate risks, including variations of real estate values and the general economic climate in local markets and competition for tenants in such markets; and possible environmental liabilities. Readers should carefully review the Registrant's financial statements and the notes thereto, as well as the risk factors described in the documents the Registrant files from time to time with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The Partnership's investment properties consist of two apartment complexes. The following table sets forth the average occupancy for each of the properties for the nine months ended September 30, 2002 and 2001: Average Occupancy Property 2002 2001 Lake Meadows Apartments (1) 90% 96% Garland, Texas Lakewood Apartments (2) 91% 95% Tomball, Texas (1) Occupancy at Lake Meadows Apartments decreased primarily due to increased competition in the area. (2) Occupancy at Lakewood Apartments decreased primarily due to a large employer layoff in the area. Results of Operations The Partnership had net income of approximately $173,000 for the nine months ended September 30, 2002, as compared to net income of approximately $325,000 for the nine months ended September 30, 2001. The Partnership had net income of approximately $35,000 for the three months ended September 30, 2002, as compared to net income of approximately $103,000 for the three months ended September 30, 2001. The decrease in net income for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2002 was due to a decrease in total revenues and an increase in total expenses. The decrease in total revenues was due to a decrease in rental income, partially offset by an increase in other income. Rental income decreased due to a decrease in occupancy partially offset by an increase in average rental rates at both investment properties. Other income increased due to increases in utility reimbursements, late charges and non-refundable fees partially offset by decreases in interest income at both investment properties. Total expenses for the three and nine month periods increased due to an increase in interest expense partially offset by a decrease in general and administrative expense. Interest expense increased due to the refinancing of Lakewood Apartments in December 2001, which resulted in a higher debt balance. General and administrative expense decreased due to a decrease in professional fees associated with the administrating the Partnership. Included in general and administrative expenses for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2002 and 2001 are management reimbursements to the General Partner as allowed under the Partnership Agreement. In addition to these reimbursements, costs associated with the quarterly and annual communications with investors and regulatory agencies and the annual audit required by the Partnership Agreement are also included in general and administrative expenses. As part of the ongoing business plan of the Partnership, the General Partner monitors the rental market environment of its investment properties to assess the feasibility of increasing rents, maintaining or increasing occupancy levels and protecting the Partnership from increases in expenses. As part of this plan, the General Partner attempts to protect the Partnership from the burden of inflation-related increases in expenses by increasing rents and maintaining a high overall occupancy level. However, due to changing market conditions, which can result in the use of rental concessions and rental reductions to offset softening market conditions, there is no guarantee that the General Partner will be able to sustain such a plan. Liquidity and Capital Resources At September 30, 2002, the Partnership had cash and cash equivalents of approximately $234,000 compared to approximately $321,000 for the corresponding period in 2001. Cash and cash equivalents decreased approximately $20,000 from December 31, 2001 due to approximately $663,000 and $109,000 of cash used in financing and investing activities, respectively, largely offset by approximately $752,000 of cash provided by operating activities. Cash used in financing activities consisted of distributions to the partners and principal payments made on the mortgages encumbering both investment properties. Cash used in investing activities consisted of property improvements and replacements partially offset by net withdrawals from restricted escrows maintained by the mortgage lender. The Partnership invests its working capital reserves in interest bearing accounts. The sufficiency of existing liquid assets to meet future liquidity and capital expenditure requirements is directly related to the level of capital expenditures required at the properties to adequately maintain the physical assets and other operating needs of the Partnership and to comply with Federal, state, and local legal and regulatory requirements. The General Partner monitors developments in the area of legal and regulatory compliance and is studying new federal laws, including the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 mandates or suggests additional compliance measures with regard to governance, disclosure, audit and other areas. In light of these changes, the Partnership expects that it will incur higher expenses related to compliance, including increased legal and audit fees. Capital improvements for each of the Partnership's properties are detailed below. Lake Meadows Apartments Approximately $38,000 was budgeted for capital improvements for the year 2002 at Lake Meadows Apartments consisting primarily of floor covering and appliance replacements. During the nine months ended September 30, 2002, the Partnership completed approximately $44,000 of budgeted and unbudgeted capital improvements at Lake Meadows Apartments, consisting primarily of floor covering and appliance replacements, major landscaping and interior decoration. These improvements were funded from operating cash flow. Additional capital improvements may be considered and will depend on the physical condition of the property as well as the anticipated cash flow generated by the property and replacement reserves. Lakewood Apartments Approximately $98,000 was budgeted for capital improvements for the year 2002 at Lakewood Apartments consisting primarily of parking area improvements and air conditioning, floor covering and appliance replacements. During the nine months ended September 30, 2002, the Partnership completed approximately $67,000 of capital improvements at the property, consisting primarily of floor covering and appliance replacements, and structural upgrades. These improvements were funded from operating cash flow. Additional capital improvements may be considered and will depend on the physical condition of the property as well as the anticipated cash flow generated by the property. Additional capital expenditures will be incurred only to the extent of cash available from operations and from the Partnership's reserves. To the extent that such budgeted capital improvements are completed, the Partnership's distributable cash flow, if any, may be adversely affected at least in the short term. The Partnership's current assets are thought to be sufficient for any near-term needs (exclusive of capital improvements) of the Partnership. The mortgage indebtedness is approximately $6,813,000, net of discounts. Lake Meadows Apartments' mortgage is being amortized over 343 months with balloon payments due at the maturity date of October 2003. Lakewood Apartments' indebtedness is being amortized over 240 months with a maturity date of January 1, 2022 at which time it is scheduled to be fully amortized. The General Partner will attempt to refinance such indebtedness and/or sell the properties prior to such maturity dates. If the properties cannot be refinanced or sold for a sufficient amount, the Partnership will risk losing such properties through foreclosure. The Partnership distributed the following amounts during the nine months ended September 30, 2002 and 2001 (in thousands, except per unit data):
Nine Months Per Limited Nine Months Per Limited Ended Partnership Ended Partnership September 30, 2002 Unit September 30, 2001 Unit Operations (1) $ 556 $43.86 $ 647 $51.11
(1) Includes approximately $5,000 distributed to the general partner of the majority-owned sub-tier limited partnership. The Partnership's cash available for distribution is reviewed on a monthly basis. Future cash distributions will depend on the levels of net cash generated from operations, the availability of cash reserves, and the timing of debt maturities, refinancings, and/or property sales. There can be no assurance that the Partnership will generate sufficient funds from operations after required capital expenditures to permit further distributions to its partners for the remainder of 2002 or subsequent periods. Other In addition to its indirect ownership of the general partner interest in the Partnership, AIMCO and its affiliates owned 6,160 limited partnership units (the "Units") in the Partnership representing 49.58% of the outstanding units at September 30, 2002. 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 of limited partnership interest in the Partnership in exchange for cash or a combination of cash and units in the operating partnership of AIMCO either through private purchases or tender offers. Under the Partnership Agreement, unitholders holding a majority of the Units are entitled to take action with respect to a variety of matters which would include voting on certain amendments to the Partnership Agreement and voting to remove the General Partner. As a result of its ownership of 49.58% of the outstanding Units, AIMCO is in a position to influence all such voting decisions with respect to the Registrant. Although the General Partner owes fiduciary duties to the limited partners of the Partnership, the General Partner also owes fiduciary duties to AIMCO as its sole stockholder. As a result, the duties of the General Partner, as general partner, to the Partnership and its limited partners may come into conflict with the duties of the General Partner to AIMCO, as its sole stockholder. Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates The consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States which require the Partnership to make estimates and assumptions. The Partnership believes that of its significant accounting policies, the following may involve a higher degree of judgment and complexity. Impairment of Long-Lived Assets Investment properties are recorded at cost, less accumulated depreciation, unless considered impaired. If events or circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of a property may be impaired, the Partnership will make an assessment of its recoverability by estimating the undiscounted future cash flows, excluding interest charges, of the property. If the carrying amount exceeds the aggregate future cash flows, the Partnership would recognize an impairment loss to the extent the carrying amount exceeds the fair value of the property. Real property investments are subject to varying degrees of risk. Several factors may adversely affect the economic performance and value of the Partnership's investment properties. These factors include changes in the national, regional and local economic climate; local conditions, such as an oversupply of multifamily properties; competition from other available multifamily property owners and changes in market rental rates. Any adverse changes in these factors could cause an impairment in the Partnership's assets. Revenue Recognition The Partnership generally leases apartment units for twelve-month terms or less. Rental income attributable to leases is recognized monthly as it is earned. The Partnership will offer rental concessions during particularly slow months or in response to heavy competition from other similar complexes in the area. Concessions are charged to income as incurred. ITEM 3. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES The principal executive officer and principal financial officer of the General Partner, who are the equivalent of the Partnership's principal executive officer and principal financial officer, respectively, have, within 90 days of the filing date of this quarterly report, evaluated the effectiveness of the Partnership's disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules (13a-14(c) and (15d-14(c)) and have determined that such disclosure controls and procedures are adequate. There have been no significant changes in the Partnership's internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect the Partnership's internal controls since the date of evaluation. The Partnership does not believe any significant deficiencies or material weaknesses exist in the Partnership's internal controls. Accordingly, no corrective actions have been taken. PART II - OTHER INFORMATION ITEM 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS In March 1998, several putative unit holders of limited partnership units of the Partnership commenced an action entitled Rosalie Nuanes, et al. v. Insignia Financial Group, Inc., et al. (the "Nuanes action") in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Mateo. The plaintiffs named as defendants, among others, the Partnership, its General Partner and several of their affiliated partnerships and corporate entities. The action purports to assert claims on behalf of a class of limited partners and derivatively on behalf of a number of limited partnerships (including the Partnership) which are named as nominal defendants, challenging, among other things, the acquisition of interests in certain General Partner entities by Insignia Financial Group, Inc. ("Insignia") and entities which 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 seek monetary damages and equitable relief, including judicial dissolution of the Partnership. On June 25, 1998, the General Partner filed a motion seeking dismissal of the action. In lieu of responding to the motion, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint. The General Partner filed demurrers to the amended complaint which were heard February 1999. Pending the ruling on such demurrers, settlement negotiations commenced. On November 2, 1999, the parties executed and filed a Stipulation of Settlement, settling claims, subject to court approval, on behalf of the Partnership and all limited partners who owned units as of November 3, 1999. Preliminary approval of the settlement was obtained on November 3, 1999 from the Court, at which time the Court set a final approval hearing for December 10, 1999. Prior to the December 10, 1999 hearing, the Court received various objections to the settlement, including a challenge to the Court's preliminary approval based upon the alleged lack of authority of prior lead counsel to enter the settlement. On December 14, 1999, the General Partner and its affiliates terminated the proposed settlement. In February 2000, counsel for some of the named plaintiffs filed a motion to disqualify plaintiff's lead and liaison counsel who negotiated the settlement. On June 27, 2000, the Court entered an order disqualifying them from the case and an appeal was taken from the order on October 5, 2000. On December 4, 2000, the Court appointed the law firm of Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein LLP as new lead counsel for plaintiffs and the putative class. Plaintiffs filed a third amended complaint on January 19, 2001. On March 2, 2001, the General Partner and its affiliates filed a demurrer to the third amended complaint. On May 14, 2001, the Court heard the demurrer to the third amended complaint. On July 10, 2001, the Court issued an order sustaining defendants' demurrer on certain grounds. On July 20, 2001, Plaintiffs filed a motion for reconsideration of the Court's July 10, 2001 order granting in part and denying in part defendants' demurrer. On September 7, 2001, Plaintiffs filed a fourth amended class and derivative action complaint. On September 12, 2001, the Court denied Plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration. On October 5, 2001, the General Partner and affiliated defendants filed a demurrer to the fourth amended complaint, which was heard on December 11, 2001. On February 2, 2002, the Court served its order granting in part the demurrer. The Court has dismissed without leave to amend certain of the plaintiffs' claims. On February 11, 2002, plaintiffs filed a motion seeking to certify a putative class comprised of all non-affiliated persons who own or have owned units in the partnerships. The General Partner and affiliated defendants oppose the motion. On April 29, 2002, the Court held a hearing on plaintiffs' motion for class certification and took the matter under submission after further briefing, as ordered by the court, was submitted by the parties. On July 10, 2002, the Court entered an order vacating the current trial date of January 13, 2003 (as well as the pre-trial and discovery cut-off dates) and stayed the case in its entirety through November 7, 2002 so that the parties can have an opportunity to discuss settlement. On October 30, 2002, the court entered an order extending the stay in effect through January 10, 2003. During the third quarter of 2001, a complaint (the "Heller action") was filed against the same defendants that are named in the Nuanes action, captioned Heller v. Insignia Financial Group. On or about August 6, 2001, plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint. The first amended complaint in the Heller action is brought as a purported derivative action, and asserts claims for among other things breach of fiduciary duty; unfair competition; conversion, unjust enrichment; and judicial dissolution. Plaintiffs in the Nuanes action filed a motion to consolidate the Heller action with the Nuanes action and stated that the Heller action was filed in order to preserve the derivative claims that were dismissed without leave to amend in the Nuanes action by the Court order dated July 10, 2001. On October 5, 2001, the General Partner and affiliated defendants moved to strike the first amended complaint in its entirety for violating the Court's July 10, 2001 order granting in part and denying in part defendants' demurrer in the Nuanes action, or alternatively, to strike certain portions of the complaint based on the statute of limitations. Other defendants in the action demurred to the fourth amended complaint, and, alternatively, moved to strike the complaint. On December 11, 2001, the court heard argument on the motions and took the matters under submission. On February 4, 2002, the Court served notice of its order granting defendants' motion to strike the Heller complaint as a violation of its July 10, 2001 order in the Nuanes action. On March 27, 2002, the plaintiffs filed a notice appealing the order striking the complaint. The parties are currently in the midst of briefing that appeal. The General Partner does not anticipate that any costs, whether legal or settlement costs, associated with these cases will be material to the Partnership's overall operations. ITEM 6. EXHIBITS AND REPORTS ON FORM 8-K a) Exhibits: Exhibit 3.1, Amendment Certificate and Agreement of the Limited Partnership filed in the Partnership's prospectus dated July 7, 1986, which is incorporated herein by reference. Exhibit 99, Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer. b) Reports on Form 8-K: None filed during the quarter ended September 30, 2002. SIGNATURES In accordance with the requirements of the Exchange Act, the Registrant caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized. ANGELES OPPORTUNITY PROPERTIES, LTD. By: Angeles Realty Corporation II General Partner By: /s/Patrick J. Foye Patrick J. Foye Executive Vice President By: /s/Thomas C. Novosel Thomas C. Novosel Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer Date: January 9, 2003 CERTIFICATION I, Patrick J. Foye, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Angeles Opportunity Properties, Ltd.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report; 4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared; b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and c) Presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date; 5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): a) All significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and 6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses. Date: November 13, 2002 /s/Patrick J. Foye Patrick J. Foye Executive Vice President of Angeles Realty Corporation II, equivalent of the chief executive officer of the Partnership CERTIFICATION I, Paul J. McAuliffe, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Angeles Opportunity Properties, Ltd.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report; 4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared; b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and c) Presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date; 5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): a) All significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and 6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses. Date: November 13, 2002 /s/Paul J. McAuliffe Paul J. McAuliffe Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Angeles Realty Corporation II, equivalent of the chief financial officer of the Partnership Exhibit 99 Certification of CEO and CFO Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Angeles Opportunity Properties, Ltd. (the "Partnership"), for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Patrick J. Foye, as the equivalent of the chief executive officer of the Partnership, and Paul J. McAuliffe, as the equivalent of the chief financial officer of the Partnership, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his knowledge: (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Partnership. /s/ Patrick J. Foye Name: Patrick J. Foye Date: November 13, 2002 /s/ Paul J. McAuliffe Name: Paul J. McAuliffe Date: November 13, 2002 This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Partnership for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. -----END PRIVACY-ENHANCED MESSAGE-----