ITEM 1. BUSINESS.
General
Wells Real Estate Fund VIII, L.P. (the “Partnership”) is a Georgia public limited partnership with Leo Wells, III and Wells Partners, L.P. (“Wells Partners”), a Georgia nonpublic limited partnership, serving as its general partners (collectively, the “General Partners”). Wells Capital, Inc. (“Wells Capital”) serves as the corporate general partner of Wells Partners. Wells Capital is a wholly owned subsidiary of Wells Real Estate Funds, Inc. (“WREF”). Leo F. Wells, III is the president and sole director of Wells Capital and the president, sole director, and sole owner of WREF. The Partnership was formed on August 15, 1994 for the purpose of acquiring, developing, owning, operating, improving, leasing, and otherwise managing income-producing commercial properties for investment purposes. Upon subscription, limited partners elected to have their units treated as Class A Units or Class B Units. Limited partners have the right to change their prior elections to have some or all of their units treated as Class A Units or Class B Units one time during each quarterly accounting period (“conversion elections”). Limited partners may vote to, among other things, (a) amend the partnership agreement, subject to certain limitations; (b) change the business purpose or investment objectives of the Partnership; and (c) add or remove a general partner. A majority vote on any of the above described matters will bind the Partnership, without the concurrence of the General Partners. Each limited partnership unit has equal voting rights, regardless of class.
On January 6, 1995, the Partnership commenced a public offering of up to $35,000,000 of Class A or Class B limited partnership units ($10.00 per unit) pursuant to a Registration Statement on Form S-11 filed under the Securities Act of 1933. The offering was terminated on January 4, 1996, at which time the Partnership had sold approximately 2,613,534 Class A Units and 590,735 Class B Units representing total limited partner capital contributions of $32,042,689.
Operating Phases and Objectives
The Partnership typically operates in the following five life-cycle phases and, during which, typically focuses on the following key operating objectives. The duration of each phase is dependent upon various economic, industry, market, and other internal/external factors. Some overlap naturally exists in the transition from one phase to the next.
•
Fundraising phase
The period during which the Partnership is raising capital through the sale and issuance of limited partner units to the public;
•
Investing phase
The period during which the Partnership invests the capital raised during the fundraising phase, less up-front fees, into the acquisition of real estate assets;
•
Holding phase
The period during which the Partnership owns and operates its real estate assets during the initial lease terms of the tenants;
•
Positioning-for-sale phase
The period during which the leases in place at the time of acquisition expire and, thus, the Partnership expends time, effort, and funds to re-lease such space to existing and/or new tenants. Following the holding phase, the Partnership continues to own and operate the real estate assets, evaluate various options for disposition, and market the real estate assets for sale; and
•
Disposition-and-liquidation phase
The period during which the Partnership sells its real estate investments, distributes net sale proceeds to the partners, liquidates, and terminates the Partnership.
We are currently in the positioning-for-sale phase of our life cycle. Accordingly, we are concentrating on re-leasing and marketing efforts that we believe will ultimately result in the best disposition pricing for our investors.
Employees
The Partnership has no direct employees. The employees of Wells Capital and Wells Management Company, Inc. (“Wells Management”), an affiliate of the General Partners, perform a full range of real estate and administrative services for the Partnership including leasing and property management, accounting, asset management, and investor relations. See Item 13, “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions,” for a summary of the fees paid to the General Partners or their affiliates during the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009, and 2008.
Insurance
Wells Management carries comprehensive liability and extended coverage with respect to the properties we own through our investments in the joint ventures described in Item 2. In the opinion of management, our properties are adequately insured.
Competition
We will experience competition for tenants from owners and managers of competing projects which may include the General Partners or their affiliates. As a result, in connection with negotiating leases, we may offer rental concessions, reduced charges for tenant improvements, and other inducements, all of which may have an adverse impact on results of operations. We are also in competition with sellers of similar properties to locate suitable purchasers for its properties.
Economic Dependency
We have engaged Wells Capital and Wells Management to provide certain essential services, including supervision of the management and leasing of its properties, asset acquisition and disposition services, as well as other administrative responsibilities, including accounting services and investor communications and relations. These agreements are terminable by either party upon 60 days’ written notice. As a result of these relationships, we are dependent upon Wells Capital and Wells Management.
Wells Capital and Wells Management are both owned and controlled by WREF. The operations of Wells Capital and Wells Management represent substantially all of the business of WREF. Accordingly, we focus on the financial condition of WREF when assessing the financial condition of Wells Capital and Wells Management. In the event that WREF were to become unable to meet its obligations as they become due, we might be required to find alternative service providers.
Future net income generated by WREF will be largely dependent upon the amount of fees earned by Wells Capital and Wells Management based on, among other things, the level of investor proceeds raised from the sale of common stock for certain WREF-sponsored programs and the volume of future acquisitions and dispositions of real estate assets by WREF-sponsored programs, as well as distribution income earned from its holdings of common stock of Piedmont Office Realty Trust, Inc. (“Piedmont REIT”), which was acquired in connection with the Piedmont REIT internalization transaction (see “Assertion of Legal Action Against Related-Parties” below). As of December 31, 2010, the General Partners have no reason to believe that WREF does not
have access to adequate liquidity and capital resources, including cash flow generated from operations, cash on hand, other investments and borrowing capacity, necessary to meet its current and future obligations as they become due.
We are also dependent upon the ability of our current tenants to pay their contractual rent amounts as they become due. The inability of a tenant to pay future rental amounts would be likely to have a negative impact on our results of operations. We are not currently aware of any reason why our existing tenants will not be able to pay their contractual rental amounts as they become due in all material respects. Situations preventing the tenants from paying contractual rents could result in a material adverse impact on our results of operations.
Proxy to Liquidate
Under Section 20.2 of the partnership agreement, limited partners holding 10% or more of the outstanding units have the right, at any time commencing eight years after the termination of the Partnership’s offering of units (January 4, 2004), to provide a written request to the General Partners directing the General Partners to formally proxy the limited partners to determine whether the assets of the Partnership should be liquidated.
Assertion of Legal Action Against Related-Parties
On March 12, 2007, a stockholder of Piedmont REIT filed a putative class action and derivative complaint, presently styled In re Wells Real Estate Investment Trust, Inc. Securities Litigation, in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland against, among others, Piedmont REIT; Leo F. Wells, III, one of the Partnership’s General Partners; Wells Capital, the corporate general partner of Wells Partners, the Partnership’s other General Partner; Wells Management, the Partnership’s property manager; certain affiliates of WREF; the directors of Piedmont REIT; and certain individuals who formerly served as officers or directors of Piedmont REIT prior to the closing of the internalization transaction on April 16, 2007.
The complaint alleged, among other things, violations of the federal proxy rules and breaches of fiduciary duty arising from the Piedmont REIT internalization transaction and the related proxy statement filed with the SEC on February 26, 2007, as amended. The complaint sought, among other things, unspecified monetary damages and nullification of the Piedmont REIT internalization transaction.
On June 27, 2007, the plaintiff filed an amended complaint, which attempted to assert class action claims on behalf of those persons who received and were entitled to vote on the Piedmont REIT proxy statement filed with the SEC on February 26, 2007, and derivative claims on behalf of Piedmont REIT.
On March 31, 2008, the Court granted in part the defendants’ motion to dismiss the amended complaint. The Court dismissed five of the seven counts of the amended complaint in their entirety. The Court dismissed the remaining two counts with the exception of allegations regarding the failure to disclose in the Piedmont REIT proxy statement details of certain expressions of interest in acquiring Piedmont REIT. On April 21, 2008, the plaintiff filed a second amended complaint, which alleges violations of the federal proxy rules based upon allegations that the proxy statement to obtain approval for the Piedmont REIT internalization transaction omitted details of certain expressions of interest in acquiring Piedmont REIT. The second amended complaint seeks, among other things, unspecified monetary damages, to nullify and rescind the internalization transaction, and to cancel and rescind any stock issued to the defendants as consideration for the internalization transaction. On May 12, 2008, the defendants answered and raised certain defenses to the second amended complaint.
On June 23, 2008, the plaintiff filed a motion for class certification. On September 16, 2009, the Court granted the plaintiff’s motion for class certification. On September 20, 2009, the defendants filed a petition for permission to appeal immediately the Court’s order granting the motion for class certification with the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. The petition for permission to appeal was denied on October 30, 2009. On April 13, 2009, the plaintiff moved for leave to amend the second amended complaint to add additional defendants. The Court denied the plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend on June 23, 2009.
On December 4, 2009, the parties filed motions for summary judgment. On August 2, 2010, the Court entered an order denying the defendants’ motion for summary judgment and granting, in part, the plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment. The Court ruled that the question of whether certain expressions of interest in acquiring Piedmont REIT constituted “material” information required to be disclosed in the proxy statement to obtain approval for the Piedmont REIT internalization transaction raises questions of fact that must be determined at trial. A trial date has not been set.
Mr. Wells, Wells Capital, and Wells Management believe that the allegations contained in the complaint are without merit and intend to vigorously defend this action. Any financial loss incurred by Wells Capital, Wells Management, or their affiliates could hinder their ability to successfully manage the Partnership’s operations and portfolio of investments.
Website Address
Access to copies of each of our filings with the SEC is available, free of charge, at the http://www.wellsref.com website, through a link to the http://www.sec.gov website.
ITEM 1A.
ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS.
Risk Related to Current Economic Conditions
Current economic conditions may cause market rental rates and property values to decline, may impede disposition of our properties at commercially reasonable terms, and have had, and will likely continue to have, an adverse effect on our financial condition.
Current economic conditions, the availability and cost of credit, turmoil in the mortgage market, and declining real estate markets have contributed to increased volatility, lower real estate values, and diminished expectations for real estate markets and the economy going forward. Many economists are predicting economic conditions in the United States for 2011 to remain relatively weak, along with continued high levels of unemployment and vacancy rates at commercial properties as what has been commonly referred to as the “jobless recovery” persists through most of the year. Should such current economic conditions continue for a prolonged period of time, the value of our commercial real estate assets and the market rental rates that we are able to achieve may decline significantly. Deteriorating economic conditions could adversely impact the ability of one or more of our tenants to honor their lease payments and our ability to re-lease space on favorable terms as leases expire or as space otherwise becomes vacant at our properties. While we do not anticipate the need to access the credit markets, the impact of the current crisis in the credit markets may adversely affect the ability of potential purchasers of our properties to obtain financing. Therefore, this may affect our timing and/or ability to sell our properties at commercially reasonable terms. The current economic conditions and the difficulties currently being experienced in the mortgage and real estate markets have adversely affected our business model, financial condition, results of operations, and the valuation of our units. A worsening of these conditions would exacerbate the adverse effects that the current market environment has had on us and on commercial real estate in general.
Real Estate Risks
Changes in general economic conditions and regulatory matters germane to the real estate industry may cause our operating results to suffer and the value of our real estate properties to decline.
Our operating results will be subject to risks generally incident to the ownership of real estate, including:
•
changes in general or local economic conditions;
•
changes in supply of or demand for similar or competing properties in an area;
•
changes in interest rates and availability of permanent mortgage funds, which may render the sale of a property difficult or unattractive;
•
changes in tax, real estate, environmental, and zoning laws; and
•
periods of high interest rates and tight money supply.
These and other reasons may prevent us from being profitable or from realizing growth or maintaining the value of our real estate properties.
General economic conditions may affect the timing of the sale of our properties and the sale price we receive.
We may be unable to sell a property if or when we decide to do so. The real estate market is affected by many factors, such as general economic conditions, the availability of financing, interest rates, and other factors, including supply and demand for real estate investments, all of which are beyond our control. We cannot predict whether we will be able to sell any property for the price or on terms which are acceptable to us. Further, we cannot predict the length of time which will be needed to find a willing purchaser and to close the sale of a property.
Vacancy and/or near-term tenant rollover at our properties could reduce or eliminate future cash distributions to limited partners.
We anticipate that we will be required to expend in the future, substantial funds for tenant improvements and other costs necessary to re-lease (i) previously vacant space at the US Cellular Building, which is currently 73% leased and (ii) space that is currently occupied through August 2011 at 305 Interlocken Parkway. If we are unable to secure a replacement tenant at 305 Interlocken Parkway in a timely manner and/or the US Cellular Building remains partially vacant for a prolonged period of time, property earnings would suffer, and we would be required to continue to reserve cash otherwise available for operating distributions to limited partners. In addition, the residual value of these properties would be negatively impacted by vacancy because the market value is largely dependent upon the value of the leases in place at such properties.
Adverse economic conditions in the geographic regions in which we own properties may negatively impact your overall returns.
Adverse economic conditions in the geographic regions in which we own our properties could affect the real estate values in this area or the business of our tenants if any of our tenants rely upon the local economy for their revenues. Therefore, changes in local economic conditions could reduce our income and distributions to limited partners or the amounts we could otherwise receive upon the sale of a property in a negatively affected region.
Adverse economic conditions affecting the particular industries of the tenants of our properties may negatively impact your overall returns.
Adverse economic conditions affecting a particular industry of one or more of our tenants could affect the financial ability of one or more of our tenants to make payments under their leases, which could cause delays in our receipt of rental revenues or a vacancy in one or more of our properties for a period of time. Therefore, changes in economic conditions of the particular industry of one or more of our tenants could reduce our income and distributions to limited partners and the value of one or more of our properties at the time of sale of such properties.
We are dependent on our tenants for substantially all of our revenue, so our success is materially dependent on the financial stability of our tenants.
Most of our properties are occupied by only a few tenants and, therefore, the success of our investments is materially dependent on the financial stability of our tenants. Lease payment defaults by tenants could cause us to reduce the amount of distributions to holders of Class A Units. A default of a tenant on its lease payments to us would cause us to lose the revenue from the property. In the event of a default, we may experience delays in
enforcing our rights as landlord and may incur substantial costs in protecting our investment and re-letting our property. If a lease is terminated, we cannot assure you that we will be able to lease the property for the rent previously received or sell the property without incurring a loss.
Your investment in units is subject to greater risk because we lack a diversified property portfolio.
Because we own interests in only a few properties, your investment in units is subject to a greater risk of loss. There is a greater risk that you will lose money in your investment because our portfolio of properties is not diverse by geographic location, property type, or industry group of tenants.
Our future financial success depends on only a few tenants.
The ability of our tenants to generate revenues is substantially dependent upon their financial condition and, accordingly, any event of bankruptcy, insolvency, or a general downturn in the business of any of these tenants may result in the failure or delay of such tenant’s rental payments, which may have a substantial adverse effect on our financial performance.
We depend on tenants for our revenue. Accordingly, lease terminations and/or tenant default could reduce our net income and limit our ability to make distributions to our limited partners.
The success of our investments materially depends on the financial stability of our tenants. A default or termination by a significant tenant on its lease payments to us would cause us to lose the revenue associated with such lease and require us to find an alternative source of revenue. In the event of a tenant default or bankruptcy, we may experience delays in enforcing our rights as landlord and may incur substantial costs in protecting our investment and re-letting our property. If significant leases are terminated or defaulted upon, we may be unable to lease the property for the rent previously received or sell the property without incurring a loss. These events could cause us to reduce the amount of distributions to limited partners.
If one or more of our tenants file for bankruptcy, we may be precluded from collecting all sums due.
If one or more of our tenants, or the guarantor of a tenant’s lease, commences, or has commenced against it, any proceeding under any provision of the federal Bankruptcy Code, as amended, or any other legal or equitable proceeding under any bankruptcy, insolvency, rehabilitation, receivership, or debtor’s relief statute or law (bankruptcy proceeding), we may be unable to collect sums due under relevant leases. Any or all of the tenants, or a guarantor of a tenant’s lease obligations, could be subject to a bankruptcy proceeding. Such a bankruptcy proceeding may bar our efforts to collect pre-bankruptcy debts from these entities or their properties, unless we are able to obtain an enabling order from the bankruptcy court. If a lease is rejected by a tenant in bankruptcy, we would have only a general unsecured claim against the tenant, and may not be entitled to any further payments under the lease. A tenant’s or lease guarantor’s bankruptcy proceeding could hinder or delay efforts to collect past-due balances under relevant leases, and could ultimately preclude collection of these sums. Such an event could cause a decrease or cessation of rental payments, which would result in a reduction in our cash flow and the amount available for distribution to limited partners holding Class A Units. In the event of a bankruptcy proceeding, we cannot assure you that the tenant or its trustee will assume our lease. If a given lease, or guaranty of a lease, is not assumed, our cash flow and the amounts available for distribution to limited partners holding Class A Units may be adversely affected.
We may not have funding for future tenant improvements, which may reduce your returns and make it difficult to attract one or more new tenants.
When a tenant at one of our properties does not renew its lease or otherwise vacates its space in one of our buildings, it is likely that in order to attract one or more new tenants, we will be required to expend substantial funds for tenant improvements and tenant refurbishments to the vacated space and other lease-up costs. Substantially all of our net offering proceeds available for investment have been used for investment in
Partnership properties, and we do not anticipate that we will maintain permanent working capital reserves. We also have not identified a funding source to provide funds which may be required in the future for tenant improvements, tenant refurbishments, and other lease-up costs in order to attract new tenants. We cannot assure you that any such source of funding will be available to us for such purposes in the future. In the event that we are required to use net cash from operations to fund such tenant improvements, tenant refurbishments, and other lease-up costs, cash distributions to limited partners holding Class A Units will be reduced or eliminated for potentially extended periods of time.
A property that incurs a vacancy could be difficult to sell or lease.
A property may incur a vacancy either by the continued default of a tenant under its lease or the expiration of one of our leases. Our properties may be leased to a single tenant and/or may be specifically suited to the particular needs of a certain tenant based on the type of business the tenant operates. If a vacancy on any of our properties continues for a long period of time, we may suffer reduced revenues resulting in less cash to be distributed to investors holding Class A Units. In addition, the resale value of the property could be diminished because the market value of a particular property will depend principally upon the value of the leases of such property.
Uninsured losses relating to real property or excessively expensive premiums for insurance coverage could reduce our net income.
Our General Partners will attempt to obtain adequate insurance on all of our properties to cover casualty losses. However, there are types of losses, generally catastrophic in nature, such as losses due to wars, acts of terrorism, earthquakes, floods, hurricanes, pollution, or environmental matters that are uninsurable or not economically insurable, or may be insured subject to limitations, such as large deductibles or co-payments. Insurance risks associated with potential terrorism acts could sharply increase the premiums we pay for coverage against property and casualty claims. We may not have adequate coverage for such losses. If any of our properties incur a casualty loss that is not fully insured, the value of our assets will be reduced by such uninsured loss. In addition, other than reserves of net cash from operations we may establish, we have no source of funding to repair or reconstruct any uninsured damaged property. Also, to the extent we must pay unexpectedly large amounts for insurance, we could suffer reduced earnings that would result in lower distributions to limited partners.
Uncertain market conditions and the broad discretion of our General Partners relating to the future disposition of properties could adversely affect the return on your investment.
We generally will hold our two remaining real properties in which we are invested until such time as the General Partners determine that the sale or other disposition thereof appears to be advantageous to achieve our investment objectives or until the sale of the properties is warranted, even if it appears that such objectives will not be met. Our General Partners intend to sell properties acquired for development after holding such properties for a period of eight to 12 years from the date the development is completed, and intend to sell existing income-producing properties within eight to 12 years after their acquisition, or as soon thereafter as market conditions permit. This is the period of time it typically takes to realize significant appreciation of the type of property in which we traditionally invest. However, our General Partners may exercise their discretion as to whether and when to sell a property, and we will have no obligation to sell properties at any particular time, except upon the termination of the Partnership as specified in the partnership agreement, or earlier if a majority of you vote to liquidate the Partnership pursuant to a formal proxy to liquidate. We cannot predict with any certainty the various market conditions affecting real estate investments that will exist at any particular time in the future. Due to the uncertainty of market conditions, which may affect the future disposition of our properties, we cannot assure you that we will be able to sell our properties at a profit in the future. Accordingly, the timing of liquidation of the Partnership and the extent to which you will receive cash distributions and realize potential appreciation on our real estate investments will be dependent upon fluctuating market conditions.
If any environmentally hazardous material is determined to exist on a property owned by the Partnership, our operating results could be adversely affected.
Under various federal, state and local environmental laws, ordinances, and regulations, a current or previous owner or operator of real property may be liable for the cost of removal or remediation of hazardous or toxic substances on, under, or in such property. Such laws often impose liability whether or not the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the presence of such hazardous or toxic substances. Environmental laws also may impose restrictions on the manner in which property may be used or businesses may be operated, and these restrictions may require expenditures. Environmental laws provide for sanctions in the event of noncompliance and may be enforced by governmental agencies or, in certain circumstances, by private parties. In connection with the acquisition and ownership of our properties, we may be potentially liable for such costs. The cost of defending against claims of liability, complying with environmental regulatory requirements, or remediating any contaminated property could materially adversely affect the business, assets, or results of operations of the Partnership and, consequently, amounts available for distribution to limited partners holding Class A Units.
The Partnership and/or other prior Wells public limited partnerships sponsored by our General Partners have sold real estate properties for a sale price less than the original purchase price.
Certain of the real estate properties previously purchased by the Partnership and other Wells public limited partnerships sponsored by the General Partners have not appreciated to the levels anticipated at the time of purchase. Recently some of these properties have been sold by such partnerships at purchase prices below the prices paid for such properties. We cannot guarantee that any of our properties will appreciate in value.
General Investment Risks
The Georgia Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act (“GRULPA”) does not grant you any specific voting rights, and your rights are limited under our partnership agreement.
A vote of a majority in interest of the limited partners is sufficient to take the following significant Partnership actions:
•
to amend our partnership agreement;
•
to change our business purpose or our investment objectives;
•
to remove our General Partners; or
•
to authorize a merger or a consolidation of the Partnership.
These are your only significant voting rights granted under our partnership agreement. In addition, GRULPA does not grant you any specific voting rights. Therefore, your voting rights are severely limited.
You are bound by the majority vote on matters on which you are entitled to vote.
Limited partners may approve any of the above actions by majority vote of the outstanding units. Therefore, you are bound by such majority vote even if you do not vote with the majority on any of these actions.
Under our partnership agreement, we are required to indemnify our General Partners under certain circumstances which may reduce returns to our limited partners.
Under our partnership agreement and subject to certain limitations, the Partnership is required to indemnify our General Partners from and against losses, liabilities, and damages relating to or arising out of any action or inaction on behalf of the Partnership done in good faith and in the best interest of the Partnership. If substantial and expensive litigation should ensue and the Partnership is obligated to indemnify one or both General Partners, we may be forced to use substantial funds to do so, which may reduce the return on your investment.
Payment of fees to our General Partners or their affiliates will reduce cash available for distributions to our limited partners.
Our General Partners or their affiliates perform services for us in connection with the management and leasing of our properties. Our affiliates may receive property management and leasing fees of 6.0% of gross revenues in connection with the commercial properties we own. In addition, we will reimburse our General Partners or their affiliates for the administrative services necessary to our prudent operation which includes actual costs of goods, services, and materials used for or by the Partnership. These fees and reimbursements will reduce the amount of cash available for capital expenditures to our properties or distributions to limited partners.
The availability and the timing of cash distributions are uncertain.
We cannot assure you that sufficient cash will be available to make distributions to you from either net cash from operations or proceeds from the sale of properties. We bear all expenses incurred in connection with our operations, which are deducted from cash funds generated by operations prior to computing the amount of net cash from operations to be distributed to our general and limited partners. In addition, our General Partners, in their discretion, may retain all or any portion of net cash generated from our operations and/or proceeds from the sale of our properties for tenant improvements, tenant refurbishments, and other lease-up costs or for working capital reserves.
Gains and distributions upon sale of our properties are uncertain.
Although gains from the sale of properties typically represent a substantial portion of any profits attributable to real estate investments, we cannot assure you that we will realize any gains on the sale of our properties. In addition, the amount of taxable gain allocated to you with respect to the sale of a Partnership property could exceed the cash proceeds received from such sale. While the net proceeds from the sale of a property will generally be distributed to investors, the General Partners, in their sole discretion, may not make such distribution if such proceeds are used to:
•
purchase land underlying any of our properties;
•
buy out the interest of any co-venturer or joint venture partner in a property which is jointly owned;
•
establish working capital reserves; or
•
make repairs, maintenance, tenant improvements, capital improvements, or other expenditures to any of our existing properties.
We are uncertain of our sources for funding of future capital needs.
Substantially all of the gross proceeds of the offering were used to invest in properties and to pay various fees and expenses. In addition, we do not anticipate that we will maintain any permanent working capital reserves. Accordingly, in the event that we develop a need for additional capital in the future, such as the funding of tenant improvements, tenant refurbishments, or other lease-up costs, we have not identified any sources for such funding, and we cannot assure you that any sources of funding will be available to us for potential capital needs in the future.
We may need to reserve net cash from operations for future tenant improvements, which may reduce your returns.
We may be required to expend substantial funds for tenant improvements and tenant refurbishments to vacated space and other lease-up costs. Substantially all of our net offering proceeds available for investment were used for investment in Partnership properties, and we do not anticipate that we will maintain permanent working capital reserves. We also have no identified funding source to provide funds that may be required in the future for
tenant improvements, tenant refurbishments, and other lease-up costs in order to attract new tenants. We cannot assure you that any such source of funding will be available to us for such purposes in the future. In the event that we are required to use net cash from operations to fund such tenant improvements, tenant refurbishments, and other lease-up costs, cash distributions to limited partners holding Class A Units will be reduced or eliminated for potentially extended periods of time.
Concentration of Credit Risk
The Partnership maintains bank accounts with high-credit, quality financial institutions. At times, our cash balances may exceed the federally insured limits.
Marketability and Transferability Risks
There is no public trading market for your units.
There is no public market for your units, and we do not anticipate that any public trading market for your units will ever develop. If you attempt to sell your units, you would likely do so at substantially discounted prices on the secondary market. Further, our partnership agreement restricts our ability to participate in a public trading market or anything substantially equivalent to one by providing that any transfer which may cause us to be classified as a “publicly traded partnership” as defined in Section 7704 of the Internal Revenue Code shall be deemed void and shall not be recognized. Because classification of the Partnership as a “publicly traded partnership” may significantly decrease the value of your units, our General Partners intend to use their authority to the maximum extent possible to prohibit transfers of units, which could cause us to be classified as a “publicly traded partnership.”
Your units have limited transferability and lack liquidity due to restrictions under state regulatory laws and our partnership agreement.
You are limited in your ability to transfer your units. Our partnership agreement and certain state regulatory agencies have imposed restrictions relating to the number of units you may transfer. In addition, the suitability standards applied to you upon the purchase of your units may also be applied to persons to whom you wish to transfer your units. Accordingly, you may find it difficult to sell your units for cash or if you are able to sell your units, you may have to sell your units at a substantial discount. You may not be able to sell your units in the event of an emergency, and your units are not likely to be accepted as collateral for a loan.
Our estimated unit valuations should not be viewed as an accurate reflection of the value of the limited partners’ units.
The estimated unit valuations contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K should not be viewed as an accurate reflection of the value of the limited partners’ units, what limited partners might be able to sell their units for, or the fair market value of the Partnership’s properties, nor do they necessarily represent the amount of net proceeds limited partners would receive if the Partnership’s properties were sold and the proceeds distributed in a liquidation of the Partnership in accordance with the net sale proceeds distribution allocation outlined in the partnership agreement. There is no established public trading market for the Partnership’s limited partnership units, and it is not anticipated that a public trading market for the units will ever develop. We did not obtain any third-party appraisals of our properties in connection with these estimated unit valuations. In addition, property values are subject to change and could decline in the future. The valuations performed by the General Partners are estimates only and are based on a number of assumptions that may not be accurate or complete and may or may not be applicable to any specific limited partnership units. Further, these estimated valuations are applicable only to limited partners who purchased their units directly from the Partnership in the Partnership’s original public offering of units. It also should be noted that as properties are sold and the net proceeds from property sales are distributed to limited partners, the remaining value of the Partnership’s portfolio of properties and the resulting value of the Partnership’s limited partnership units will naturally decline.
Special Risks Regarding Status of Units
If you hold Class A Units, we expect that you will be allocated more income than cash flow.
Since limited partners holding Class A Units are allocated substantially all of the Partnership’s net income, while substantially all deductions for depreciation and other tax losses are allocated to limited partners holding Class B Units, we expect that those of you who hold Class A Units will be allocated taxable income in excess of your cash distributions. We cannot assure you that cash flow will be available for distribution in any year.
The desired effect of holding Class A Units or Class B Units may be reduced depending on how many investors hold each type of unit.
You will be entitled to different rights and priorities as to distributions of cash flow from operations and net sale proceeds and as to the allocation of depreciation and other tax losses depending upon whether you are holding Class A Units or Class B Units. However, the effect of any advantage associated with holding Class A Units or Class B Units may be significantly reduced or eliminated, depending upon the ratio of Class A Units to Class B Units during any given period. We will not attempt to restrict the ratio of Class A Units to Class B Units, and we will not attempt to establish or maintain any particular ratio.
Management Risks
You must rely on our General Partners for management of our business.
Our General Partners make all decisions with respect to the management of the Partnership. Limited partners have no right or power to take part in the management of the Partnership, except through the exercise of limited voting rights. Therefore, you must rely almost entirely on our General Partners for management of the Partnership and the operation of its business. Our General Partners may be removed only under certain conditions set forth in our partnership agreement. If our General Partners are removed, they will receive payment equal to the fair market value of their interests in the Partnership, as agreed upon by our General Partners and the Partnership or by arbitration if they are unable to agree.
Leo F. Wells, III has a primary role in determining what is in the best interest of the Partnership and its limited partners.
Leo F. Wells, III is one of our General Partners and is the president, treasurer, and sole director of Wells Capital, the general partner of Wells Partners, our other general partner. Therefore, one person has a primary role in determining what is in the best interest of the Partnership and its limited partners. Although Mr. Wells relies on the input of the officers and other employees of Wells Capital, he ultimately has the authority to make decisions affecting our Partnership operations. Therefore, Mr. Wells alone will determine the propriety of his own actions, which could result in a conflict of interest when he is faced with any significant decision relating to our Partnership affairs.
Our loss of, or inability to obtain, key personnel could delay or hinder implementation of our investment strategies, which could limit our ability to make distributions.
Our success depends to a significant degree upon the contributions of Leo F. Wells, III, Douglas P. Williams, and Randall D. Fretz, each of whom would be difficult to replace. We do not have employment agreements with Messrs. Wells, Williams, or Fretz, and we cannot guarantee that such persons will remain affiliated with us. If any of Wells Capital’s key personnel were to cease their affiliation with the Partnership, we may be unable to find suitable replacement personnel, and our operating results could suffer. We do not maintain key-person life insurance on any person. We believe that our future success depends, in large part, upon the ability of our General Partners to hire and retain highly skilled managerial and operational personnel. If we lose, or are unable to obtain, the services of highly skilled personnel or do not establish or maintain appropriate strategic relationships, our ability to implement our investment strategies could be delayed or hindered, and the value of your investment may decline.
Our operating performance could suffer if Wells Capital incurs significant losses, including those losses that may result from being the general partner of other entities.
We are dependent on Wells Capital to conduct our operations; thus, adverse changes in the financial condition of Wells Capital, including changes arising from litigation or our relationship with Wells Capital, could hinder its ability to successfully manage our operations and our portfolio of investments. As a general partner in many Wells-sponsored programs, Wells Capital may have contingent liabilities for the obligations of such programs. Enforcement of such obligations against Wells Capital could result in a substantial reduction of its net worth. If such liabilities affected the level of services that Wells Capital could provide, our operations and financial performance could suffer.
Our General Partners have a limited net worth consisting of illiquid assets, which may affect their ability to fulfill their financial obligations to the Partnership.
The net worth of our General Partners consists primarily of interests in real estate, retirement plans, partnerships, and closely held businesses and, in the case of Wells Capital, receivables from affiliated corporations and partnerships. Accordingly, the net worth of our General Partners is illiquid and not readily marketable. This illiquidity may be relevant to you in evaluating the ability of our General Partners to fulfill their financial obligations to the Partnership. In addition, our General Partners have significant commitments to the other Wells-sponsored programs.
Increases in our administrative operating expenses, including increased expenses associated with operating as a public company in the current regulatory environment, could limit our ability to make distributions.
As we evolve through our Partnership life cycle and sell various properties in our portfolio, our general and administrative operating expenses become a larger percentage in relationship to our operating cash flow and the value of our properties. Further, we bear all expenses incurred in connection with our operations, which are deducted from cash funds generated by operations prior to computing the amount of net cash from operations to be distributed to our limited partners. Therefore, as a result of the increased general and administrative operating expenses and increased percentage of such expenses, we cannot assure you that sufficient cash will be available to make future distributions to you from either net cash from our operations or proceeds from the sale of our properties.
Conflicts of Interest Risks
Our General Partners will face conflicts of interest relating to time management, which could result in lower returns on our investments.
Because our General Partners and their affiliates have interests in other real estate programs and also engage in other business activities, they could have conflicts of interest in allocating their time between our business and these other activities, which could affect operations of the Partnership. You should note that our partnership agreement does not specify any minimum amount of time or level of attention that our General Partners are required to devote to the Partnership.
Our General Partners will face conflicts of interest relating to the sale and leasing of properties.
We may be selling properties at the same time as other Wells programs are buying and selling properties. We may have acquired or be selling properties in geographic areas where other Wells programs own properties or are trying to sell properties, which could lower the return on your investment.
Investments in joint ventures with affiliates will result in additional risks involving our relationship with the co-venturer.
We have entered into joint ventures with affiliates. Such investments may involve risks not otherwise present with an investment in real estate, including, for example:
•
the possibility that our co-venturer, co-tenant, or partner in an investment might become bankrupt;
•
that such co-venturer, co-tenant, or partner may at any time have economic or business interests or goals which are, or which become, inconsistent with our business interests or goals; or
•
that such co-venturer, co-tenant, or partner may be in a position to take action contrary to our instructions or requests or contrary to our policies or objectives.
Actions by such a co-venturer, co-tenant, or partner might result in subjecting the property to liabilities in excess of those contemplated and may have the effect of reducing your returns.
Our General Partners will face various conflicts of interest relating to joint ventures with affiliates.
Since our General Partners and their affiliates control both the Partnership and other affiliates, transactions between the parties with respect to joint ventures between such parties do not have the benefit of arm’s-length negotiation of the type normally conducted between unrelated co-venturers. Under these joint venture arrangements, neither co-venturer has the power to control the venture, and an impasse could be reached regarding matters pertaining to the joint venture, which might have a negative influence on the joint venture and decrease potential returns to you. In the event that a co-venturer has a right of first refusal to buy out the other co-venturer, it may be unable to finance such a buy-out at that time. It may also be difficult for us to sell our interest in any such joint venture or partnership or as a co-tenant in property. In addition, to the extent that our co-venturer, partner, or co-tenant is an affiliate of our General Partners, certain conflicts of interest will exist.
Federal Income Tax Risks
The Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) may challenge our characterization of material tax aspects of your investment in the Partnership.
An investment in units involves certain material income tax risks, the character and extent of which are, to some extent, a function of whether you hold Class A Units or Class B Units. We will not seek any rulings from the IRS regarding any of the tax issues related to your units.
Investors may realize taxable income without cash distributions.
As a limited partner in the Partnership, you are required to report your allocable share of the Partnership’s taxable income on your personal income tax return regardless of whether or not you have received any cash distributions from the Partnership. For example, if you hold Class A Units, you will be allocated substantially all of our net income, defined in the partnership agreement to mean generally net income for federal income tax purposes, including any income exempt from tax, but excluding all deductions for depreciation and amortization and gain or loss from the sale of Partnership properties, even if such income is in excess of any distributions of cash from our operations. If you hold Class A Units, you will likely be allocated taxable income in excess of any distributions to you, and the amount of cash received by you could be less than the income tax attributable to the net income allocated to you.
We could potentially be characterized as a publicly traded partnership resulting in unfavorable tax results.
If the IRS were to classify the Partnership as a “publicly traded partnership,” we could be taxable as a corporation, and distributions made to you could be treated as portfolio income to you rather than passive income. We cannot assure you that we will not, at some time in the future, be treated as a publicly traded partnership due to the following factors:
•
the complex nature of the IRS rules governing our potential exemption from classification as a publicly traded partnership;
•
the lack of interpretive guidance with respect to such rules; and
•
the fact that any determination in this regard will necessarily be based upon events which have not yet occurred.
The IRS may challenge our allocations of profit and loss.
While it is more likely than not Partnership items of income, gain, loss, deduction, and credit will be allocated among our General Partners and our limited partners substantially in accordance with the allocation provisions of the partnership agreement, we cannot assure you that the IRS will not successfully challenge the allocations in the partnership agreement and reallocate items of income, gain, loss, deduction, and credit in a manner which reduces the anticipated tax benefits to investors holding Class B Units or increases the income allocated to investors holding Class A Units.
We may be audited and additional tax, interest, and penalties may be imposed upon you.
Our federal income tax returns may be audited by the IRS. Any audit of the Partnership could result in an audit of your tax return, causing adjustments of items unrelated to your investment in the Partnership, in addition to adjustments to various Partnership items. In the event of any such adjustments, you might incur accountants’ or attorneys’ fees, court costs, and other expenses contesting deficiencies asserted by the IRS. You also may be liable for interest on any underpayment and certain penalties from the date your tax was originally due. The tax treatment of all Partnership items will generally be determined at the Partnership level in a single proceeding rather than in separate proceedings with each partner, and our General Partners are primarily responsible for contesting federal income tax adjustments proposed by the IRS. In this connection, our General Partners may extend the statute of limitations as to all partners and, in certain circumstances, may bind the partners to a settlement with the IRS. Further, our General Partners may cause us to elect to be treated as an “electing large partnership.” If they do, we could take advantage of simplified flow-through reporting of Partnership items. Adjustments to Partnership items would continue to be determined at the Partnership level, however, and any such adjustments would be accounted for in the year they take effect, rather than in the year to which such adjustments relate. Accordingly, if you make an election to change the status of your units between the years in which a tax benefit is claimed and an adjustment is made, you may suffer a disproportionate adverse impact with respect to any such adjustment. Further, our General Partners will have the discretion in such circumstances either to pass along any such adjustments to the partners or to bear such adjustments at the Partnership level, thereby potentially adversely impacting the holders of a particular class of units disproportionately to holders of the other class of units.
State and local taxes and a requirement to withhold state taxes may apply.
The state in which you reside may impose an income tax upon your share of our taxable income. Further, states in which we own properties may impose income taxes upon your share of our taxable income allocable to any Partnership property located in that state or other taxes on limited partnerships owning properties in their states. Many states have implemented or are implementing programs to require partnerships to withhold and pay state income taxes owed by nonresident partners relating to income-producing properties located in their states, and we may be required to withhold state taxes from cash distributions otherwise payable to you. In the event we are
required to withhold state taxes from your cash distributions, or pay other state taxes, the amount of the net cash from operations otherwise payable to you would be reduced. In addition, such collection and filing requirements at the state level may result in increases in our administrative expenses, which would have the effect of reducing cash available for distribution to you. You are urged to consult with your own tax advisors with respect to the impact of applicable state and local taxes and state tax withholding requirements or other potential state taxes relating to an investment in our units.
Legislative or regulatory action could adversely affect investors.
In recent years, numerous legislative, judicial, and administrative changes have been made in the provisions of the federal income tax laws applicable to investments similar to an investment in our units. Additional changes to the tax laws are likely to continue to occur in the future, and we cannot assure you that any such changes will not adversely affect the taxation of a limited partner. Any such changes could have an adverse effect on an investment in our units or on the market value or the resale potential of our properties. You are urged to consult with your own tax advisor with respect to the impact of recent legislation on your investment in units and the status of legislative, regulatory, or administrative developments and proposals and their potential effect on an investment in our units.
Retirement Plan and Qualified Plan Risks
There are special considerations that apply to a pension or profit-sharing trust or an Individual Retirement Account (“IRA”) investing in units.
If you are investing the assets of a pension, profit-sharing, Section 401(k), Keogh, or other qualified retirement plan or the assets of an IRA in units, you should satisfy yourself that:
•
your investment is consistent with your fiduciary obligations under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”) and the Internal Revenue Code;
•
your investment is made in accordance with the documents and instruments governing your plan or IRA, including your plan’s investment policy;
•
your investment satisfies the prudence and diversification requirements of Sections 404(a)(1)(B) and 404(a)(1)(C) of ERISA;
•
your investment will not impair the liquidity of the plan or IRA;
•
your investment will not produce “unrelated business taxable income” for the plan or IRA;
•
you will be able to value the assets of the plan annually in accordance with ERISA requirements; and
•
your investment will not constitute a prohibited transaction under Section 406 of ERISA or Section 4975 of the Internal Revenue Code.
We may dissolve the Partnership if our assets are deemed to be plan assets or if we engage in prohibited transactions.
If our assets were deemed to be assets of qualified plans investing as limited partners, i.e., plan assets, our General Partners would be considered to be fiduciaries of such plans and certain contemplated transactions between our General Partners or their affiliates, and the Partnership may then be deemed to be “prohibited transactions” subject to excise taxation under Section 4975 of the Internal Revenue Code. Additionally, if our assets were deemed to be plan assets, the standards of prudence and other provisions of ERISA applicable to plan fiduciaries would apply to the General Partners with respect to our investments. We have not sought a ruling from the U.S. Department of Labor regarding the potential classification of our assets as plan assets.
In this regard, U.S. Department of Labor regulations defining plan assets for purposes of ERISA contain exemptions which, if satisfied, would preclude assets of a limited partnership such as ours from being treated as plan assets. We cannot assure you that our partnership agreement has been structured so that the exemptions in such Regulations would apply to us, although our General Partners intend that an investment by a qualified plan in units will not be deemed an investment in the assets of the Partnership. We can make no representations or warranties of any kind regarding the consequences of an investment in our units by qualified plans in this regard. Plan fiduciaries are urged to consult with, and rely upon, their own advisors with respect to this and other ERISA issues which, if decided adversely to the Partnership, could result in qualified plan investors being deemed to have engaged in “prohibited transactions,” which would cause the imposition of excise taxes and co-fiduciary liability under Section 405 of ERISA in the event actions taken by us are deemed to be nonprudent investments or “prohibited transactions.”
In the event our assets are deemed to constitute plan assets or certain transactions undertaken by us are deemed to constitute “prohibited transactions” under ERISA or the Internal Revenue Code, and no exemption for such transactions is obtainable by us, the General Partners have the right, but not the obligation, upon notice to all limited partners, but without the consent of any limited partner, to:
•
compel a termination and dissolution of the Partnership; or
•
restructure our activities to the extent necessary to comply with any exemption in the U.S. Department of Labor regulations or any prohibited transaction exemption granted by the Department of Labor or any condition which the Department of Labor might impose as a condition to granting a prohibited transaction exemption.
Adverse tax consequences may result because of minimum distribution requirements.
If you hold units in an IRA or you intend to acquire units in a secondary market through your IRA, or if you are a custodian of an IRA or a trustee or other fiduciary of a retirement plan which is holding units or is considering an acquisition of units through a secondary market, you must consider the limited liquidity of an investment in our units as it relates to applicable minimum distribution requirements under the Internal Revenue Code. If units are held and our properties have not yet been sold at such time as mandatory distributions are required to begin to an IRA beneficiary or qualified plan participant, Sections 408(a)(6) and 401(a)(9) of the Internal Revenue Code will likely require that a distribution-in-kind of the units be made to the IRA beneficiary or qualified plan participant. Any such distribution-in-kind of units must be included in the taxable income of the IRA beneficiary or qualified plan participant for the year in which the units are received at the fair market value of the units, and taxes attributable thereto must be paid without any corresponding cash distributions from us with which to pay such income tax liability.
Unrelated business taxable income (“UBTI”) may be generated with respect to tax-exempt investors.
We do not intend or anticipate that the tax-exempt investors in the Partnership will be allocated income deemed to be derived from an unrelated trade or business. Notwithstanding this, the General Partners do have limited authority to borrow funds deemed necessary:
•
to finance improvements necessary to protect capital previously invested in a property;
•
to protect the value of our investment in a property; or
•
to make one of our properties more attractive for sale or lease.
Our General Partners have represented that they will not cause the Partnership to incur indebtedness unless they obtain an opinion from legal counsel or an opinion from our tax accountants that the proposed indebtedness more than likely will not cause the income allocable to tax-exempt investors to be characterized as UBTI. Any such opinion will have no binding effect on the IRS or any court, however, and some risk remains that we may generate UBTI for our tax-exempt investors in the event that it becomes necessary for us to borrow funds.
Further, in the event we were deemed to be a “dealer” in real property, defined as one who holds real estate primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of business, the gain realized on the sale of our properties which is allocable to tax-exempt investors would be characterized as UBTI.
ITEM 1B.
ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS.
There were no unresolved SEC staff comments as of December 31, 2010.
ITEM 2.
ITEM 2. PROPERTIES.
Overview
The Partnership owns indirect interests in all of its real estate assets through joint ventures with other entities affiliated with the General Partners and Piedmont Operating Partnership, LP (“Piedmont OP”), formerly known as Wells Operating Partnership, L.P. Piedmont OP is a Delaware limited partnership, with Piedmont REIT serving as its general partner. Piedmont REIT is a Maryland corporation that qualifies as a real estate investment trust. During the periods presented, the Partnership owned interests in the following joint ventures (the “Joint Ventures”) and properties:
(1) These joint ventures were liquidated and dissolved in 2007.
(2) This property was sold in May 2006.
(3) One outparcel of land was sold in October 2002; the shopping center and one outparcel of land were sold in April 2005; a portion of one outparcel of land was condemned by the North Carolina Department of Transportation in October 2005; and two remaining outparcels of land were sold in January 2007.
(4) This property was sold in November 2007.
Wells Real Estate Fund IX, L.P. is affiliated with the Partnership through common general partners. Wells Real Estate Fund VI, L.P. and Wells Real Estate Fund VII, L.P. were affiliated with the Partnership through common general partners prior to their dissolution. Each of the properties described above was acquired on an all-cash basis.
Lease Expirations
As of December 31, 2010, the lease expirations scheduled during the following 10 years for all properties in which the Partnership owned an interest through Fund VIII-IX Associates, assuming no exercise of renewal options or termination rights, are summarized below:
(1) The Partnership’s share of annualized gross base rent in year of expiration is calculated based on the Partnership’s ownership percentage in the joint venture that owns the leased property.
(2) Expiration of Flextronics International USA, Inc. lease at 305 Interlocken Parkway (approximately 48,600 square feet).
(3) Expiration of United States Cellular Operating Company lease at the US Cellular Building (approximately 74,700 square feet).
Property Descriptions
The properties in which the Partnership owned an interest through the Joint Ventures during the periods presented are further described below:
BellSouth Building
The BellSouth Building is a four-story office building containing approximately 92,000 square feet located in Jacksonville, Florida. On May 15, 2006, Fund VI-VII-VIII Associates and another Wells-affiliated joint venture sold the BellSouth Building and a second office property owned by the other Wells-affiliated joint venture to an unaffiliated third party for an aggregate gross sales price of $24,000,000, less agreed-upon credits of approximately $228,000. As a result of the sale, the Partnership received net sale proceeds of approximately $4,157,000 and was allocated a gain of approximately $2,176,000.
Tanglewood Commons
Tanglewood Commons consisted of a strip-mall shopping center containing approximately 67,000 square feet on a 12.48-acre tract of land. Approximately 2.2 acres of the property consisting of four outparcels were graded and held for future development or resale. On October 7, 2002, Fund VI-VII-VIII Associates sold an outparcel of land at Tanglewood Commons to an unrelated third party for a gross sale price of approximately $559,000. As a result of this sale, the Partnership received net sale proceeds of approximately $170,000 and was allocated a gain of approximately $4,000. On April 21, 2005, Fund VI-VII-VIII Associates sold the Tanglewood Commons shopping center and one outparcel of land to an unrelated third party for a gross sale price of $11,500,000. As a result of the sale, the Partnership received net proceeds of approximately $3,635,000 and was allocated a gain of approximately $1,755,000. On October 12, 2005, a portion of one of the remaining outparcels of land was condemned by the North Carolina Department of Transportation. As a result of this condemnation, the Partnership received net sale proceeds of approximately $17,000 and was allocated a gain of approximately $10,000. On January 31, 2007, Fund VI-VII-VIII Associates sold the two remaining outparcels of land to Wells Management, an affiliate of our General Partners, for a gross sale price of $750,000 after seeking the consent of the limited partners to the transaction. As a result of the sale, the Partnership received net sale proceeds of approximately $238,000 and was allocated a gain of approximately $28,000.
US Cellular Building
The US Cellular Building is a four-story office building containing approximately 102,000 rentable square feet located in Madison, Wisconsin. United States Cellular Operating Company (“US Cellular”), a business unit of Telephone and Data Systems, occupied 100% of the building until 2006. In September 2006, Fund VIII-IX Associates completed a lease amendment with US Cellular that (i) extended the termination date of the lease from May 31, 2007 to January 31, 2013, (ii) reduced the square footage leased from approximately 102,000 square feet to approximately 75,000 square feet commencing January 1, 2007, (iii) allowed for a seven-month rental abatement period commencing July 1, 2006 through January 31, 2007, and (iv) reduced the contract rental rate following the rental abatement period. In June 2007, Fund VIII-IX Associates completed an additional lease amendment with US Cellular that extended the termination date of the lease to April 9, 2013 and allowed them to apply the remaining landlord-funded tenant allowance of approximately $171,000 as rental abatement. As of December 31, 2010, the annualized base rent payable for the US Cellular lease was approximately $991,000. The base rent increases by approximately 2% each January until 2013, when the annualized base rent payable will be approximately $1,052,000.
14079 Senlac Drive
The 14079 Senlac Drive property is a one-story office building containing approximately 40,000 rentable square feet located on 4.864 acres of land located in Farmers Branch, Texas. On November 29, 2007, Fund VIII-IX Associates sold 14079 Senlac Drive to an unrelated third party for a gross selling price of approximately $5,410,000. As a result of the sale, the Partnership received net sale proceeds of approximately $2,799,000 and was allocated a gain of approximately $1,044,000.
305 Interlocken Parkway
The 305 Interlocken Parkway property is a two-story office building containing approximately 49,000 rentable square feet located in Broomfield, Colorado. In November 2005, Fund VIII-IX Associates and Flextronics International USA, Inc. (“Flextronics”) entered into a 67-month lease for the entire property that commenced in January 2006 and will expire in August 2011. The lease allowed for rental abatements during the first seven months of the lease term. As of December 31, 2010, the annualized base rent payable was approximately $443,000 and remains the same through the expiration of the lease in August 2011. Flextronics intends to vacate the building at its scheduled lease expiration in August 2011.
ITEM 3.
ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS.
From time to time, we are party to legal proceedings which arise in the ordinary course of our business. We are not currently involved in any litigation for which the outcome would, in the judgment of the General Partners based on information currently available, have a materially adverse impact on the results of operations or financial condition of the Partnership, nor is management aware of any such litigation threatened against us. For a description of pending litigation involving certain related parties, see “Assertion of Legal Action Against Related-Parties” in Item 1. of this report.
ITEM 4.
ITEM 4. RESERVED.
PART II
ITEM 5.
ITEM 5. MARKET FOR PARTNERSHIP’S UNITS AND RELATED SECURITY HOLDER MATTERS.
Summary
As of February 28, 2011, 2,949,979 Class A Units and 253,287 Class B Units held by a total of 2,000 and 187 limited partners, respectively, were outstanding. The total number of Class B Units has decreased due to the rescission of certain units since the termination of the offering in 1996. Original capital contributions were equal to $10.00 per each limited partnership unit; to date, the Partnership has returned capital in the form of distributions of net sale proceeds to its limited partners equal to, on average, $5.85 per Class A Unit and $13.84 per Class B Unit, as further described below. A public trading market has not been established for the Partnership’s limited partnership units, nor is such a market anticipated to develop in the future. The partnership agreement provides the General Partners with the right to prohibit transfers of units under certain circumstances.
Unit Valuation
Because fiduciaries of retirement plans subject to ERISA and the IRA custodians are required to determine and report the value of the assets held in their respective plans or accounts on an annual basis, the General Partners are required under the partnership agreement to report estimated unit values to the limited partners each year in the Partnership’s Annual Report on Form 10-K. The methodology to be utilized for determining such estimated unit values under the partnership agreement requires the General Partners to estimate the amount a unit holder would receive assuming that the Partnership’s properties were sold at their estimated fair market values as of the end of the Partnership’s fiscal year and the proceeds therefrom, plus the amount of net sale proceeds held by the Partnership at year-end from previous property sales, if any, were distributed to the limited partners in liquidation in accordance with the net sale proceeds distribution allocation outlined in the partnership agreement. The estimated unit valuations are intended to be an estimate of the distributions that would be made to limited partners who purchased their units directly from the Partnership in the Partnership’s original public offering of units, taking into account conversion elections as provided for in the partnership agreement.
The General Partners of the Partnership recently completed their estimated unit valuations as of December 31, 2010. Utilizing the foregoing methodology, the General Partners have estimated the Partnership’s unit valuations, based upon their estimates of property values as of December 31, 2010, to be approximately $3.20 per Class A Unit and $3.25 per Class B Unit, based upon market conditions existing in early December 2010. These estimates should not be viewed as an accurate reflection of the value of the limited partners’ units, how much limited partners might be able to sell their units for, or the fair market value of the Partnership’s properties, nor do they necessarily represent the amount of net proceeds limited partners would receive if the Partnership’s properties were sold and the proceeds were distributed in a liquidation of the Partnership. There is no established public trading market for the Partnership’s limited partnership units, and it is not anticipated that a public trading market for the units will ever develop. In addition, property values are subject to change and could decline in the future. While, as required by the partnership agreement, the General Partners have obtained an opinion from The David L. Beal Company, an independent appraiser certified by the Member Appraisal Institute, to the effect that such estimates of value were deemed reasonable and were prepared in accordance with appropriate methods for valuing real estate, no actual appraisals were obtained due to the inordinate expense that would be involved in obtaining appraisals for all of the Partnership’s properties.
The valuations performed by the General Partners are estimates only and are based on a number of assumptions which may not be accurate or complete and may or may not be applicable to any specific limited partnership units. For example, as a result of the availability of conversion elections under the partnership agreement and the resulting complexities involved relating to the distribution methodology under the partnership agreement, each limited partnership unit of the Partnership potentially has its own unique characteristics as to distributions and value. These estimated valuations are applicable only to limited partners who purchased their units directly from
the Partnership in the Partnership’s original public offering of units. Further, as set forth above, no third-party appraisals have or will be obtained. For these reasons, the estimated unit valuations set forth above should not be used by or relied upon by investors, other than fiduciaries of retirement plans and IRA custodians for limited ERISA and IRA reporting purposes, as any indication of the fair market value of their units. In addition, it should be noted that ERISA plan fiduciaries and IRA custodians may use estimated unit valuations obtained from other sources, such as prices paid for the Partnership’s units in secondary market trades, and that such estimated unit valuations may well be lower than those estimated by the General Partners using the methodology required by the partnership agreement.
It should also be noted that as the Partnership’s properties are sold and the net proceeds from property sales are distributed to limited partners, the remaining value of the Partnership’s portfolio of properties, and resulting value of Partnership’s limited partnership units, will naturally decline. In considering the foregoing estimated unit valuations, it should be noted that the Partnership has previously distributed net sale proceeds in the amount of $5.85 per Class A Unit and $13.84 per Class B Unit to its limited partners. These amounts are intended to represent the per-unit distributions received by limited partners who purchased their units directly from the Partnership in the Partnership’s original public offering of units, and who have made no conversion elections under the partnership agreement. Limited partners who have made one or more conversion elections would have received different levels of per-unit distributions.
Operating Distributions
Operating cash available for distribution to the limited partners is generally distributed on a quarterly basis. Under the partnership agreement, distributions from net cash from operations are allocated first to the limited partners holding Class A Units (and limited partners holding Class B Units that have elected a conversion right that allows them to share in the distribution rights of limited partners holding Class A Units) until they have received 10% of their adjusted capital contributions. Initially Class A Unit holders are allocated none of the depreciation, amortization, cost recovery and interest expense. Cash available for distribution is then distributed to the General Partners until they have received an amount equal to 10% of cash distributions previously distributed to the limited partners. Any remaining cash available for distribution is split between the limited partners holding Class A Units and the General Partners on a basis of 90% and 10%, respectively. No operating distributions will be made to the limited partners holding Class B Units.
Operating cash distributions made to limited partners holding Class A Units during 2009 and 2010 are summarized below:
Operating distributions to limited partners are accrued for accounting purposes in the quarter earned and paid to Class A limited partners in the following quarter. No operating cash distributions were paid to holders of Class B Units or the General Partners during the years ended December 31, 2009 or 2010.
ITEM 6.
ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA.
A summary of the selected financial data as of and for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2010, 2009, 2008, 2007, and 2006 for the Partnership is provided below. The comparability of net income for the periods presented below is impacted by the sale of properties described in Item 2.
ITEM 7.
ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS.
The following discussion and analysis should be read in conjunction with the Selected Financial Data presented in Item 6 and our accompanying financial statements and notes thereto. See also “Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements” preceding Part I of this report and “Risk Factors” in Item 1A. of this report.
Overview
Portfolio Overview
We are currently in the positioning-for-sale phase of our life cycle. We have sold six of the eight properties in which we have held interests. Our focus at this time involves leasing and marketing efforts that we believe will ultimately result in the best disposition pricing of our assets for our limited partners.
The fourth quarter 2010 operating distributions to limited partners were reserved. Our General Partners anticipate that operating distributions to limited partners will continue to be reserved in the near-term as a result of our intention to fund our pro rata share of anticipated re-leasing costs for our remaining properties.
Property Summary
As we move further into the positioning-for-sale phase, we will continue to focus on re-leasing vacant space and space that may become vacant upon the expiration of our current leases. In doing so, we will seek to maximize
returns to our limited partners by attempting to negotiate long-term leases at market rental rates while attempting to minimize down time, re-leasing expenditures, ongoing property level costs, and portfolio costs. As properties are positioned for sale, our attention will shift to locating suitable buyers, negotiating purchase-sale contracts that will attempt to maximize the total return to our limited partners, and minimize contingencies and potential post-closing obligations to buyers. As of February 28, 2011, the Partnership owned interests in two properties.
Information relating to the properties owned, or previously owned, by the Joint Ventures is provided below:
•
Hannover Center was sold on April 29, 2004.
•
The 15253 Bake Parkway property was sold on December 2, 2004.
•
An outparcel of land at Tanglewood Commons was sold on October 7, 2002. The Tanglewood Commons shopping center and one outparcel of land was sold on April 21, 2005. On October 12, 2005, a portion of one of the remaining outparcels of land was condemned. On January 31, 2007, the two remaining outparcels of land were sold to Wells Management, an affiliate of the General Partners, after seeking the approval of the limited partners.
•
The CH2M Hill Building was sold on December 7, 2005.
•
The BellSouth Building was sold on May 15, 2006.
•
The 14079 Senlac Drive property was sold on November 29, 2007.
•
The US Cellular Building, located in Madison, Wisconsin, is currently approximately 73% leased to US Cellular until April 2013. We are actively working on re-leasing the remaining vacant space in this building.
•
The 305 Interlocken Parkway property, located in the Broomfield submarket of Denver, Colorado, is 100% leased to Flextronics who intends to vacate the building at its scheduled lease expiration in August 2011. We are marketing the space in this building for lease.
Industry Factors
Our results continue to be impacted by a number of factors influencing the real estate industry.
General Economic Conditions and Real Estate Market Commentary
Management reviews a number of economic forecasts and market commentaries in order to evaluate general economic conditions and to formulate a view of the current environment’s effect on the real estate markets in which we operate.
As measured by the U.S. gross domestic product (“GDP”), the U.S. economy’s growth increased at an annual rate of 2.8% in the fourth quarter of 2010, according to estimates. This is an indication that the market has stabilized and an economic recovery is currently under way. For the full year of 2010, real GDP increased 2.8% compared with a 2.6% decrease in 2009. The main contributors to the increase in real GDP growth in 2010 were positive contributions from personal consumption expenditures, private domestic investment, and government consumption expenditures. While management believes the U.S. economy is beginning to show signs of recovery, we believe this recovery will be gradual and that downside risks related to factors, such as employment and housing, still exist.
Real estate market fundamentals underlying the U.S. office markets continued to deteriorate in 2010, as evidenced by a vacancy rate of 17.6% for the fourth quarter compared with 17.0% vacancy this same time a year ago. There was negative net absorption of 14.5 million square feet in 2010, in addition to the 79 million square feet of negative absorption in 2009. As anticipated, average rents have also declined from a $27.79 rate in fourth quarter 2009 to current rates of $27.53, a 0.94% decline. On a positive note, however, fourth quarter numbers show a positive net absorption of 2.5 million square feet, the first quarter of positive absorption since 2007, and a stabilization in vacancy rates and rental rates. Additionally, as the overall economy continues to improve, the office market should follow suit with modestly improving fundamentals in 2011.
Transaction volume for office properties increased significantly in 2010 with over $41 billion in transactions, more than doubling 2009 activity of $17.3 billion. Fourth quarter 2010 activity was $18.7 billion, which was more than all of 2009 activity combined. Much of the sales activity was made up of portfolio transactions and larger deals concentrated in major markets such as New York; Washington, D.C.; and Chicago. Capitalization rates (first year income returns) also experienced sharp declines in 2010, dropping nearly 200 basis points overall. Average central business district capitalization rates finished the year at 6.2%, a 225 basis point reduction from 2009, and suburban rates averaged 7.7%, 135 basis points lower than 2009. Both exchange-listed REITs and nontraded REITs were the largest buyers of real estate in 2010, with over $8 billion of total transaction activity. Commercial mortgage-backed securities also made a return in 2010, which bodes well for 2011 financing expectations.
After a sluggish office market in 2009, recent transaction activity suggests that the market has bottomed out and headed toward an even stronger, healthier recovery. Nevertheless, the majority of transactions in 2010 continued to be well-tenanted assets in primary markets. This disparity is largely determined by cash flow quality, investor profile, and location of the asset. Properties that are in top-tier markets with credit tenants and lack of near-term lease rollover are commanding significantly higher prices and lower capitalization rates than properties lacking these qualities. Recent pricing spreads and sales volumes in Washington, D.C.; New York; San Francisco; Boston; Chicago; and other desirable markets validate this trend. Additionally, rising delinquencies and looming debt maturities could force distressed sellers to dispose of assets at discounted prices. Even though evidence shows little distressed office sales compared to the amount of distressed assets, in the fourth quarter of 2010, distressed office sales exceeded the previous three quarters combined and accounted for 17% of all office transactions in the fourth quarter of 2010. Cash buyers should be in prime position to capitalize on these distressed situations should they occur.
Impact of Economic Conditions on our Portfolio
While some of the market conditions noted above may indicate expected changes in rental rates, the extent to which our portfolio may be affected is dependent upon the contractual rental rates currently provided in existing leases at the properties we own. As the majority of our in-place leases are at properties that were acquired at times during which the market demanded higher rental rates, as compared with today, new leasing activities in certain markets may result in a decrease in future rental rates. Additionally, the turbulence in the credit markets may adversely affect the ability of potential purchasers of our properties to obtain financing, which could affect our timing and/or ability to complete the disposition-and-liquidation phase of our life cycle.
Less diversified real estate funds that own fewer properties, such as the Partnership, and those with current vacancies or near-term tenant rollover, such as the Partnership, may face an increasingly challenging leasing environment. The properties within these funds may be required to offer lower rental rates and higher concession packages to potential tenants, the degree to which will depend heavily on the specific property and market.
From a valuation standpoint, it is generally preferable to either renew an existing tenant lease or re-lease the property prior to marketing it for sale. Generally, buyers will heavily discount their offering prices to compensate for existing or pending vacancies.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Overview
Our operating strategy entails funding expenditures related to the recurring operations of the Joint Ventures’ properties and the portfolio with operating cash flows, including current and prior period operating distributions received from the Joint Ventures, and assessing the amount of remaining cash flows that will be required to fund known future re-leasing costs and other capital improvements. Any residual operating cash flows are generally considered available for distribution to the Class A limited partners and, unless reserved, are generally paid quarterly. To the extent that operating cash flows are insufficient to fund our recurring operations, net sale
proceeds will be utilized. As a result, the ongoing monitoring of our cash position is critical to ensuring that adequate liquidity and capital resources are available. Economic downturns in one or more of our core markets could adversely impact the ability of one or more of our tenants to honor lease payments and our ability to re-lease space on favorable terms as leases expire or space otherwise becomes vacant. In the event of either situation, cash flows and, consequently, our ability to provide funding for capital needs could be adversely affected.
Short-Term Liquidity
During the year ended December 31, 2010, we generated net operating cash flows, including distributions received from Fund VIII-IX Associates, of approximately $419,000. Operating distributions from the joint venture generally consist of rental revenues and tenant reimbursements, less property operating expenses, management fees, general administrative expenses, and capital expenditures. During 2010, we used such net operating cash flows to fund operating distributions to Class A limited partners of approximately $244,000 and reserved the remainder to fund our pro rata share of anticipated re-leasing costs for our remaining properties. The extent to which any future operating distributions are paid to limited partners will be largely dependent upon the amount of cash generated from by Fund VIII-IX Associates, our expectations of future cash flows, and determination of near-term cash needs to fund our share of tenant re-leasing costs and other capital improvements for properties owned by Fund VIII-IX Associates. We anticipate future operating distributions from Fund VIII-IX Associates may decline in the near-term as a result of our intention to fund our pro rata share of anticipated re-leasing costs for our remaining properties.
We believe that the cash on hand and operating distributions due from Fund VIII-IX Associates are sufficient to cover our working capital needs, including those provided for within our total liabilities of approximately $24,000, as of December 31, 2010.
Long-Term Liquidity
We expect that our future sources of capital will be primarily derived from operating cash flows generated from the properties owned by Fund VIII-IX Associates and net proceeds generated from the sale of those properties. Our future long-term liquidity requirements will include, but not be limited to, funding our share of tenant improvements, renovations, expansions, and other significant capital improvements necessary for properties owned through Fund VIII-IX Associates. We expect to continue to use substantially all future net cash flows from operations, including distributions received from Fund VIII-IX Associates, to fund our pro rata share of leasing costs and capital expenditures necessary to position our properties for sale. To the extent that residual operating cash flows remain after considering these funding requirements, we would then distribute such residual operating cash flow to the limited partners.
Capital Resources
The Partnership is an investment vehicle formed for the purpose of acquiring, owning, and operating income-producing real properties or investing in joint ventures formed for the same purpose, and has invested all of the partners’ original net offering proceeds available for investment. Thus, it is unlikely that we will acquire interests in any additional properties or joint ventures. Historically, our investment strategy has generally involved acquiring properties on an all-cash basis that are preleased to creditworthy tenants through joint ventures with affiliated partnerships.
The Joint Ventures incur capital expenditures primarily related to building improvements for the purpose of maintaining the quality of our properties, and tenant improvements for the purpose of readying our properties for re-leasing. As leases expire, we will work with the Joint Ventures to attempt to re-lease space to an existing tenant or market the space to prospective new tenants. Generally, tenant improvements funded in connection with lease renewals require less capital than those funded in connection with new leases. However, external
conditions, such as the supply of and demand for comparable space available within a given market, drive capital costs as well as rental rates. Any capital or other expenditures not funded from the operations of the Joint Ventures will be required to be funded by the Partnership and the other respective joint venture partners on a pro rata basis.
Operating cash flows, if available, are generally distributed from the Joint Ventures to the Partnership approximately one month following calendar quarter-ends. However, the Joint Ventures will reserve operating distributions, or a portion thereof, as needed in order to fund known capital and other expenditures. Our cash management policy typically includes first utilizing current period operating cash flow until depleted, at which point operating reserves are utilized to fund capital and other required expenditures. In the event that current and prior period accumulated operating cash flows are insufficient to fund such costs, net sale proceeds reserves, if available, are then utilized.
As of December 31, 2010, we have received, used, distributed, and held net sale proceeds allocated to the Partnership from the sale of properties as presented below:
(1) Represents payment received for unamortized tenant improvements in connection with the Cirrus Logic, Inc. lease termination.
Upon evaluating the capital needs of the properties in which we currently own an interest, our General Partners have determined to reserve net sale proceeds of approximately $523,000 to fund our pro rata share of anticipated re-leasing costs for our remaining properties.
Results of Operations
Comparison of the year ended December 31, 2009 vs. the year ended December 31, 2010
Equity in Income of Joint Venture
Equity in income of Joint Venture increased from $186,259 for the year ended December 31, 2009 to $195,670 for the year ended December 31, 2010. This increase is primarily attributable to incurring less maintenance expenses at the US Cellular Building in 2010 as compared to 2009.
Absent leasing activity at the US Cellular Building, we expect equity in income of Joint Venture to remain at relatively similar levels during the first half of 2011; however, if we are unable to secure a suitable replacement tenant for the 305 Interlocken Building in a timely manner (the current tenant’s lease is scheduled to expire in August 2011), equity in income of Joint Venture would decline in the future.
Interest and Other Income
Interest and other income decreased from $2,023 for the year ended December 31, 2009 to $1,232 for the year ended December 31, 2010. This decrease is primarily a result of a decrease in the average daily yield.
Future levels of interest income will be largely dependent on the timing of future property dispositions and net sales proceeds distributions to the limited partners, and fluctuations in the average daily yield.
General and Administrative Expenses
General and administrative expenses increased from $177,733 for the year ended December 31, 2009 to $202,353 for the year ended December 31, 2010. This increase is attributable to a temporary difference in accounting fees related to the timing of work performed by our external accountants and additional administrative reimbursements resulting primarily from a reduction in the economies of scale available to the Partnership for investor support services.
We anticipate that future general and administrative expenses will vary primarily based on future changes in our reporting and regulatory requirements.
Comparison of the year ended December 31, 2008 vs. the year ended December 31, 2009
Equity in Income of Joint Venture
Equity in income of Joint Venture decreased from $320,238 for the year ended December 31, 2008 to $186,259 for the year ended December 31, 2009. This decrease is primarily attributable to a decline in rental income at the US Cellular Building related to a decline in occupancy in December 2008, partially offset by higher repair and maintenance expenses incurred in 2008 at the US Cellular Building.
Interest and Other Income
Interest and other income decreased from $46,264 for the year ended December 31, 2008 to $2,023 for the year ended December 31, 2009. This decrease is primarily a result of a decrease in the average amount of net sale proceeds held during the respective periods as a result of the distribution of net sale proceeds to the limited partners in May 2008, as well as a decrease in the average daily yield.
General and Administrative Expenses
General and administrative expenses decreased from $197,663 for the year ended December 31, 2008 to $177,733 for the year ended December 31, 2009. This decrease is primarily attributable to a decline in legal services in 2009 and a temporary difference in accounting fees related to the timing of work performed by our external accountants in 2009 as compared with the prior year.
Inflation
We are exposed to inflation risk, as income from long-term leases is the primary source of our cash flows from operations. There are provisions in the majority of our tenant leases that are intended to help protect us from the impact of inflation. These provisions include rent steps, reimbursement billings for operating expense pass-through charges, real estate tax and insurance reimbursements on a per-square-foot basis, or in some cases, annual reimbursement of operating expenses above a certain per-square-foot allowance. However, due to the long-term nature of our leases, the leases may not readjust their reimbursement rates frequently enough to cover inflation.
Application of Critical Accounting Policies
Our accounting policies have been established to conform with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”). The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to use judgment in the application of accounting policies, including making estimates and assumptions. These judgments affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the dates of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reporting periods. If management’s judgment or interpretation of the facts and circumstances relating to various transactions had been different, it is possible that different accounting policies would have been applied, thus resulting in a different presentation of the financial statements. Additionally, other companies may utilize different estimates that may impact comparability of our results of operations to those of companies in similar businesses.
Below is a discussion of the accounting policies used by the Partnership and the Joint Ventures, which are considered critical in that they may require complex judgment in their application or require estimates about matters that are inherently uncertain.
Investment in Real Estate Assets
We are required to make subjective assessments as to the useful lives of our depreciable assets. We consider the period of future benefit of the asset to determine the appropriate useful lives. These assessments have a direct impact on net income. The estimated useful lives of the Joint Ventures’ assets are depreciated using the straight-line method over the following useful lives:
In the event that the Joint Ventures utilize inappropriate useful lives or methods of depreciation, our net income would be misstated.
Evaluating the Recoverability of Real Estate Assets
We continually monitor events and changes in circumstances that could indicate that the carrying amounts of the real estate assets in which we have an ownership interest through investment in the Joint Ventures may not be recoverable. When indicators of potential impairment are present that suggest that the carrying amounts of real estate assets may not be recoverable, we assess the recoverability of the real estate assets by determining whether the respective carrying values will be recovered through the estimated undiscounted future operating cash flows expected from the use of the assets and their eventual disposition for assets held for use, or with the estimated fair values, less costs to sell, for assets held for sale. In the event that such expected undiscounted future cash flows for assets held for use, or the estimated fair values, less costs to sell, for assets held for sale, do not exceed the respective assets’ carrying values, we adjust the real estate assets to their respective estimated fair values,
pursuant to the provisions of the property, plant, and equipment accounting standard for the impairment or disposal of long-lived assets, and recognize an impairment loss. Estimated fair values are determined based on the following information, dependent upon availability: (i) recently quoted market price(s) for the subject property, or highly comparable properties, under sufficiently active and normal market conditions, or (ii) the present value of future cash flows, including estimated residual value. We have determined that there has been no impairment in the carrying value of any of our real estate assets held as of December 31, 2010.
Projections of expected future cash flows require that we estimate future market rental income amounts subsequent to the expiration of current lease agreements, property operating expenses, the number of months it takes to re-lease the property, and the number of years the property is held for investment, among other factors. The subjectivity of assumptions used in the future cash flow analysis, including discount rates, could result in an incorrect assessment of the property’s future cash flows and fair value, and could result in the misstatement of the carrying value of real estate assets held by the Joint Venture and net income of the Partnership.
Related-Party Transactions and Agreements
We have entered into agreements with Wells Capital and Wells Management, affiliates of our General Partners, or their affiliates, whereby we pay certain fees and expense reimbursements to Wells Capital, Wells Management, or their affiliates for asset management; the management and leasing of our properties; administrative services relating to accounting, property management, and other partnership administration; and incur the related expenses. See Item 13, “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions” for a description of these fees and reimbursements and amounts incurred and “Risk Factors - Conflicts of Interest” in Item 1A. of this report.
ITEM 7A.
ITEM 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK.
Since we do not borrow any money, make any foreign investments, or invest in any market risk-sensitive instruments, we are not subject to risks relating to interest rates, foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations, or the other market risks contemplated by Item 305 of Regulation S-K.
ITEM 8.
ITEM 8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA.
Our financial statements and supplementary data are detailed under Item 15(a) and filed as part of the report on the pages indicated.
ITEM 9.
ITEM 9. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE.
There were no disagreements with the Partnership’s independent public accountants during the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009.
ITEM 9A.
ITEM 9A. CONTROL AND PROCEDURES.
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
We carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of management of Wells Capital, the corporate general partner of one of our General Partners, including the Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures, as required by Rule 13a-15(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as of December 31, 2010. Based upon that evaluation, which was completed as of the end of the period covered by this Form 10-K, the Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective at December 31, 2010 in providing a reasonable level of assurance that the information we are required to disclose in reports that we file or submit under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within the time periods specified in applicable SEC rules and forms,
including providing a reasonable level of assurance that the information required to be disclosed by us in such reports is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our Principal Executive Officer and our Principal Financial Officer, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.
Management Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as a process designed by, or under the supervision of, the Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer and effected by our 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 GAAP and includes those policies and procedures that:
•
pertain to the maintenance of records that in reasonable detail accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and disposition of the assets of the Partnership;
•
provide reasonable assurance that the transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with GAAP, and that receipts and expenditures of the Partnership are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and/or members of the Financial Oversight Committee; and
•
provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the Partnership’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
Because of the inherent limitations of internal control over financial reporting, including the possibility of human error and the circumvention or overriding of controls, material misstatements may not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. In addition, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risks that controls may become inadequate because of changes and conditions or that the degree of compliance with policies or procedures may deteriorate. Accordingly, even internal controls determined to be effective can provide only reasonable assurance that the information required to be disclosed in reports filed under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is recorded, processed, summarized, and represented within the time periods required.
Our management has assessed the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting at December 31, 2010. To make this assessment, we used the criteria for effective internal control over financial reporting described in Internal Control - Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on this assessment, our management believes that our system of internal control over financial reporting met those criteria, and therefore our management has concluded that we maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2010.
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 attestation by the Partnership’s registered public accounting firm pursuant to SEC rules adopted in conformity with the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010.
Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
There have been no significant changes in our internal control over financial reporting during the quarter ended December 31, 2010 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
ITEM 9B.
ITEM 9B. OTHER INFORMATION.
For the quarter ended December 31, 2010, all items required to be disclosed under Form 8-K were reported under Form 8-K.
PART III
ITEM 10.
ITEM 10. DIRECTORS AND EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF THE REGISTRANT’S GENERAL PARTNERS.
Wells Partners
The sole general partner of Wells Partners, one of our General Partners, is Wells Capital, a Georgia corporation. The executive offices of Wells Capital are located at 6200 The Corners Parkway, Norcross, Georgia 30092. Wells Capital was organized on April 18, 1984 under the Georgia Business Corporation Code, and is primarily in the business of serving as general partner or as an affiliate to the general partner in affiliated public limited partnerships (“Wells Real Estate Funds”). Wells Capital or its affiliates serve as the advisor to Wells Real Estate Investment Trust II, Inc.; Wells Core Office Income REIT, Inc. (formerly Wells Real Estate Investment Trust III, Inc.); and Wells Timberland REIT, Inc. (collectively, the “Wells REITs”), each of which is a Maryland corporation. In these capacities, Wells Capital performs certain services for Wells Real Estate Funds and the Wells REITs, including presenting, structuring, and acquiring real estate investment opportunities; entering into leases and service contracts on acquired properties; arranging for and completing the disposition of properties; and providing other services such as accounting and administrative functions. Wells Capital is a wholly owned subsidiary of WREF, of which Leo F. Wells, III is the sole stockholder.
Leo F. Wells, III
Mr. Wells, 67, who serves as one of our General Partners, is the president, treasurer, and sole director of Wells Capital, which is the general partner of Wells Partners, our other general partner. He is also the sole stockholder, president, and sole director of WREF, the parent corporation of Wells Capital, Wells Management, Wells Investment Securities, Inc. (“WIS”), and Wells & Associates, Inc., a real estate brokerage and investment company formed in 1976 and incorporated in 1978, for which Mr. Wells serves as principal broker. He is also the president, treasurer, and sole director of:
•
Wells Management, our property manager;
•
Wells Asset Management, Inc.;
•
Wells & Associates, Inc.; and
•
Wells Development Corporation, a company he organized in 1997 to develop real properties.
Mr. Wells is a director of Wells Real Estate Investment Trust II, Inc. and the president and a director of Wells Core Office Income REIT, Inc., which are public real estate programs not listed on a securities exchange. He is also the president of Wells Timberland REIT, Inc., which is also a public real estate program not listed on a securities exchange. From 1998 to 2007, Mr. Wells served as president and Chairman of the Board of Piedmont REIT, formerly known as Wells Real Estate Investment Trust, Inc., a public, non-traded REIT sponsored by WREF, until April 16, 2007, when Piedmont REIT acquired certain entities formerly affiliated with WREF and became a self-advised REIT.
Mr. Wells was a real estate salesman and property manager from 1970 to 1973 for Roy D. Warren & Company, an Atlanta-based real estate company, and he was associated from 1973 to 1976 with Sax Gaskin Real Estate Company. From 1980 to February 1985, he served as Vice President of Hill-Johnson, Inc., a Georgia corporation engaged in the construction business. Mr. Wells holds a Bachelor of Business Administration degree in economics from the University of Georgia. Mr. Wells is an inaugural sponsor of the Financial Services Institute.
On August 26, 2003, Mr. Wells and WIS entered into a Letter of Acceptance, Waiver and Consent (“AWC”) with the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (“NASD”) relating to alleged rule violations. The AWC set forth the NASD’s findings that WIS and Mr. Wells had violated conduct rules relating to the provision of noncash compensation of more than $100 to associated persons of NASD member firms in connection with their
attendance at the annual educational and due diligence conferences sponsored by WIS in 2001 and 2002. Without admitting or denying the allegations and findings against them, WIS and Mr. Wells consented in the AWC to various findings by the NASD, which are summarized in the following paragraph:
In 2001 and 2002, WIS sponsored conferences attended by registered representatives who sold its real estate investment products. WIS also paid for certain expenses of guests of the registered representatives who attended the conferences. In 2001, WIS paid the costs of travel to the conference and meals for many of the guests, and paid the costs of playing golf for some of the registered representatives and their guests. WIS later invoiced registered representatives for the cost of golf and for travel expenses of guests, but was not fully reimbursed for such. In 2002, WIS paid for meals for the guests. WIS also conditioned most of the 2001 conference invitations on attainment by the registered representatives of a predetermined sales goal for WIS products. This conduct violated the prohibitions against payment and receipt of noncash compensation in connection with the sales of these products contained in NASD’s Conduct Rules 2710, 2810, and 3060. In addition, WIS and Mr. Wells failed to adhere to all of the terms of their written undertaking made in March 2001 not to engage in the conduct described above, and thereby engaged in conduct that was inconsistent with high standards of commercial honor and just and equitable principles of trade in violation of NASD Conduct Rule 2110.
WIS consented to a censure and Mr. Wells consented to suspension from acting in a principal capacity with an NASD member firm for one year. WIS and Mr. Wells also agreed to the imposition of a joint and several fine in the amount of $150,000. Mr. Wells’ one-year suspension from acting in a principal capacity ended on October 6, 2004. Mr. Wells continues to represent certain affiliated issuers and perform nonprincipal activities on behalf of WIS.
Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance
Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 requires the officers and directors of the general partner of our general partner, and persons who own 10% or more of any class of equity interests in the Partnership, to report their beneficial ownership of equity interests in the Partnership to the SEC. Their initial reports are required to be filed using the SEC’s Form 3, and they are required to report subsequent purchases, sales, and other changes using the SEC’s Form 4, which must be filed within two business days of most transactions. Officers, directors, and partners owning more than 10% of any class of equity interests in the Partnership are required by SEC regulations to furnish us with copies of all reports they file pursuant to Section 16(a).
Financial Oversight Committee
The Partnership does not have a board of directors or an audit committee. Accordingly, as the corporate general partner of one of the General Partners of the Partnership, Wells Capital has established a Financial Oversight Committee consisting of Douglas P. Williams, as the Principal Financial Officer; Randall D. Fretz, as the Senior Vice President of Wells Capital; and Kevin Race, as Chief of Financial Strategy. The Financial Oversight Committee serves the equivalent function of an audit committee for, among others, the following purposes: appointment, compensation, review, and oversight of the work of our independent registered public accountant, and establishing and enforcing the code of ethics. However, since neither the Partnership nor its corporate general partner has an audit committee and the Financial Oversight Committee is not independent of the Partnership or the General Partners, we do not have an “audit committee financial expert.”
Code of Ethics
The Partnership has adopted a code of ethics applicable to Wells Capital’s Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer, as well as the principal accounting officer, controller, or other employees of Wells Capital performing similar functions on behalf of the Partnership, if any. The code of ethics is contained in the Business Standards/Code of Conduct/General Policies established by WREF. You may obtain a copy of this code of ethics, without charge, upon request by calling our Client Services Department at 800-557-4830 or 770-243-8282.
ITEM 11.
ITEM 11. COMPENSATION OF GENERAL PARTNERS AND AFFILIATES.
While the Partnership is managed by the General Partners and their affiliates, it does not pay any salaries or other compensation directly to the General Partners or to any of the General Partners’ individual employees, officers, or directors. Further, the Partnership does not employ, and is not managed by, any of its own employees, officers, or directors. Accordingly, no compensation has been awarded to, earned by, or paid to any such individuals in connection with the operation or management of the Partnership. Due to our current management structure and our lack of any employees, officers, or directors, no discussion and analysis of compensation paid by the Partnership, tabular information concerning salaries, bonuses, and other types of compensation to executive officers or directors of the Partnership, or other information regarding compensation policies and practices of the Partnership has been included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
See Item 13, “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions,” for a description of the fees incurred by the Partnership payable to affiliates of the General Partners during the year ended December 31, 2010.
ITEM 12.
ITEM 12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT.
(a) No limited partner owns beneficially more than 5% of any class of the outstanding units of the Partnership.
(b) Set forth below is the security ownership of management as of February 28, 2011.
Title of Class
Name of
Beneficial Owner
Amount and Nature of
Beneficial Ownership
Percent of Class
Limited Partnership Units
Leo F. Wells, III
9,140.881 Units(1)
Less than 1%
(1) Leo F. Wells, III owns 4,140.881 Class A Units through an individual retirement account and 5,000 Class A Units through Wells Capital.
(c) No arrangements exist which would, upon execution thereof, result in a change in control of the Partnership.
ITEM 13.
ITEM 13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS.
The compensation and fees we pay to our General Partners or their affiliates in connection with our operations are described below:
Interest in Partnership Cash Flow and Net Sale Proceeds
The General Partners are entitled to receive a subordinated participation in net cash flow from operations equal to 10% of net cash flow after the limited partners holding Class A Units have received preferential distributions equal to 10% of their adjusted capital accounts in each fiscal year. The General Partners are also entitled to receive a subordinated participation in net sales proceeds and net financing proceeds equal to 20% of residual proceeds available for distribution after limited partners holding Class A Units have received a return of their adjusted capital contributions plus a 10% cumulative return on their adjusted capital contributions, and limited partners holding Class B Units have received a return of their adjusted capital contributions plus a 15% cumulative return on their adjusted capital contributions; provided, however, that in no event shall the General Partners receive in the aggregate in excess of 15% of net sales proceeds and net financing proceeds remaining after payments to limited partners from such proceeds of amounts equal to the sum of their adjusted capital contributions plus a 6% cumulative return on their adjusted capital contributions. The General Partners did not receive any distributions of net cash from operations or net sale proceeds for the year ended December 31, 2010.
Management and Leasing Fees
In accordance with the property management and leasing agreement, Wells Management, an affiliate of the General Partners, receives compensation for asset management and the management and leasing of our properties
owned through Joint Ventures equal to (a) 3% for management services and 3% for leasing services of the gross revenues collected monthly; plus a separate fee for the one-time initial lease-up of newly constructed properties in an amount not to exceed the fee customarily charged in arm’s-length transactions by others rendering similar services in the same geographic area for similar properties, which is assessed periodically based on market studies, or (b) in the case of commercial properties that are leased on a long-term net basis (ten or more years), 1% of the gross revenues except for initial leasing fees equal to 3% of the gross revenues over the first five years of the lease term. Management and leasing fees are paid by the Joint Ventures and, accordingly, are included in equity in income of joint ventures in the accompanying statement of operations. Our share of management and leasing fees and lease acquisition costs incurred though the Joint Ventures that are payable to Wells Management is $70,879, $77,119, and $81,243 for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009, and 2008, respectively.
Administrative Reimbursements
Wells Capital, the corporate general partner of Wells Partners, one of the Partnership’s General Partners, and Wells Management perform certain administrative services for the Partnership, relating to accounting and other partnership administration, and incurs the related expenses. Such expenses are allocated among other entities affiliated with the General Partners based on estimates of the amount of time dedicated to each fund by individual administrative personnel. In the opinion of the General Partners, this allocation is a reasonable estimation of such expenses. We incurred administrative expenses of $113,093, $101,892, and $97,012 payable to Wells Capital and Wells Management for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009, and 2008, respectively.
Real Estate Commissions
In connection with the sale of our properties, the General Partners or their affiliates may receive commissions not exceeding the lesser of (a) 50% of the commissions customarily charged by other brokers in arm’s-length transactions involving comparable properties in the same geographic area or (b) 3% of the gross sales price of the property, and provided that payments of such commissions will be made only after limited partners have received prior distributions totaling 100% of their capital contributions plus a 6% cumulative return on their adjusted capital contributions. No real estate commissions were paid to the General Partners or affiliates for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009, or 2008.
Procedures Regarding Related-Party Transactions
Our policies and procedures governing related-party transactions with our General Partners and their affiliates, including, but not limited to, all transactions required to be disclosed under Item 404(a) of Regulation S-K, are restricted or severely limited by the provisions of Articles XI, XII, XIII, and XIV of our partnership agreement, which has been filed with the SEC. No transaction has been entered into with either of our General Partners or their affiliates that does not comply with those policies and procedures. In addition, in any transaction involving a potential conflict of interest, including any transaction that would require disclosure under Item 404(a) of Regulation S-K, our General Partners must view such a transaction after taking into consideration their fiduciary duties to the Partnership.
ITEM 14.
ITEM 14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES.
Preapproval Policies and Procedures
The Financial Oversight Committee preapproves all auditing and permissible nonauditing services provided by our independent registered public accountants. The approval may be given as part of the Financial Oversight Committee’s approval of the scope of the engagement of our independent registered public accountants or on an individual basis. The preapproval of certain audit-related services and certain nonauditing services not exceeding enumerated dollar limits may be delegated to one or more of the Financial Oversight Committee’s members, but the member to whom such authority is delegated shall report any preapproval decisions to the full Financial Oversight Committee. Our independent registered public accountants may not be retained to perform the nonauditing services specified in Section 10A(g) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Fees Paid to the Independent Registered Public Accountants
Frazier & Deeter, LLC serves as our independent registered public accountants and has provided audit services since September 22, 2006. All such fees are recognized in the period to which the services relate. A portion of such fees is allocated to the joint ventures in which the Partnership invests. The aggregate fees billed to the Partnership for professional accounting services by Frazier & Deeter, LLC, including the audit of the Partnership’s annual financial statements, for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009, are set forth in the table below.
For purposes of the preceding table, the professional fees are classified as follows:
•
Audit Fees - These are fees for professional services performed for the audit of our annual financial statements and review of financial statements included in our Form 10-Q filings, services that are normally provided by independent registered public accountants in connection with statutory and regulatory filings or engagements, and services that generally independent registered public accountants reasonably can provide, such as statutory audits, attest services, consents, and assistance with and review of documents filed with the SEC.
•
Audit-Related Fees - These are fees for assurance and related services that traditionally are performed by independent registered public accountants, such as due diligence related to acquisitions and dispositions, internal control reviews, attestation services that are not required by statute or regulation, and consultation concerning financial accounting and reporting standards.
•
Tax Fees - These are fees for all professional services performed by professional staff in our independent registered public accountant’s tax division, except those services related to the audit of our financial statements. These include fees for tax compliance, tax planning, and tax advice. Tax compliance involves preparation of any federal, state or local tax returns. Tax planning and tax advice encompass a diverse range of services, including assistance with tax audits and appeals, tax advice related to acquisitions and dispositions of assets, and requests for rulings or technical advice from taxing authorities.
•
Other Fees - These are fees for other permissible work performed that do not meet the above-described categories, including assistance with internal audit plans and risk assessments.
During the fiscal years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009, 100% of the services performed by Frazier & Deeter, LLC described above under the captions “Audit Fees,” “Audit-Related Fees,” “Tax Fees,” and “Other Fees” were approved in advance by a member of the Financial Oversight Committee. In addition, fees were incurred for tax services performed by an accounting firm separate from the Partnership’s independent registered public accountants in each year presented.
PART IV
ITEM 15.
ITEM 15. EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES.
(a)1. The financial statements are contained on pages through of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, and the list of the financial statements contained herein is set forth on page, which is hereby incorporated by reference.
(b) The Exhibits filed in response to Item 601 of Regulation S-K are listed on the Exhibit Index attached hereto.
(c) See (a) 1 above.
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND VIII, L.P.
(Registrant)
By:
WELLS PARTNERS, L.P.
(General Partner)
By:
WELLS CAPITAL
(Corporate General Partner)
March 22, 2011
/S/ LEO F. WELLS, III
Leo F. Wells, III
President, Principal Executive Officer,
and Sole Director of Wells Capital, Inc.
March 22, 2011
/S/ DOUGLAS P. WILLIAMS
Douglas P. Williams
Principal Financial Officer
of Wells Capital, Inc.
WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND VIII, L.P.
Page
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The General Partners of
Wells Real Estate Fund VIII, L.P.
We have audited the accompanying balance sheets of Wells Real Estate Fund VIII, L.P. (the “Partnership”) as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, and the related statements of operations, partners’ capital, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2010. 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 Wells Real Estate Fund VIII, L.P. as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2010, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
/s/ Frazier & Deeter, LLC
Atlanta, Georgia
March 22, 2011
Page
WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND VIII, L.P.
BALANCE SHEETS
DECEMBER 31, 2010 AND 2009
ASSETS
LIABILITIES AND PARTNERS’ CAPITAL
See accompanying notes.
Page
WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND VIII, L.P.
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
FOR THE YEARS ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 2010, 2009, AND 2008
See accompanying notes.
Page
WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND VIII, L.P.
STATEMENTS OF PARTNERS’ CAPITAL
FOR THE YEARS ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 2010, 2009, AND 2008
See accompanying notes.
Page
WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND VIII, L.P.
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
FOR THE YEARS ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 2010, 2009, AND 2008
See accompanying notes.
Page
WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND VIII, L.P.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2010, 2009, AND 2008
1. ORGANIZATION AND BUSINESS
Wells Real Estate Fund VIII, L.P. (the “Partnership”) is a Georgia public limited partnership with Leo Wells, III and Wells Partners, L.P. (“Wells Partners”), a Georgia nonpublic limited partnership, serving as its general partners (collectively, “General Partners”). Wells Capital, Inc. (“Wells Capital”) serves as the corporate general partner of Wells Partners. Wells Capital is a wholly owned subsidiary of Wells Real Estate Funds, Inc. Leo F. Wells, III is the president and sole director of Wells Capital and the president, sole director, and sole owner of Wells Real Estate Funds, Inc. The Partnership was formed on August 15, 1994 for the purpose of acquiring, developing, owning, operating, improving, leasing, and otherwise managing income-producing commercial properties for investment purposes. Upon subscription, limited partners elected to have their units treated as Class A Units or Class B Units. Limited partners have the right to change their prior elections to have some or all of their units treated as Class A Units or Class B Units one time during each quarterly accounting period. Limited partners may vote to, among other things, (a) amend the partnership agreement, subject to certain limitations; (b) change the business purpose or investment objectives of the Partnership; and (c) add or remove a general partner. A majority vote on any of the above-described matters will bind the Partnership, without the concurrence of the General Partners. Each limited partnership unit has equal voting rights, regardless of class.
On January 6, 1995, the Partnership commenced a public offering of up to $35,000,000 of Class A or Class B limited partnership units ($10 per unit) pursuant to a Registration Statement on Form S-11 filed under the Securities Act of 1933. The offering was terminated on January 4, 1996, at which time the Partnership had sold approximately 2,613,534 Class A Units and 590,735 Class B Units representing total limited partner capital contributions of $32,042,689.
During the periods presented, the Partnership owned interests in the following joint venture (the “Joint Venture”) and properties:
Joint Venture
Joint Venture Partners
Properties
Fund VIII and Fund IX Associates
(“Fund VIII-IX Associates”)
•Wells Real Estate Fund VIII, L.P.
•Wells Real Estate Fund IX, L.P.
1. US Cellular Building
A four-story office building located in Madison, Wisconsin
2. 305 Interlocken Parkway
A two-story office building located in Broomfield, Colorado
Wells Real Estate Fund IX, L.P. is affiliated with the Partnership through common general partners. Each of the properties described above was acquired on an all-cash basis.
2. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Basis of Presentation
The Partnership’s financial statements are prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”).
Page
Use of Estimates
Preparation of the Partnership’s financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues, and expenses and related disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities in the financial statements and accompanying notes. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
Investment in Joint Venture
The Partnership has evaluated the Joint Venture and concluded that it is not a variable-interest entity. The Partnership does not have control over the operations of the Joint Venture; however, it does exercise significant influence. Approval by the Partnership as well as the other joint venture partners is required for any major decision or any action that would materially affect the Joint Venture or their real property investments. Accordingly, the Partnership accounts for its investment in the Joint Venture using the equity method of accounting, whereby original investments are recorded at cost and subsequently adjusted for contributions, distributions, and net income (loss) attributable to the Partnership. Pursuant to the terms of the joint venture agreement, all income (loss) and distributions are allocated to joint venture partners in accordance with their respective ownership interests. Distributions of net cash from operations, if available, are generally distributed to the joint venture partners on a quarterly basis.
Evaluating the Recoverability of Real Estate Assets
The Partnership continually monitors events and changes in circumstances that could indicate that the carrying amounts of the real estate assets owned through the Partnership’s investment in the Joint Venture may not be recoverable. When indicators of potential impairment are present which suggest that the carrying amounts of real estate assets may not be recoverable, management assesses the recoverability of the real estate assets by determining whether the respective carrying values will be recovered through the estimated undiscounted future operating cash flows expected from the use of the assets and their eventual disposition for assets held for use, or with the estimated fair values, less costs to sell, for assets held for sale. In the event that the expected undiscounted future cash flows for assets held for use, or the estimated fair value, less costs to sell, for assets held for sale do not exceed the respective asset carrying value, management adjusts the real estate assets to their respective estimated fair values, pursuant to the provisions of the property, plant, and equipment accounting standard for the impairment or disposal of long-lived assets and recognizes an impairment loss. Estimated fair values are determined based on the following information, dependent upon availability: (i) recently quoted market price(s) for the subject property, or highly comparable properties, under sufficiently active and normal market conditions, or (ii) the present value of future cash flows, including estimated residual value.
While various techniques and assumptions can be used to estimate fair value depending on the nature of the asset or liability, the accounting standard for fair value measurements and disclosures describes three levels of inputs that may be used to measure fair value. Level 1 inputs are quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the Partnership has the ability to access. Level 2 inputs are inputs other than quoted prices included in Level 1 that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly. Level 2 inputs may include quoted prices for similar assets and liabilities in active markets, as well as inputs that are observable for the asset or liability (other than quoted prices), such as interest rates, foreign exchange rates, and yield curves that are observable at commonly quoted intervals. Level 3 inputs are unobservable inputs for the asset or liability, which are typically based on an entity’s own assumptions, as little, if any, related market activity or information is available. Examples of Level 3 inputs include estimated holding periods, discount rates, market capitalization rates, expected lease rental rates, timing of new leases, and sales prices; additionally, the Partnership may assign an estimated probability-weighting to more than one fair value estimate based on the Partnership’s assessment of the likelihood of the respective underlying assumptions occurring as of the evaluation date. In instances where the determination of the fair value measurement is based on inputs from different levels of the fair value hierarchy, the level in the fair value hierarchy within which the entire fair value measurement falls is based on the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement in its
Page
entirety. The Partnership’s assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement in its entirety requires judgment and considers factors specific to the asset or liability. The accounting standard for fair value measurements and disclosures was applied to the Partnership’s outstanding nonfinancial assets and nonfinancial liabilities effective January 1, 2009.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
The Partnership considers all highly liquid instruments purchased with an original maturity of three months or less to be cash equivalents. Cash equivalents include cash and short-term investments. Short-term investments are stated at cost, which approximates fair value, and consist of investments in money market accounts.
Distributions of Net Cash from Operations
Net cash from operations, if available, is generally distributed quarterly to the limited partners as follows:
•
First, to all limited partners holding Class A Units on a per-unit basis until such limited partners have received distributions equal to a 10% per annum return on their respective net capital contributions, as defined.
•
Second, to the General Partners until the General Partners have received distributions equal to 10% of the total cumulative distributions paid by the Partnership.
•
Third, to the limited partners holding Class A Units on a per-unit basis and the General Partners allocated on a basis of 90% and 10%, respectively.
No distributions of net cash from operations will be made to limited partners holding Class B Units.
Distribution of Net Sale Proceeds
Upon sales of properties, unless reserved, net sale proceeds are distributed in the following order:
•
In the event that the particular property sold is sold for a price less than its original property purchase price, to the limited partners holding Class A Units until they have received an amount equal to the excess of the original property purchase price over the price for which the property was sold, limited to the amount of depreciation, amortization, and cost recovery deductions taken by the limited partners holding Class B Units with respect to such property;
•
To limited partners holding units, which at any time have been treated as Class B Units, until each limited partner has received an amount necessary to equal the net cash available for distribution previously received by the limited partners holding Class A Units on a per-unit basis;
•
To all limited partners on a per-unit basis until they have received 100% of their respective net capital contributions, as defined;
•
To all limited partners on a per-unit basis until they have received a cumulative 10% per annum return on their respective net capital contributions, as defined;
•
To limited partners on a per-unit basis until they have received an amount equal to their respective preferential limited partners’ returns (defined as the sum of a 10% per annum cumulative return on net capital contributions for all periods during which the units were treated as Class A Units and a 15% per annum cumulative return on net capital contributions for all periods during which the units were treated as Class B Units);
•
To the General Partners until they have received 100% of their respective capital contributions; in the event that the limited partners have received aggregate cash distributions from the Partnership over the life of their respective investments in excess of a return of their respective net capital contributions, plus the preferential limited partner return, the General Partners shall receive an additional sum equal to 25% of such excess; and
•
Thereafter, 80% to the limited partners on a per-unit basis and 20% to the General Partners.
Page
Allocations of Net Income, Net Loss, and Gain on Sale
For the purpose of determining allocations per the partnership agreement, net income is defined as net income recognized by the Partnership, excluding deductions for depreciation, amortization, and cost recovery and the gain on the sale of assets. Net income, as defined, of the Partnership is generally allocated each year in the same proportions that net cash from operations is distributed to the limited partners holding Class A Units and the General Partners. To the extent the Partnership’s net income in any year exceeds net cash from operations, it will be allocated 99% to the limited partners and 1% to the General Partners.
Net loss, depreciation, and amortization deductions for each fiscal year will be allocated as follows: (a) 99% to the limited partners holding Class B Units and 1% to the General Partners until their capital accounts are reduced to zero; (b) then, to any partner having a positive balance in his capital account in an amount not to exceed such positive balance; and (c) thereafter, to the General Partners.
Gain on the sale or exchange of the Partnership’s properties will be allocated generally in the same manner that the net proceeds from such sale are distributed to partners after the following allocations are made, if applicable: (a) allocations made pursuant to the qualified income offset provisions of the partnership agreement; (b) allocations to partners having negative capital accounts until all negative capital accounts have been restored to zero; and (c) allocations to limited partners holding Class B Units in amounts equal to the deductions for depreciation and amortization previously allocated to them with respect to the specific partnership property sold, but not in excess of the amount of gain on sale recognized by the Partnership with respect to the sale of such property.
Income Taxes
The Partnership is not subject to federal or state income taxes; therefore, none have been provided for in the accompanying financial statements. The partners are required to include their respective shares of profits and losses in their individual income tax returns.
Recent Accounting Pronouncement
In January 2010, the Financial Accounting Standards Board clarified previously issued GAAP and issued new requirements related to Accounting Standards Codification Topic Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures (“ASU 2010-6”). The clarification component includes disclosures about inputs and valuation techniques used in determining fair value, and providing fair value measurement information for each class of assets and liabilities. The new requirements relate to disclosures of transfers between the levels in the fair value hierarchy, as well as the individual components in the rollforward of the lowest level (Level 3) in the fair value hierarchy. This change in GAAP became effective for the Partnership beginning January 1, 2010, except for the provision concerning the rollforward of activity of the Level 3 fair value measurement, which will become effective for the Partnership on January 1, 2011. The adoption of ASU 2010-6 has not had, and is not expected to have, a material impact on the Partnership’s financial statements or disclosures.
3. INVESTMENT IN JOINT VENTURE
Due from Joint Venture
As of December 31, 2010 and 2009, due from joint venture represents the Partnership’s share of operating cash flow to be distributed from Fund VIII-IX Associates for the fourth quarters of 2010 and 2009, respectively.
Page
Summary of Investments
The Partnership’s investments and approximate ownership percentages in the Joint Venture as of December 31, 2010 and 2009 are summarized below:
Summary of Activity
Roll-forwards of the Partnership’s investment in the Joint Venture for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009 are presented below:
Summary of Financial Information
Condensed financial information for the Joint Venture in which the Partnership held an interest as of December 31, 2010 and 2009 and for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009, and 2008, is presented below:
The Partnership allocates its share of net income, net loss, and gain on sale generated by the properties owned by the Joint Venture to its Class A and Class B limited partners pursuant to the partnership agreement provisions outlined in Note 2. The components of loss from discontinued operations recognized by the Joint Venture are provided below:
Page
4. RELATED-PARTY TRANSACTIONS
Management and Leasing Fees
The Partnership entered into a property management and leasing agreement with Wells Management Company, Inc. (“Wells Management”), an affiliate of the General Partners. In accordance with the property management and leasing agreement, Wells Management receives compensation for the management and leasing of the Partnership’s properties owned through the Joint Venture, equal to (a) 3% for management services and 3% for leasing services of the gross revenues collected monthly; plus a separate fee for the one-time initial lease-up of newly constructed properties in an amount not to exceed the fee customarily charged in arm’s-length transactions by others rendering similar services in the same geographic area for similar properties, which is assessed periodically based on market studies; or (b) in the case of commercial properties leased on a long-term net basis (10 or more years), 1% of the gross revenues except for initial leasing fees equal to 3% of the gross revenues over the first five years of the lease term. Management and leasing fees are paid by the Joint Venture and, accordingly, are included in equity in income of joint venture in the accompanying statements of operations. The Partnership’s share of management and leasing fees and lease acquisition costs incurred through the Joint Venture that are payable to Wells Management is $70,879, $77,119, and $81,243 for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009, and 2008, respectively.
Administrative Reimbursements
Wells Capital, the corporate general partner of Wells Partners, one of the Partnership’s general partners, and Wells Management perform certain administrative services for the Partnership, relating to accounting and other partnership administration, and incur the related expenses. Such expenses are allocated among other entities affiliated with the General Partners based on estimates of the amount of time dedicated to each fund by individual administrative personnel. In the opinion of the General Partners, this allocation is a reasonable estimation of such expenses. The Partnership incurred administrative expenses of $113,093, $101,892, and $97,012 payable to Wells Capital and Wells Management for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009, and 2008, respectively, which are included in general and administrative expenses in the accompanying statements of operations. In addition, Wells Capital pays for certain operating expenses of the Partnership (“bill-backs”) directly, and generally invoices the Partnership for the reimbursement thereof on a quarterly basis. As presented in the accompanying balance sheets, due to affiliates as of December 31, 2010 and 2009 represents administrative reimbursements and/or bill-backs due to Wells Capital and/or Wells Management.
5. PER-UNIT AMOUNTS
Income (loss) per limited partnership unit amounts are calculated based upon weighted-average units outstanding during the respective periods. Income (loss) per limited partnership unit, as presented in the accompanying financial statements, will vary from the per-unit amounts attributable to the individual investors due to the differences between the GAAP and tax basis treatment of certain items of income and expense and the fact that, within the respective classes of Class A Units and Class B Units, individual units have different characteristics including capital bases, cumulative operating and net property sales proceeds distributions, and cumulative earnings allocations as a result of, among other things, the ability of unit holders to elect to be treated as Class A Units or Class B Units, or to change their prior elections, on a quarterly basis.
For the reasons mentioned above, distributions of net sale proceeds per unit also vary among individual unit holders. Distributions of net sale proceeds have been calculated at the investor level pursuant to the partnership agreement and allocated between the Class A and Class B limited partners in the period paid. Accordingly, distributions of net sale proceeds per unit, as presented in the accompanying financial statements, vary from the per-unit amounts attributable to the individual investors.
Page
6. INCOME TAX BASIS NET INCOME AND PARTNERS’ CAPITAL
A reconciliation of the Partnership’s financial statement net income to net income presented in accordance with the federal income tax basis of accounting is as follows for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009, and 2008:
A reconciliation of the partners’ capital balances, as presented in the accompanying financial statements, to partners’ capital balances, as presented in accordance with the federal income tax basis of accounting, is as follows for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009, and 2008:
Page
7. QUARTERLY RESULTS (UNAUDITED)
A summary of the unaudited quarterly financial information for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009 is presented below:
(a) The quarterly per-unit amounts have been calculated using actual income (loss) for the respective quarters. Conversely, the corresponding annual income (loss) per-unit amounts have been calculated assuming that income (loss) was earned ratably over the year. As a result, the sum of these quarterly per-unit amounts does not equal the respective annual per-unit amount presented in the accompanying financial statements.
Page
(b) The quarterly per-unit amounts have been calculated using actual distribution for the respective quarters. Conversely, the corresponding distributions-per-unit amounts have been calculated assuming that the total distribution was earned ratably over the year. As a result, the sum of these quarterly per-unit amounts does not equal the respective annual per-unit amount presented in the accompanying financial statements.
8. GENERAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS
General and administrative costs for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009, and 2008 are composed of the following items:
Page
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The General Partners of
Fund VIII and Fund IX Associates:
We have audited the accompanying balance sheets of Fund VIII and Fund IX Associates (the “Joint Venture”) as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, and the related statements of operations, partners’ capital, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2010. Our audits also included the financial statement schedule listed in the index at Item 15(a). These financial statements and schedule are the responsibility of the Joint Venture’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements and schedule 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 Joint Venture’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 Joint Venture’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 Fund VIII and Fund IX Associates as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2010, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. Also, in our opinion, the related financial statement schedule, when considered in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole, presents fairly in all material respects the information set forth therein.
/s/ Frazier & Deeter, LLC
Atlanta, Georgia
March 22, 2011
Page
FUND VIII AND FUND IX ASSOCIATES
BALANCE SHEETS
DECEMBER 31, 2010 AND 2009
ASSETS
LIABILITIES AND PARTNERS’ CAPITAL
See accompanying notes.
Page
FUND VIII AND FUND IX ASSOCIATES
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
FOR THE YEARS ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 2010, 2009, AND 2008
See accompanying notes.
Page
FUND VIII AND FUND IX ASSOCIATES
STATEMENTS OF PARTNERS’ CAPITAL
FOR THE YEARS ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 2010, 2009, AND 2008
See accompanying notes.
Page
FUND VIII AND FUND IX ASSOCIATES
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
FOR THE YEARS ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 2010, 2009, AND 2008
See accompanying notes.
Page
FUND VIII AND FUND IX ASSOCIATES
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2010, 2009, AND 2008
1. ORGANIZATION AND BUSINESS
In June 1996, Wells Real Estate Fund VIII, L.P. (“Fund VIII”) entered into a Georgia general partnership with Wells Real Estate Fund IX, L.P. (“Fund IX”) to form Fund VIII and Fund IX Associates (the “Joint Venture”). The general partners of Fund VIII and Fund IX are Leo F. Wells, III and Wells Partners, L.P., a private Georgia limited partnership.
The Joint Venture was formed to acquire, develop and operate real properties. On June 17, 1996, the Joint Venture purchased a 7.09-acre parcel of land located in Madison, Wisconsin, on which an approximate 102,000 rentable square foot, four-story office building, the US Cellular Building, was developed and constructed. On October 10, 1996, the Joint Venture purchased a 40,000 square foot, one-story office building, 14079 Senlac Drive, located in Farmers Branch, Texas. On January 10, 1997, the Joint Venture purchased an approximately 65,000 square foot, two-story office building, 15253 Bake Parkway, located in Irvine, California. On February 20, 1997, the Joint Venture purchased an approximate 49,000 square foot, two-story partially completed office building, 305 Interlocken Parkway, located in Broomfield, Colorado.
On June 15, 2000, the Joint Venture entered into a joint venture with Piedmont Operating Partnership, LP (“Piedmont OP”), formerly known as Wells Operating Partnership, L.P., to form Fund VIII-IX-REIT Joint Venture. Piedmont OP is a Delaware limited partnership with Piedmont Office Realty Trust, Inc. (“Piedmont REIT”), formerly known as Wells Real Estate Investment Trust, Inc., serving as its general partner. Piedmont REIT is a Maryland corporation that qualifies as a real estate investment trust. Fund VIII-IX-REIT Joint Venture was formed to acquire, develop and operate real properties. During 2000, the Joint Venture contributed, at cost, 15253 Bake Parkway to Fund VIII-IX-REIT Joint Venture, and Piedmont OP contributed approximately $1,300,000 to fund building improvements. On December 2, 2004, Fund VIII-IX-REIT Joint Venture sold 15253 Bake Parkway to an unrelated third party for a gross sales price of $12,400,000. As a result of the sale, the Joint Venture received net sale proceeds of approximately $10,014,000 and was allocated a gain of approximately $2,301,000. During the third quarter of 2006, Fund VIII-IX-REIT Joint Venture wound up its affairs by, among other things, collecting the outstanding receivables, satisfying outstanding payables, and distributing all residual cash balances to the joint venture partners. Fund VIII-IX-REIT Joint Venture was terminated in March 2007 in accordance with the relevant dissolution and termination provisions of the Georgia Uniform Partnership Act.
On November 29, 2007, the Joint Venture sold 14079 Senlac Drive to an unrelated third party for a gross selling price of approximately $5,410,000. As a result of the sale, the Joint Venture recognized a gain of approximately $1,905,000 and received net sale proceeds of approximately $5,107,000.
2. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Basis of Presentation
The Joint Venture’s financial statements are prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”).
Use of Estimates
The preparation of the Joint Venture’s financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues, and expenses and related disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities in the financial statements and accompanying notes. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
Page
Real Estate Assets
Real estate assets are stated at cost, less accumulated depreciation. Amounts capitalized to real estate assets consist of the cost of acquisition or construction, application of acquisition fees incurred, and any tenant improvements or major improvements and betterments which extend the useful life of the related asset. The Joint Venture considers the period of future benefit of the asset to determine the appropriate useful lives. These assessments have a direct impact on net income. Upon receiving notification of a tenant’s intention to terminate a lease, undepreciated tenant improvements are written off to lease termination expense. All repairs and maintenance are expensed as incurred.
The Joint Venture’s real estate assets are depreciated using the straight-line method over the following useful lives:
Evaluating the Recoverability of Real Estate Assets
Management continually monitors events and changes in circumstances that could indicate that the carrying amounts of the real estate assets owned by the Joint Venture may not be recoverable. When indicators of potential impairment are present, which suggest that the carrying amounts of the real estate assets may not be recoverable, management assesses the recoverability of the real estate assets by determining whether the respective carrying values will be recovered through the estimated undiscounted future operating cash flows expected from the use of the assets and their eventual disposition for assets held for use, or with the estimated fair values, less costs to sell, for assets held for sale. In the event that such expected undiscounted future cash flows for assets held for use or the estimated fair values, less costs to sell, for assets held for sale do not exceed the respective assets’ carrying values, management adjusts the real estate assets to the respective estimated fair values, pursuant to the provisions of the property, plant, and equipment accounting standard for the impairment or disposal of long-lived assets, and recognizes an impairment loss. Estimated fair values are determined based on the following information, dependent upon availability: (i) recently quoted market price(s) for the subject property, or highly comparable properties, under sufficiently active and normal market conditions, or (ii) the present value of future cash flows, including estimated residual value. The Joint Venture has determined that there has been no impairment in the carrying value of any of the real estate assets held as of December 31, 2010.
While various techniques and assumptions can be used to estimate fair value depending on the nature of the asset or liability, the accounting standard for fair value measurements and disclosures describes three levels of inputs that may be used to measure fair value. Level 1 inputs are quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the Joint Venture has the ability to access. Level 2 inputs are inputs other than quoted prices included in Level 1 that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly. Level 2 inputs may include quoted prices for similar assets and liabilities in active markets, as well as inputs that are observable for the asset or liability (other than quoted prices), such as interest rates, foreign exchange rates, and yield curves that are observable at commonly quoted intervals. Level 3 inputs are unobservable inputs for the asset or liability, which is typically based on an entity’s own assumptions, as there is little, if any, related market activity or information. Examples of Level 3 inputs include estimated holding periods, discount rates, market capitalization rates, expected lease rental rates, timing of new leases, and sales prices; additionally, the Joint Venture may assign an estimated probability-weighting to more than one fair value estimate based on the Joint Venture’s assessment of the likelihood of the respective underlying assumptions occurring as of the evaluation date. In instances where the determination of the fair value measurement is based on inputs from different levels of the fair value hierarchy, the level in the fair value hierarchy within which the entire fair value measurement falls is based on the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement in its entirety. The Joint
Page
Venture’s assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement in its entirety requires judgment, and considers factors specific to the asset or liability. The accounting standard for fair value measurements and disclosures was applied to the Joint Venture’s outstanding nonfinancial assets and nonfinancial liabilities effective January 1, 2009.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
The Joint Venture considers all highly liquid investments purchased with an original maturity of three months or less to be cash equivalents. Cash equivalents include cash and short-term investments. Short-term investments are stated at cost, which approximates fair value, and consist of investments in money market accounts.
Tenant Receivables
Tenant receivables are comprised of rental and reimbursement billings due from tenants and the cumulative amount of future adjustments necessary to present rental income using the straight-line method. Upon receiving notification of a tenant’s intention to terminate a lease, unamortized straight-line rent receivables are written off to lease termination expense. Tenant receivables are recorded at the original amount earned, less an allowance for any doubtful accounts, which approximates fair value. Management assesses the collectibility of tenant receivables on an ongoing basis and provides for allowances as such balances, or portions thereof, become uncollectible. No such allowances have been recorded as of December 31, 2010 or 2009.
Deferred Leasing Costs, net
Deferred lease costs may include (i) costs incurred to procure leases, which are capitalized and recognized as amortization expense on a straight-line basis over the terms of the lease, and (ii) common area maintenance costs that are recoverable from tenants under the terms of the existing leases; such costs are capitalized and recognized as operating expenses over the shorter of the lease term or the recovery period provided for in the lease. The remaining unamortized balance of deferred leasing costs will be amortized over a weighted-average period of approximately two years. Upon receiving notification of a tenant’s intention to terminate a lease, unamortized deferred leasing costs are written-off to lease termination expense.
Other Assets
Other assets is comprised of prepaid expenses. Management assesses the collectibility of other assets on an ongoing basis and provides for allowances as such balances, or portions thereof, become uncollectible. Prepaid expenses are recognized as the related services are provided. Balances without a future economic benefit are written off as they are identified. No such allowances have been recorded as of December 31, 2010 or 2009.
Allocation of Income and Distributions
Pursuant to the terms of the joint venture agreement, income and distributions are allocated to the joint venture partners based upon their respective ownership interests as determined by relative cumulative capital contributions, as defined. Fund VIII and Fund IX held ownership interests in the Joint Venture of approximately 55% and 45%, respectively, for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009. Net cash from operations is generally distributed to the joint venture partners on a quarterly basis.
Revenue Recognition
The Joint Venture’s leases typically include renewal options, escalation provisions and provisions requiring tenants to reimburse the Joint Venture for a pro rata share of operating costs incurred. All of the Joint Venture’s leases are classified as operating leases, and the related rental income, including scheduled rental rate increases (other than scheduled increases based on the Consumer Price Index) is recognized on a straight-line basis over the terms of the respective leases. Tenant reimbursements are recognized as revenue in the period that the related
Page
operating cost is incurred and are billed to tenants pursuant to the terms of the underlying leases. Rents and tenant reimbursements collected in advance are recorded as deferred income in the accompanying balance sheets. Lease termination income is recognized when the tenant loses the right to lease the space and the Joint Venture has satisfied all obligations under the related lease or lease termination agreement.
The Joint Venture records the sale of real estate assets pursuant to the provisions of the property, plant, and equipment accounting standard for real estate sales. Accordingly, gains are recognized upon completing the sale and, among other things, determining the sale price and transferring all of the risks and rewards of ownership without significant continuing involvement with the seller. Recognition of all or a portion of the gain would be deferred until both of these conditions are met. Losses are recognized in full as of the sale date.
Income Taxes
The Joint Venture is not subject to federal or state income taxes; therefore, none have been provided for in the accompanying financial statements. The partners of Fund VIII and Fund IX are required to include their respective share of profits and losses from the Joint Venture in their individual income tax returns.
Recent Accounting Pronouncement
In January 2010, the Financial Accounting Standards Board clarified previously issued GAAP and issued new requirements related to Accounting Standards Codification Topic Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures (“ASU 2010-6”). The clarification component includes disclosures about inputs and valuation techniques used in determining fair value, and providing fair value measurement information for each class of assets and liabilities. The new requirements relate to disclosures of transfers between the levels in the fair value hierarchy, as well as the individual components in the rollforward of the lowest level (Level 3) in the fair value hierarchy. This change in GAAP became effective for the Joint Venture beginning January 1, 2010, except for the provision concerning the rollforward of activity of the Level 3 fair value measurement, which will become effective for the Joint Venture on January 1, 2011. The adoption of ASU 2010-6 has not had, and is not expected to have, a material impact on the Joint Venture’s financial statements or disclosures.
3. RELATED-PARTY TRANSACTIONS
Management and Leasing Fees
Fund VIII and Fund IX entered into property management and leasing agreements with Wells Management Company, Inc. (“Wells Management”), an affiliate of their general partners. In accordance with the property management and leasing agreements, Wells Management receives compensation for the management and leasing of the Joint Venture’s properties, the Joint Venture will generally pay Wells Management fees equal to (a) of the gross revenues collected monthly, 3% for management services and 3% for leasing services, plus a separate fee for the one-time lease-up of newly constructed properties in an amount not to exceed the fee customarily charged in arm’s-length transactions by others rendering similar services in the same geographic area for similar properties, which is assessed periodically based on market studies; or (b) in the case of commercial properties which are leased on a long-term net basis (10 or more years), 1% of the gross revenues, except for initial leasing fees equal to 3% of the gross revenues over the first five years of the lease term. During the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009, and 2008, the Joint Venture incurred management and leasing fees that are payable to Wells Management of $129,342, $140,728, and $148,253, respectively.
Administrative Reimbursements
Wells Management performs certain administrative services for the Joint Venture, relating to accounting, property management, and other partnership administration, and incurs the related expenses. Such expenses are allocated among these entities based on time spent on each entity by individual personnel. In the opinion of management, this is a reasonable estimation of such expenses. During the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009, and 2008, the Joint Venture incurred administrative expenses of $21,124, $22,614, and $16,228, respectively, payable to Wells Management for these services.
Page
Due to Affiliate
As presented in the accompanying balance sheets, due to affiliate as of December 31, 2010 and 2009 represents amounts due to Wells Management for the following items:
4. DISCONTINUED OPERATIONS
In accordance with the provisions of the property, plant, and equipment accounting standard for the impairment or disposal of long-lived assets, the Joint Venture has classified the results of operations related to 14079 Senlac Drive, which was sold on November 29, 2007, as discontinued operations in the accompanying statements of operations. The details comprising loss from discontinued operations are presented below:
5. RENTAL INCOME
The future contractual rental income due to the Joint Venture under noncancelable operating leases as of December 31, 2010, is presented below:
Two tenants generated approximately 70% and 30% of contractual rental income for the year ended December 31, 2010, and two tenants will generate approximately 89% and 11% of future contractual rental income.
Page
FUND VIII AND FUND IX ASSOCIATES
SCHEDULE III - REAL ESTATE AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION
DECEMBER 31, 2010
(a) The US Cellular Building is a four-story office building located in Madison, Wisconsin.
(b) 305 Interlocken Parkway is a two-story office building located in Broomfield, Colorado.
(c) Includes acquisition and advisory fees and acquisition expense reimbursements applied at acquisition as well as write-offs of fully depreciated capitalized costs.
(d) Buildings, land improvements, building improvements, and tenant improvements are depreciated using the straight-line method over 40 years, 20 years, 5 to 25 years, and the shorter of the economic life or corresponding lease terms, respectively.
Page
FUND VIII AND FUND IX ASSOCIATES
SCHEDULE III - REAL ESTATE AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION
DECEMBER 31, 2010
Page
EXHIBIT INDEX
TO
2010 FORM 10-K
OF
WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND VIII, L.P.
The following documents are filed as exhibits to this report. Those exhibits previously filed and incorporated herein by reference are identified below by an asterisk. For each such asterisked exhibit, there is shown below the description of the previous filing. Exhibits which are not required for this report are omitted.