Edgar Filing: MACERICH CO

MAC-2014-12.31-10K

Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)

OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2014

Commission File No. 1-12504

THE MACERICH COMPANY

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)



MARYLAND (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)		95-4448705 (I.R.S. Employer Identification Number)
401 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 700, Santa Monica, California 90401 (Address of principal executive office, including zip code)

Registrant's telephone number, including area code (310) 394-6000

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act



Title of each class		Name of each exchange on which registered
Common Stock, $0.01 Par Value		New York Stock Exchange

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act YES ý NO o

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act YES o NO ý

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports) and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. YES ý NO o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). YES ý NO o

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant's knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment on to this Form 10-K. o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See definitions of "large accelerated filer," "accelerated filer," and "smaller reporting company" in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):



Large accelerated filer ý	Accelerated filer o	Non-accelerated filer o (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)	Smaller reporting company o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). YES o NO ý

The aggregate market value of voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates of the registrant was approximately $9.3 billion as of the last business day of the registrant's most recently completed second fiscal quarter based upon the price at which the common shares were last sold on that day.

Number of shares outstanding of the registrant's common stock, as of February 20, 2015: 158,160,241 shares

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the proxy statement for the annual stockholders meeting to be held in 2015 are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Form 10-K.

THE MACERICH COMPANY

ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K

FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2014

INDEX



		Page
Part I
Item 1.	Business	3
Item 1A.	Risk Factors	17
Item 1B.	Unresolved Staff Comments	24
Item 2.	Properties	25
Item 3.	Legal Proceedings	31
Item 4.	Mine Safety Disclosures	31
Part II
Item 5.	Market for Registrant's Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities	32
Item 6.	Selected Financial Data	34
Item 7.	Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations	40
Item 7A.	Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk	57
Item 8.	Financial Statements and Supplementary Data	58
Item 9.	Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure	58
Item 9A.	Controls and Procedures	58
Item 9B.	Other Information	60
Part III
Item 10.	Directors and Executive Officers and Corporate Governance	60
Item 11.	Executive Compensation	60
Item 12.	Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters	60
Item 13.	Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence	60
Item 14.	Principal Accountant Fees and Services	60
Part IV
Item 15.	Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedule	61
Signatures		115

PART I

IMPORTANT FACTORS RELATED TO FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 10-K of The Macerich Company (the "Company") contains statements that constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the federal securities laws. Any statements that do not relate to historical or current facts or matters are forward-looking statements. You can identify some of the forward-looking statements by the use of forward-looking words, such as "may," "will," "could," "should," "expects," "anticipates," "intends," "projects," "predicts," "plans," "believes," "seeks," "estimates," "scheduled" and variations of these words and similar expressions. Statements concerning current conditions may also be forward-looking if they imply a continuation of current conditions. Forward-looking statements appear in a number of places in this Form 10-K and include statements regarding, among other matters:


•	expectations regarding the Company's growth;


•	the Company's beliefs regarding its acquisition, redevelopment, development, leasing and operational activities and opportunities, including the performance of its retailers;


•	the Company's acquisition, disposition and other strategies;


•	regulatory matters pertaining to compliance with governmental regulations;


•	the Company's capital expenditure plans and expectations for obtaining capital for expenditures;


•	the Company's expectations regarding income tax benefits;


•	the Company's expectations regarding its financial condition or results of operations; and


•	the Company's expectations for refinancing its indebtedness, entering into and servicing debt obligations and entering into joint venture arrangements.

Stockholders are cautioned that any such forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause actual results, performance or achievements of the Company or the industry to differ materially from the Company's future results, performance or achievements, or those of the industry, expressed or implied in such forward-looking statements. You are urged to carefully review the disclosures we make concerning risks and other factors that may affect our business and operating results, including those made in "Item 1A. Risk Factors" of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, as well as our other reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC"). You are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date of this document. The Company does not intend, and undertakes no obligation, to update any forward-looking information to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this document or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events, unless required by law to do so.

ITEM 1. BUSINESS

General

The Company is involved in the acquisition, ownership, development, redevelopment, management and leasing of regional and community/power shopping centers located throughout the United States. The Company is the sole general partner of, and owns a majority of the ownership interests in, The Macerich Partnership, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership (the "Operating Partnership"). As of December 31, 2014, the Operating Partnership owned or had an ownership interest in 52 regional shopping centers and eight community/power shopping centers. These 60 regional and community/power shopping centers (which include any related office space) consist of approximately 55 million square feet of gross leasable area (“GLA”) and are referred to herein as the “Centers”. The Centers consist of consolidated Centers (“Consolidated Centers”) and unconsolidated joint venture Centers (“Unconsolidated Joint Venture Centers”) as set forth in “Item 2. Properties,” unless the context otherwise requires.

The Company is a self-administered and self-managed real estate investment trust ("REIT") and conducts all of its operations through the Operating Partnership and the Company's management companies, Macerich Property Management Company, LLC, a single member Delaware limited liability company, Macerich Management Company, a California corporation, Macerich Arizona Partners LLC, a single member Arizona limited liability company, Macerich Arizona Management LLC, a single member Delaware limited liability company, Macerich Partners of Colorado LLC, a single member Colorado limited liability company, MACW Mall Management, Inc., a New York corporation, and MACW Property Management, LLC, a single member New York limited liability company. All seven of the management companies are collectively referred to herein as the "Management Companies."

The Company was organized as a Maryland corporation in September 1993. All references to the Company in this Annual Report on Form 10-K include the Company, those entities owned or controlled by the Company and predecessors of the Company, unless the context indicates otherwise.

Financial information regarding the Company for each of the last three fiscal years is contained in the Company's Consolidated Financial Statements included in "Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules."

Recent Developments

Acquisitions and Dispositions:

On January 15, 2014, the Company sold Rotterdam Square, a 585,000 square foot regional shopping center in Schenectady, New York, for $8.5 million, resulting in a loss on the sale of assets of $0.4 million. The Company used the proceeds from the sale to pay down its line of credit and for general corporate purposes.

On February 14, 2014, the Company sold Somersville Towne Center, a 348,000 square foot regional shopping center in Antioch, California, for $12.3 million, resulting in a loss on the sale of assets of $0.3 million. The Company used the proceeds from the sale to pay down its line of credit and for general corporate purposes.

On March 17, 2014, the Company sold Lake Square Mall, a 559,000 square foot regional shopping center in Leesburg, Florida, for $13.3 million, resulting in a loss on the sale of assets of $0.9 million. The sales price was funded by a cash payment of $3.7 million and the issuance of two notes receivable totaling $9.6 million. The Company used the cash proceeds from the sale to pay down its line of credit and for general corporate purposes.

On June 4, 2014, the Company acquired the remaining 49% ownership interest in Cascade Mall, a 589,000 square foot regional shopping center in Burlington, Washington, that it did not previously own for a cash payment of $15.2 million. The Company purchased Cascade Mall from its joint venture partner in Pacific Premier Retail LP. The cash payment was funded by borrowings under the Company's line of credit.

On July 7, 2014, the Company sold a former Mervyn's store in El Paso, Texas for $3.6 million, resulting in a loss on the sale of assets of $0.2 million. The Company used the proceeds from the sale to pay down its line of credit and for general corporate purposes.

On July 30, 2014, the Company formed a joint venture with Pennsylvania Real Estate Investment Trust to redevelop The Gallery, a 1,474,000 square foot regional shopping center in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The Company invested $106.8 million for a 50% interest in the joint venture, which was funded by borrowings under its line of credit.

On August 28, 2014, the Company sold a former Mervyn's store in Thousand Oaks, California for $3.5 million, resulting in a loss on the sale of assets of $0.1 million. The Company used the proceeds from the sale to pay down its line of credit and for general corporate purposes.

On August 28, 2014, the Company sold its 30% ownership interest in Wilshire Boulevard, a 40,000 square foot freestanding store in Santa Monica, California, for a total sales price of $17.1 million, resulting in a gain on the sale of assets of $9.0 million. The sales price was funded by a cash payment of $15.4 million and the assumption of the Company's share of the mortgage note payable on the property of $1.7 million. The Company used the cash proceeds from the sale to pay down its line of credit and for general corporate purposes.

On September 11, 2014, the Company sold a leasehold interest in a former Mervyn's store in Laredo, Texas for $1.2 million, resulting in a gain on the sale of assets of $0.3 million. The Company used the proceeds from the sale to pay down its line of credit and for general corporate purposes.

On October 10, 2014, the Company sold a former Mervyn's store in Marysville, California for $1.9 million. The Company used the proceeds from the sale to pay down its line of credit and for general corporate purposes.

On October 31, 2014, the Company sold South Towne Center, a 1,278,000 square foot regional shopping center in Sandy, Utah, for $205.0 million, resulting in a gain on the sale of assets of $121.9 million. The Company used the proceeds from the sale to pay down its line of credit and for general corporate purposes.

On October 31, 2014, the Company acquired the remaining 40% ownership interest in Fashion Outlets of Chicago, a 529,000 square foot outlet center in Rosemont, Illinois, that it did not previously own for $70.0 million. The purchase price was funded by a cash payment of $55.9 million and the settlement of $14.1 million in notes receivable. The cash payment was funded by borrowings under the Company's line of credit.

On November 13, 2014, the Company formed a joint venture to develop a 500,000 square foot outlet center at Candlestick Point in San Francisco, California. In connection with the formation of the joint venture, the Company issued a note receivable for $65.1 million to its joint venture partner that bears interest at LIBOR plus 2.0% and matures upon the completion of certain milestones in connection with the development of Candlestick Point. The note receivable was funded by borrowings under the Company's line of credit.

On November 14, 2014, the Company acquired the remaining 49% ownership interest that it did not previously own in two separate joint ventures, Pacific Premier Retail LP and Queens JV LP, which together owned five Centers: Lakewood Center, a 2,066,000 square foot regional shopping center in Lakewood, California; Los Cerritos Center, a 1,113,000 square foot regional shopping center in Cerritos, California; Queens Center, a 967,000 square foot regional shopping center in Queens, New York; Stonewood Center, a 932,000 square foot regional shopping center in Downey, California; and Washington Square, a 1,441,000 square foot regional shopping center in Portland, Oregon (collectively referred to herein as the "PPRLP Queens Portfolio"). The total consideration of approximately $1.8 billion was funded by the direct issuance of approximately $1.2 billion of common stock of the Company and the assumption of the third party's pro rata share of the mortgage notes payable on the properties of $672.1 million. As a result of the acquisition, the Company recognized a gain on remeasurement of assets of $1.4 billion.

On November 20, 2014, the Company purchased a 45% interest in 443 North Wabash Avenue, a 65,000 square foot undeveloped site adjacent to the Company's joint venture in The Shops at North Bridge in Chicago, Illinois, for a cash payment of $18.9 million. The cash payment was funded by borrowings under the Company's line of credit.

On December 29, 2014, the Company sold its 67.5% ownership interest in its consolidated joint venture in Camelback Colonnade, a 619,000 square foot community center in Phoenix, Arizona, for $92.9 million, resulting in a gain on the sale of assets of $24.6 million. The sales price was funded by a cash payment of $61.2 million and the assumption of the Company's share of the mortgage note payable on the property of $31.7 million. The Company used the cash proceeds from the sale to pay down its line of credit and for general corporate purposes.

On February 17, 2015, the Company acquired the remaining 50% ownership interest in Inland Center, a 933,000 square foot regional shopping center in San Bernardino, California, that it did not previously own for $51.3 million. The purchase price was funded by a cash payment of $26.3 million and the assumption of the third party's share of the mortgage note payable on the property of $25.0 million. Concurrent with the purchase of the joint venture interest, the Company paid off the $50.0 million loan on the property. The cash payment was funded by borrowings under the Company's line of credit.

Financing Activity:

On August 28, 2014, the Company replaced the existing loan on Mall of Victor Valley with a new $115.0 million loan that bears interest at an effective rate of 4.00% and matures on September 1, 2024.

On November 14, 2014, in connection with the acquisition of the PPRLP Queens Portfolio (See “Acquisitions and Dispositions” in Recent Developments), the Company assumed the loans on the following Centers: Lakewood Center with a fair value of $254.9 million that bears interest at an effective rate of 1.80% and matures on June 1, 2015, Los Cerritos Center with a fair value of $207.5 million that bears interest at an effective rate of 1.65% and matures on July 1, 2018, Queens Center with a fair value of $600.0 million that bears interest at an effective rate of 3.49% and matures on January 1, 2025, Stonewood Center with a fair value of $111.9 million that bears interest at an effective rate of 1.80% and matures on November 1, 2017, and Washington Square with a fair value of $240.3 million that bears interest at an effective rate of 1.65% and matures on January 1, 2016.

On December 22, 2014, the Company prepaid a total of $254.2 million of mortgage debt on Fresno Fashion Fair and Vintage Faire Mall with a weighted average interest rate of 6.4%. The Company incurred a charge of $9.0 million in connection with the early extinguishment of debt.

On February 3, 2015, the Company’s joint venture in The Market at Estrella Falls replaced the existing loan on the property with a new $26.5 million loan that bears interest at LIBOR plus 1.70% and matures on February 5, 2020, including the exercise of a one-year extension option.

On February 19, 2015, the Company placed a $280.0 million loan on Vintage Faire Mall that bears interest at a rate of 3.49% and matures on March 6, 2026.

The Company has a commitment to amend the mortgage loan on Fashion Outlets of Chicago. The existing loan on the property allows for borrowings of up to $140.0 million and bears interest at LIBOR plus 2.50%. The amended $200.0 million, five-year loan will bear interest at LIBOR plus 1.50%. The Company expects to close the loan modification in March 2015.

Redevelopment and Development Activity:

The Company's joint venture in Tysons Corner Center, a 2,141,000 square foot regional shopping center in Tysons Corner, Virginia, is currently expanding the property to include a 527,000 square foot office tower, a 430 unit residential tower and a 300 room Hyatt Regency hotel. The joint venture started the expansion project in October 2011. The office tower commenced occupancy in July 2014 and the joint venture expects the balance of the project to be completed in early 2015. The total cost of the project is estimated to be $524.0 million, with $262.0 million estimated to be the Company's pro rata share. The Company has funded $235.0 million of the total $470.0 million incurred by the joint venture as of December 31, 2014.

In November 2013, the Company started construction on the 175,000 square foot expansion of Fashion Outlets of Niagara Falls USA, a 686,000 square foot outlet center in Niagara Falls, New York. The Company completed the project in October 11-1-14. As of December 31, 2014, the Company had incurred $84.3 million of development costs.

In February 2014, the Company's joint venture in Broadway Plaza started construction on the 235,000 square foot expansion of the 774,000 square foot regional shopping center in Walnut Creek, California. The joint venture expects to complete the project in phases with the first phase anticipated to be completed in Fall 9/1/15. The total cost of the project is estimated to be $270.0 million, with $135.0 million estimated to be the Company's pro rata share. The Company has funded $45.0 million of the total $90.1 million incurred by the joint venture as of December 31, 2014.

Other Transactions and Events:

On January 1, 2015, the mortgage note payable on Great Northern Mall, an 895,000 square foot regional shopping center in Clay, New York, went into maturity default. The mortgage note payable is a non-recourse loan. The Company is working with the loan servicer, which is expected to result in a transition of the property to the loan servicer or a receiver. Consequently, Great Northern Mall has been excluded from certain 2014 performance metrics and related discussions in this "Item 1. Business", including major tenants, average base rents, cost of occupancy, lease expirations and anchors (See "Major Tenants", "Mall Stores and Freestanding Stores", "Cost of Occupancy", "Lease Expirations", and "Anchors" below). In addition, Great Northern Mall has been excluded from the Company's list of properties and related computations of GLA, occupancy and sales per square foot (See "Item 2. Properties").

The Shopping Center Industry

General:

There are several types of retail shopping centers, which are differentiated primarily based on size and marketing strategy. Regional shopping centers generally contain in excess of 400,000 square feet of GLA and are typically anchored by two or more department or large retail stores ("Anchors") and are referred to as "Regional Shopping Centers" or "Malls." Regional Shopping Centers also typically contain numerous diversified retail stores ("Mall Stores"), most of which are national or regional retailers typically located along corridors connecting the Anchors. "Strip centers," "urban villages" or "specialty centers" ("Community/Power Shopping Centers") are retail shopping centers that are designed to attract local or neighborhood customers and are typically anchored by one or more supermarkets, discount department stores and/or drug stores. Community/Power Shopping Centers typically contain 100,000 to 400,000 square feet of GLA. Outlet Centers generally contain a wide variety of designer and manufacturer stores, often located in an open-air center, and typically range in size from 200,000 to 850,000 square feet of GLA ("Outlet Centers"). In addition, freestanding retail stores are located along the perimeter of the shopping centers ("Freestanding Stores"). Mall Stores and Freestanding Stores over 10,000 square feet of GLA are also referred to as "Big Box." Anchors, Mall Stores, Freestanding Stores and other tenants typically contribute funds for the maintenance of the common areas, property taxes, insurance, advertising and other expenditures related to the operation of the shopping center.

Regional Shopping Centers:

A Regional Shopping Center draws from its trade area by offering a variety of fashion merchandise, hard goods and services and entertainment, often in an enclosed, climate controlled environment with convenient parking. Regional Shopping Centers provide an array of retail shops and entertainment facilities and often serve as the town center and a gathering place for community, charity, and promotional events.

Regional Shopping Centers have generally provided owners with relatively stable income despite the cyclical nature of the retail business. This stability is due both to the diversity of tenants and to the typical dominance of Regional Shopping Centers in their trade areas.

Regional Shopping Centers have different strategies with regard to price, merchandise offered and tenant mix, and are generally tailored to meet the needs of their trade areas. Anchors are located along common areas in a configuration designed to maximize consumer traffic for the benefit of the Mall Stores. Mall GLA, which generally refers to GLA contiguous to the Anchors for tenants other than Anchors, is leased to a wide variety of smaller retailers. Mall Stores typically account for the majority of the revenues of a Regional Shopping Center.

Business of the Company

Strategy:

The Company has a long-term four-pronged business strategy that focuses on the acquisition, leasing and management, redevelopment and development of Regional Shopping Centers.

Acquisitions. The Company principally focuses on well-located, quality Regional Shopping Centers that can be dominant in their trade area and have strong revenue enhancement potential. In addition, the Company pursues other opportunistic acquisitions of property that include retail and will complement the Company's portfolio such as Outlet Centers. The Company subsequently seeks to improve operating performance and returns from these properties through leasing, management and redevelopment. Since its initial public offering, the Company has acquired interests in shopping centers nationwide. The Company believes that it is geographically well positioned to cultivate and maintain ongoing relationships with potential sellers and financial institutions and to act quickly when acquisition opportunities arise (See "Acquisitions and Dispositions" in Recent Developments).

Leasing and Management. The Company believes that the shopping center business requires specialized skills across a broad array of disciplines for effective and profitable operations. For this reason, the Company has developed a fully integrated real estate organization with in-house acquisition, accounting, development, finance, information technology, leasing, legal, marketing, property management and redevelopment expertise. In addition, the Company emphasizes a philosophy of decentralized property management, leasing and marketing performed by on-site professionals. The Company believes that this strategy results in the optimal operation, tenant mix and drawing power of each Center, as well as the ability to quickly respond to changing competitive conditions of the Center's trade area.

The Company believes that on-site property managers can most effectively operate the Centers. Each Center's property manager is responsible for overseeing the operations, marketing, maintenance and security functions at the Center. Property managers focus special attention on controlling operating costs, a key element in the profitability of the Centers, and seek to develop strong relationships with and be responsive to the needs of retailers.

The Company generally utilizes regionally located leasing managers to better understand the market and the community in which a Center is located. The Company continually assesses and fine tunes each Center's tenant mix, identifies and replaces underperforming tenants and seeks to optimize existing tenant sizes and configurations.

On a selective basis, the Company provides property management and leasing services for third parties. The Company currently manages three regional shopping centers and three community centers for third party owners on a fee basis.

Redevelopment. One of the major components of the Company's growth strategy is its ability to redevelop acquired properties. For this reason, the Company has built a staff of redevelopment professionals who have primary responsibility for identifying redevelopment opportunities that they believe will result in enhanced long-term financial returns and market position for the Centers. The redevelopment professionals oversee the design and construction of the projects in addition to obtaining required governmental approvals (See "Redevelopment and Development Activity" in Recent Developments).

Development. The Company pursues ground-up development projects on a selective basis. The Company has supplemented its strong acquisition, operations and redevelopment skills with its ground-up development expertise to further increase growth opportunities (See "Redevelopment and Development Activity" in Recent Developments).

The Centers:

As of December 31, 2014, the Centers primarily included 51 Regional Shopping Centers, excluding Great Northern Mall, and eight Community/Power Shopping Centers totaling approximately 54 million square feet of GLA. These 59 Centers average approximately 921,000 square feet of GLA and range in size from 2.7 million square feet of GLA at Tysons Corner Center to 185,000 square feet of GLA at Boulevard Shops. As of December 31, 2014, excluding Great Northern Mall, the Centers primarily included 194 Anchors totaling approximately 27.6 million square feet of GLA and approximately 6,000 Mall Stores and Freestanding Stores totaling approximately 24.9 million square feet of GLA.

Competition:

Numerous owners, developers and managers of malls, shopping centers and other retail-oriented real estate compete with the Company for the acquisition of properties and in attracting tenants or Anchors to occupy space. There are seven other publicly traded mall companies, a number of publicly traded shopping center companies and several large private mall companies in the United States, any of which under certain circumstances could compete against the Company for an Anchor or a tenant. In addition, these companies as well as other REITs, private real estate companies or investors compete with the Company in terms of property acquisitions. This results in competition both for the acquisition of properties or centers and for tenants or Anchors to occupy space. Competition for property acquisitions may result in increased purchase prices and may adversely affect the Company's ability to make suitable property acquisitions on favorable terms. The existence of competing shopping centers could have a material adverse impact on the Company's ability to lease space and on the level of rents that can be achieved. There is also increasing competition from other retail formats and technologies, such as lifestyle centers, power centers, outlet centers, Internet shopping, home shopping networks, catalogs, telemarketing and discount shopping clubs that could adversely affect the Company's revenues.

In making leasing decisions, the Company believes that retailers consider the following material factors relating to a center: quality, design and location, including consumer demographics; rental rates; type and quality of Anchors and retailers at the center; and management and operational experience and strategy of the center. The Company believes it is able to compete effectively for retail tenants in its local markets based on these criteria in light of the overall size, quality and diversity of its Centers.

Major Tenants:

The Centers, excluding Great Northern Mall, derived approximately 74% of their total rents for the year ended December 31, 2014 from Mall Stores and Freestanding Stores under 10,000 square feet, and Big Box and Anchor tenants accounted for 26% of total rents for the year ended December 31, 2014. Total rents as set forth in "Item 1. Business" include minimum rents and percentage rents.

The following retailers (including their subsidiaries) represent the 10 largest rent payers in the Centers, excluding Great Northern Mall, based upon total rents in place as of December 31, 2014:



Tenant	Primary DBAs	Number of Locations in the Portfolio	% of Total Rents
L Brands, Inc.	Victoria's Secret, Bath and Body Works, PINK	96	2.8	%
Forever 21, Inc.	Forever 21, XXI Forever, Love21	37	2.5	%
Gap, Inc., The	Athleta, Banana Republic, Gap, Gap Kids, Old Navy and others	64	2.5	%
Foot Locker, Inc.	Champs Sports, Foot Locker, Kids Foot Locker, Lady Foot Locker, Foot Action, House of Hoops and others	98	2.1	%
Abercrombie & Fitch Co.	Abercrombie & Fitch, Hollister and others	47	1.3	%
Dick's Sporting Goods, Inc.	Dick's Sporting Goods	11	1.3	%
Sears Holdings Corporation	Sears	27	1.3	%
Golden Gate Capital	Payless ShoeSource, Eddie Bauer, J. Jill, California Pizza Kitchen	75	1.2	%
American Eagle Outfitters, Inc.	American Eagle Outfitters, aerie	37	1.2	%
Express, Inc.	Express, Express / Express Men	30	1.1	%

Mall Stores and Freestanding Stores:

Mall Store and Freestanding Store leases generally provide for tenants to pay rent comprised of a base (or "minimum") rent and a percentage rent based on sales. In some cases, tenants pay only minimum rent, and in other cases, tenants pay only percentage rent. The Company generally enters into leases for Mall Stores and Freestanding Stores that also require tenants to pay a stated amount for operating expenses, generally excluding property taxes, regardless of the expenses the Company actually incurs at any Center. However, certain leases for Mall Stores and Freestanding Stores contain provisions that only require tenants to pay their pro rata share of maintenance of the common areas, property taxes, insurance, advertising and other expenditures related to the operations of the Center.

Tenant space of 10,000 square feet and under in the Company's portfolio at December 31, 2014, excluding Great Northern Mall, comprises approximately 67% of all Mall Store and Freestanding Store space. The Company uses tenant spaces of 10,000 square feet and under for comparing rental rate activity because this space is more consistent in terms of shape and configuration and, as such, the Company is able to provide a meaningful comparison of rental rate activity for this space. Mall Store and Freestanding Store space greater than 10,000 square feet is inconsistent in size and configuration throughout the Company's portfolio and as a result does not lend itself to a meaningful comparison of rental rate activity with the Company's other space. Most of the non-Anchor space over 10,000 square feet is not physically connected to the mall, does not share the same common area amenities and does not benefit from the foot traffic in the mall. As a result, space greater than 10,000 square feet has a unique rent structure that is inconsistent with mall space under 10,000 square feet.

The following tables set forth the average base rent per square foot for the Centers, as of December 31 for each of the past five years:

Mall Stores and Freestanding Stores under 10,000 square feet:



For the Years Ended December 31,	Avg. Base Rent Per Sq. Ft.(1)(2)		Avg. Base Rent Per Sq. Ft. on Leases Executed During the Year(2)(3)		Avg. Base Rent Per Sq. Ft. on Leases Expiring During the Year(2)(4)
Consolidated Centers:
2014	$	49.68	$	49.55	$	41.20
2013	$	44.51	$	45.06	$	40.00
2012	$	40.98	$	44.01	$	38.00
2011	$	38.80	$	38.35	$	35.84
2010	$	37.93	$	34.99	$	37.02
Unconsolidated Joint Venture Centers (at the Company's pro rata share):
2014	$	63.78	$	82.47	$	64.59
2013	$	62.47	$	63.44	$	48.43
2012	$	55.64	$	55.72	$	48.74
2011	$	53.72	$	50.00	$	38.98
2010	$	46.16	$	48.90	$	38.39

Big Box and Anchors:



For the Years Ended December 31,	Avg. Base Rent Per Sq. Ft.(1)(2)		Avg. Base Rent Per Sq. Ft. on Leases Executed During the Year(2)(3)		Number of Leases Executed During the Year	Avg. Base Rent Per Sq. Ft. on Leases Expiring During the Year(2)(4)		Number of Leases Expiring During the Year
Consolidated Centers:
2014	$	11.26	$	18.28	22	$	15.16	14
2013	$	10.94	$	14.61	29	$	14.08	21
2012	$	9.34	$	15.54	21	$	8.85	22
2011	$	8.42	$	10.87	21	$	6.71	14
2010	$	8.64	$	13.79	31	$	10.64	10
Unconsolidated Joint Venture Centers (at the Company's pro rata share):
2014	$	18.51	$	33.62	11	$	27.27	6
2013	$	13.36	$	37.45	22	$	24.58	10
2012	$	12.52	$	23.25	21	$	8.88	10
2011	$	12.50	$	21.43	15	$	14.19	7
2010	$	11.90	$	24.94	20	$	15.63	26

_____________________


(1)	Average base rent per square foot is based on spaces occupied as of December 31 for each of the Centers and gives effect to the terms of each lease in effect, as of such date, including any concessions, abatements and other adjustments or allowances that have been granted to the tenants.

(2)

Centers under development and redevelopment are excluded from average base rents. As a result, the leases for Broadway Plaza, Fashion Outlets of Niagara Falls USA, The Gallery, Paradise Valley Mall, SouthPark Mall and Westside Pavilion were excluded for the year ended December 31, 2014. The leases for Paradise Valley Mall were excluded for the year ended December 31, 2013. The leases for The Shops at Atlas Park and Southridge Center were excluded for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011. The leases for Santa Monica Place were excluded for the year ended December 31, 2010.

In addition, the leases for Rotterdam Square, which was sold on January 15, 2014, were excluded for the year ended December 31, 2013. Furthermore, the leases for Great Northern Mall, which is in maturity default, were excluded for the year ended December 31, 2014 and the leases for Valley View Center, which was sold by a court-appointed receiver in 2012, were excluded for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010.


(3)	The average base rent per square foot on leases executed during the year represents the actual rent paid on a per square foot basis during the first twelve months of the lease.


(4)	The average base rent per square foot on leases expiring during the year represents the actual rent to be paid on a per square foot basis during the final twelve months of the lease.

Cost of Occupancy:

A major factor contributing to tenant profitability is cost of occupancy, which consists of tenant occupancy costs charged by the Company. Tenant expenses included in this calculation are minimum rents, percentage rents and recoverable expenditures, which consist primarily of property operating expenses, real estate taxes and repair and maintenance expenditures. These tenant charges are collectively referred to as tenant occupancy costs. These tenant occupancy costs are compared to tenant sales. A low cost of occupancy percentage shows more capacity for the Company to increase rents at the time of lease renewal than a high cost of occupancy percentage. The following table summarizes occupancy costs for Mall Store and Freestanding Store tenants in the Centers as a percentage of total Mall Store sales for the last five years:



	For the Years Ended December 31,
	2014(1)		2013 (2)		2012		2011		2010
Consolidated Centers:
Minimum rents	8.7	%	8.4	%	8.1	%	8.2	%	8.6	%
Percentage rents	0.4	%	0.4	%	0.4	%	0.5	%	0.4	%
Expense recoveries(3)	4.3	%	4.5	%	4.2	%	4.1	%	4.4	%
	13.4	%	13.3	%	12.7	%	12.8	%	13.4	%
Unconsolidated Joint Venture Centers:
Minimum rents	8.7	%	8.8	%	8.9	%	9.1	%	9.1	%
Percentage rents	0.4	%	0.4	%	0.4	%	0.4	%	0.4	%
Expense recoveries(3)	4.5	%	4.0	%	3.9	%	3.9	%	4.0	%
	13.6	%	13.2	%	13.2	%	13.4	%	13.5	%

_____________________________


(1)	Great Northern Mall is excluded for the year ended December 31, 2014.


(2)	Rotterdam Square was sold on January 15, 2014 and is excluded for the year ended December 31, 2013.


(3)	Represents real estate tax and common area maintenance charges.

Lease Expirations:

The following tables show scheduled lease expirations for Centers owned as of December 31, 2014, excluding Great Northern Mall, for the next ten years, assuming that none of the tenants exercise renewal options:

Mall Stores and Freestanding Stores under 10,000 square feet:



Year Ending December 31,	Number of Leases Expiring	Approximate GLA of Leases Expiring(1)	% of Total Leased GLA Represented by Expiring Leases(1)		Ending Base Rent per Square Foot of Expiring Leases(1)		% of Base Rent Represented by Expiring Leases(1)
Consolidated Centers:
2015	463	926,892	11.17	%	$	50.66	10.97	%
2016	468	1,008,966	12.16	%	$	47.16	11.11	%
2017	437	1,041,176	12.55	%	$	50.27	12.22	%
2018	408	960,640	11.58	%	$	49.90	11.19	%
2019	368	860,968	10.38	%	$	49.71	10.00	%
2020	253	583,567	7.03	%	$	55.48	7.56	%
2021	235	583,437	7.03	%	$	50.96	6.94	%
2022	195	443,752	5.35	%	$	51.95	5.38	%
2023	225	565,672	6.82	%	$	53.78	7.10	%
2024	247	727,009	8.76	%	$	58.65	9.96	%
Unconsolidated Joint Venture Centers (at the Company's pro rata share):
2015	93	100,944	9.90	%	$	61.62	9.33	%
2016	102	110,526	10.84	%	$	61.36	10.17	%
2017	78	82,221	8.06	%	$	63.31	7.81	%
2018	98	108,787	10.67	%	$	68.37	11.16	%
2019	91	107,701	10.56	%	$	71.84	11.61	%
2020	70	90,098	8.84	%	$	71.40	9.65	%
2021	81	105,989	10.39	%	$	61.97	9.85	%
2022	62	74,423	7.30	%	$	62.83	7.01	%
2023	50	80,597	7.90	%	$	57.43	6.94	%
2024	45	54,913	5.38	%	$	70.48	5.81	%

Big Boxes and Anchors:



Year Ending December 31,	Number of Leases Expiring	Approximate GLA of Leases Expiring(1)	% of Total Leased GLA Represented by Expiring Leases(1)		Ending Base Rent per Square Foot of Expiring Leases(1)		% of Base Rent Represented by Expiring Leases(1)
Consolidated Centers:
2015	18	868,477	5.60	%	$	6.51	3.05	%
2016	27	1,535,029	9.90	%	$	6.69	5.54	%
2017	45	1,821,730	11.75	%	$	9.05	8.89	%
2018	26	672,316	4.33	%	$	10.74	3.89	%
2019	29	1,149,429	7.41	%	$	11.27	6.98	%
2020	28	1,098,511	7.08	%	$	9.70	5.75	%
2021	21	737,923	4.76	%	$	15.52	6.18	%
2022	25	930,735	6.00	%	$	17.82	8.94	%
2023	28	1,218,983	7.86	%	$	14.17	9.32	%
2024	29	1,072,648	6.92	%	$	17.82	10.31	%
Unconsolidated Joint Venture Centers (at the Company's pro rata share):
2015	5	34,373	1.86	%	$	41.63	3.83	%
2016	10	180,672	9.78	%	$	14.14	6.83	%
2017	5	69,962	3.79	%	$	25.41	4.75	%
2018	10	230,320	12.47	%	$	7.72	4.76	%
2019	9	129,973	7.04	%	$	25.88	8.99	%
2020	13	472,998	25.62	%	$	16.39	20.73	%
2021	6	49,511	2.68	%	$	34.06	4.51	%
2022	3	30,762	1.67	%	$	36.91	3.04	%
2023	4	34,279	1.86	%	$	53.56	4.91	%
2024	9	86,415	4.68	%	$	45.09	10.42	%

_______________________________________________________________________________

(1)

The ending base rent per square foot on leases expiring during the period represents the final year minimum rent, on a cash basis, for tenant leases expiring during the year. Currently, 71% of leases have provisions for future consumer price index increases that are not reflected in ending base rent. The leases for Centers currently under development and redevelopment are excluded from this table.

Anchors:

Anchors have traditionally been a major factor in the public's identification with Regional Shopping Centers. Anchors are generally department stores whose merchandise appeals to a broad range of shoppers. Although the Centers receive a smaller percentage of their operating income from Anchors than from Mall Stores and Freestanding Stores, strong Anchors play an important part in maintaining customer traffic and making the Centers desirable locations for Mall Store and Freestanding Store tenants.

Anchors either own their stores, the land under them and in some cases adjacent parking areas, or enter into long-term leases with an owner at rates that are lower than the rents charged to tenants of Mall Stores and Freestanding Stores. Each Anchor that owns its own store and certain Anchors that lease their stores enter into reciprocal easement agreements with the owner of the Center covering, among other things, operational matters, initial construction and future expansion.

Anchors accounted for approximately 8.5% of the Company's total rents for the year ended December 31, 2014, excluding Great Northern Mall.

The following table identifies each Anchor, each parent company that owns multiple Anchors and the number of square feet owned or leased by each such Anchor or parent company in the Company's portfolio, excluding Great Northern Mall, at December 31, 2014.



Name	Number of Anchor Stores	GLA Owned by Anchor	GLA Leased by Anchor	Total GLA Occupied by Anchor
Macy's Inc.
Macy's	42	4,956,000	2,376,000	7,332,000
Bloomingdale's	2	—	355,000	355,000
	44	4,956,000	2,731,000	7,687,000
Sears(1)	28	2,541,000	1,529,000	4,070,000
JCPenney	28	1,744,000	2,182,000	3,926,000
Dillard's	15	2,276,000	257,000	2,533,000
Nordstrom	13	739,000	1,477,000	2,216,000
Target	7	640,000	273,000	913,000
Forever 21	7	155,000	574,000	729,000
The Bon-Ton Stores, Inc.
Younkers	3	—	317,000	317,000
Herberger's	1	188,000	—	188,000
Bon-Ton, The	1	—	71,000	71,000
	5	188,000	388,000	576,000
Kohl's	5	89,000	356,000	445,000
Hudson Bay Company
Lord & Taylor	3	121,000	199,000	320,000
Saks Fifth Avenue	1	—	92,000	92,000
	4	121,000	291,000	412,000
Home Depot	3	—	395,000	395,000
Walmart	2	165,000	173,000	338,000
Costco	2	—	321,000	321,000
Burlington Coat Factory	3	187,000	127,000	314,000
Dick's Sporting Goods(2)	3	—	257,000	257,000
Neiman Marcus	2	—	188,000	188,000
Von Maur	2	187,000	—	187,000
La Curacao	1	—	165,000	165,000
Boscov's	1	—	161,000	161,000
Belk	2	—	139,000	139,000
BJ's Wholesale Club	1	—	123,000	123,000
Lowe's	1	—	114,000	114,000
Century 21(3)	1		98,000	98,000
Mercado de los Cielos	1	—	78,000	78,000
L.L. Bean	1	—	76,000	76,000
Best Buy	1	66,000	—	66,000
Des Moines Area Community College	1	64,000	—	64,000
Barneys New York	1	—	60,000	60,000
Sports Authority	1	—	52,000	52,000
Bealls	1	—	40,000	40,000
Vacant Anchors(4)	4	—	649,000	649,000
	191	14,118,000	13,274,000	27,392,000
Anchors at Centers not owned by the Company(5):
Forever 21	2	—	154,000	154,000
Kohl's	1	—	83,000	83,000
Total	194	14,118,000	13,511,000	27,629,000

_______________________________


(1)	Sears closed its store at Cascade Mall in January 2015.


(2)	Dick's Sporting Goods plans to open a new store at Scottsdale Fashion Square, SouthPark Mall and Los Cerritos Center in late 2015.


(3)	Century 21 plans to open a 70,000 square foot two-level department store at Green Acres Mall in Fall 2015.


(4)	The Company is seeking replacement tenants and/or contemplating redevelopment opportunities for these vacant sites. The Company continues to collect rent under the terms of an agreement regarding one of these four vacant Anchor locations.


(5)	The Company owns a portfolio of nine stores located at shopping centers not owned by the Company. Of these nine stores, two have been leased to Forever 21, one has been leased to Kohl's and six have been leased for non-Anchor usage.

Environmental Matters

Each of the Centers has been subjected to an Environmental Site Assessment—Phase I (which involves review of publicly available information and general property inspections, but does not involve soil sampling or ground water analysis) completed by an environmental consultant.

Based on these assessments, and on other information, the Company is aware of the following environmental issues, which may result in potential environmental liability and cause the Company to incur costs in responding to these liabilities or in other costs associated with future investigation or remediation:

•

Asbestos. The Company has conducted asbestos-containing materials ("ACM") surveys at various locations within the Centers. The surveys indicate that ACMs are present or suspected in certain areas, primarily vinyl floor tiles, mastics, roofing materials, drywall tape and joint compounds. The identified ACMs are generally non-friable, in good condition, and possess low probabilities for disturbance. At certain Centers where ACMs are present or suspected, however, some ACMs have been or may be classified as "friable," and ultimately may require removal under certain conditions. The Company has developed and implemented an operations and maintenance ("O&M") plan to manage ACMs in place.

•

Underground Storage Tanks. Underground storage tanks ("USTs") are or were present at certain Centers, often in connection with tenant operations at gasoline stations or automotive tire, battery and accessory service centers located at such Centers. USTs also may be or have been present at properties neighboring certain Centers. Some of these tanks have either leaked or are suspected to have leaked. Where leakage has occurred, investigation, remediation, and monitoring costs may be incurred by the Company if responsible current or former tenants, or other responsible parties, are unavailable to pay such costs.

•

Chlorinated Hydrocarbons. The presence of chlorinated hydrocarbons such as perchloroethylene ("PCE") and its degradation byproducts have been detected at certain Centers, often in connection with tenant dry cleaning operations. Where PCE has been detected, the Company may incur investigation, remediation and monitoring costs if responsible current or former tenants, or other responsible parties, are unavailable to pay such costs.

See "Item 1A. Risk Factors—Possible environmental liabilities could adversely affect us."

Insurance

Each of the Centers has comprehensive liability, fire, extended coverage and rental loss insurance with insured limits customarily carried for similar properties. The Company does not insure certain types of losses (such as losses from wars), because they are either uninsurable or not economically insurable. In addition, while the Company or the relevant joint venture, as applicable, carry specific earthquake insurance on the Centers located in California, the policies are subject to a deductible equal to 5% of the total insured value of each Center, a $100,000 per occurrence minimum and a combined annual aggregate loss limit of $150 million on these Centers. The Company or the relevant joint venture, as applicable, carry specific earthquake insurance on the Centers located in the Pacific Northwest and in the New Madrid Seismic Zone. However, the policies are subject to a deductible equal to 2% of the total insured value of each Center, a $50,000 per occurrence minimum and a combined annual aggregate loss limit of $200 million on these Centers. While the Company or the relevant joint venture also carries standalone terrorism insurance on the Centers, the policies are subject to a $50,000 deductible and a combined annual aggregate loss limit of $1 billion. Each Center has environmental insurance covering eligible third‑party losses, remediation and non-owned disposal sites, subject to a $100,000 deductible and a $50 million three-year aggregate loss limit. Some environmental losses are not covered by this insurance because they are uninsurable or not economically insurable. Furthermore, the Company carries title insurance on substantially all of the Centers for generally less than their full value.

Qualification as a Real Estate Investment Trust

The Company elected to be taxed as a REIT under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"), commencing with its first taxable year ended December 31, 1994, and intends to conduct its operations so as to continue to qualify as a REIT under the Code. As a REIT, the Company generally will not be subject to federal and state income taxes on its net taxable income that it currently distributes to stockholders. Qualification and taxation as a REIT depends on the Company's ability to meet certain dividend distribution tests, share ownership requirements and various qualification tests prescribed in the Code.

Employees

As of December 31, 2014, the Company had approximately 1,117 employees, of which approximately 976 were full-time. The Company believes that relations with its employees are good.

Seasonality

For a discussion of the extent to which the Company's business may be seasonal, see "Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Management's Overview and Summary—Seasonality."

Available Information; Website Disclosure; Corporate Governance Documents

The Company's corporate website address is www.macerich.com. The Company makes available free-of-charge through this website its reports on Forms 10-K, 10-Q and 8-K and all amendments thereto, as soon as reasonably practicable after the reports have been filed with, or furnished to, the SEC. These reports are available under the heading "Investing—Financial Information—SEC Filings", through a free hyperlink to a third-party service. Information provided on our website is not incorporated by reference into this Form 10-K.

The following documents relating to Corporate Governance are available on the Company's website at www.macerich.com under "Investing—Corporate Governance":

Guidelines on Corporate Governance

Code of Business Conduct and Ethics

Code of Ethics for CEO and Senior Financial Officers

Audit Committee Charter

Compensation Committee Charter

Executive Committee Charter

Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee Charter

You may also request copies of any of these documents by writing to:

Attention: Corporate Secretary

The Macerich Company

401 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 700

Santa Monica, CA 90401

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

The following factors could cause our actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking statements made in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and presented elsewhere by our management from time to time. This list should not be considered to be a complete statement of all potential risks or uncertainties as it does not describe additional risks of which we are not presently aware or that we do not currently consider material. We may update our risk factors from time to time in our future periodic reports. Any of these factors may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, operating results and cash flows. For purposes of this “Risk Factor” section, Centers wholly owned by us are referred to as “Wholly Owned Centers” and Centers that are partly but not wholly owned by us are referred to as “Joint Venture Centers.”

RISKS RELATED TO OUR BUSINESS AND PROPERTIES

We invest primarily in shopping centers, which are subject to a number of significant risks that are beyond our control.

Real property investments are subject to varying degrees of risk that may affect the ability of our Centers to generate sufficient revenues to meet operating and other expenses, including debt service, lease payments, capital expenditures and tenant improvements, and to make distributions to us and our stockholders. A number of factors may decrease the income generated by the Centers, including:


•	the national economic climate;


•	the regional and local economy (which may be negatively impacted by rising unemployment, declining real estate values, increased foreclosures, higher taxes, plant closings, industry slowdowns, union activity, adverse weather conditions, natural disasters and other factors);


•	local real estate conditions (such as an oversupply of, or a reduction in demand for, retail space or retail goods, decreases in rental rates, declining real estate values and the availability and creditworthiness of current and prospective tenants);


•	decreased levels of consumer spending, consumer confidence, and seasonal spending (especially during the holiday season when many retailers generate a disproportionate amount of their annual sales);


•	negative perceptions by retailers or shoppers of the safety, convenience and attractiveness of a Center;


•	acts of violence, including terrorist activities; and


•	increased costs of maintenance, insurance and operations (including real estate taxes).

Income from shopping center properties and shopping center values are also affected by applicable laws and regulations, including tax, environmental, safety and zoning laws.

A significant percentage of our Centers are geographically concentrated and, as a result, are sensitive to local economic and real estate conditions.

A significant percentage of our Centers are located in California and Arizona. Nine Centers in the aggregate are located in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut. To the extent that weak economic or real estate conditions or other factors affect California, Arizona, New York, New Jersey or Connecticut (or their respective regions) more severely than other areas of the country, our financial performance could be negatively impacted.

We are in a competitive business.

Numerous owners, developers and managers of malls, shopping centers and other retail-oriented real estate compete with us for the acquisition of properties and in attracting tenants or Anchors to occupy space. There are seven other publicly traded mall companies, a number of publicly traded shopping center companies and several large private mall companies in the United States, any of which under certain circumstances could compete against us for an Anchor or a tenant. In addition, these companies as well as other REITs, private real estate companies or investors compete with us in terms of property acquisitions. This results in competition both for the acquisition of properties or centers and for tenants or Anchors to occupy space. Competition for property acquisitions may result in increased purchase prices and may adversely affect our ability to make suitable property acquisitions on favorable terms. The existence of competing shopping centers could have a material adverse impact on our ability to lease space and on the level of rents that can be achieved. There is also increasing competition from

other retail formats and technologies, such as lifestyle centers, power centers, outlet centers, Internet shopping, home shopping networks, catalogs, telemarketing and discount shopping clubs that could adversely affect our revenues.

We may be unable to renew leases, lease vacant space or re-let space as leases expire on favorable terms or at all, which could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

There are no assurances that our leases will be renewed or that vacant space in our Centers will be re-let at net effective rental rates equal to or above the current average net effective rental rates or that substantial rent abatements, tenant improvements, early termination rights or below‑market renewal options will not be offered to attract new tenants or retain existing tenants. If the rental rates at our Centers decrease, if our existing tenants do not renew their leases or if we do not re-let a significant portion of our available space and space for which leases will expire, our financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected.

If Anchors or other significant tenants experience a downturn in their business, close or sell stores or declare bankruptcy, our financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected.

Our financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected if a downturn in the business of, or the bankruptcy or insolvency of, an Anchor or other significant tenant leads them to close retail stores or terminate their leases after seeking protection under the bankruptcy laws from their creditors, including us as lessor. In recent years a number of companies in the retail industry, including some of our tenants, have declared bankruptcy or have gone out of business. We may be unable to re-let stores vacated as a result of voluntary closures or the bankruptcy of a tenant. Furthermore, if the store sales of retailers operating at our Centers decline significantly due to adverse economic conditions or for any other reason, tenants might be unable to pay their minimum rents or expense recovery charges. In the event of a default by a lessee, the affected Center may experience delays and costs in enforcing its rights as lessor.

In addition, Anchors and/or tenants at one or more Centers might terminate their leases as a result of mergers, acquisitions, consolidations or dispositions in the retail industry. The sale of an Anchor or store to a less desirable retailer may reduce occupancy levels, customer traffic and rental income. Depending on economic conditions, there is also a risk that Anchors or other significant tenants may sell stores operating in our Centers or consolidate duplicate or geographically overlapping store locations. Store closures by an Anchor and/or a significant number of tenants may allow other Anchors and/or certain other tenants to terminate their leases, receive reduced rent and/or cease operating their stores at the Center or otherwise adversely affect occupancy at the Center.

Our real estate acquisition, development and redevelopment strategies may not be successful.

Our historical growth in revenues, net income and funds from operations has been in part tied to the acquisition, development and redevelopment of shopping centers. Many factors, including the availability and cost of capital, our total amount of debt outstanding, our ability to obtain financing on attractive terms, if at all, interest rates and the availability of attractive acquisition targets, among others, will affect our ability to acquire, develop and redevelop additional properties in the future. We may not be successful in pursuing acquisition opportunities, and newly acquired properties may not perform as well as expected. Expenses arising from our efforts to complete acquisitions, develop and redevelop properties or increase our market penetration may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. We face competition for acquisitions primarily from other REITs, as well as from private real estate companies or investors. Some of our competitors have greater financial and other resources. Increased competition for shopping center acquisitions may result in increased purchase prices and may impact adversely our ability to acquire additional properties on favorable terms. We cannot guarantee that we will be able to implement our growth strategy successfully or manage our expanded operations effectively and profitably.

We may not be able to achieve the anticipated financial and operating results from newly acquired assets. Some of the factors that could affect anticipated results are:


•	our ability to integrate and manage new properties, including increasing occupancy rates and rents at such properties;


•	the disposal of non-core assets within an expected time frame; and


•	our ability to raise long-term financing to implement a capital structure at a cost of capital consistent with our business strategy.

Our business strategy also includes the selective development and construction of retail properties. Any development, redevelopment and construction activities that we may undertake will be subject to the risks of real estate development, including lack of financing, construction delays, environmental requirements, budget overruns, sunk costs and lease-up. Furthermore, occupancy rates and rents at a newly completed property may not be sufficient to make the property profitable. Real estate development activities are also subject to risks relating to the inability to obtain, or delays in obtaining, all necessary zoning, land-use, building, and occupancy and other required governmental permits and authorizations. If any of the above events occur, our ability to pay dividends to our stockholders and service our indebtedness could be adversely affected.

Real estate investments are relatively illiquid and we may be unable to sell properties at the time we desire and on favorable terms.

Investments in real estate are relatively illiquid, which limits our ability to adjust our portfolio in response to changes in economic, market or other conditions. Moreover, there are some limitations under federal income tax laws applicable to REITs that limit our ability to sell assets. In addition, because our properties are generally mortgaged to secure our debts, we may not be able to obtain a release of a lien on a mortgaged property without the payment of the associated debt and/or a substantial prepayment penalty, which restricts our ability to dispose of a property, even though the sale might otherwise be desirable. Furthermore, the number of prospective buyers interested in purchasing shopping centers is limited. Therefore, if we want to sell one or more of our Centers, we may not be able to dispose of it in the desired time period and may receive less consideration than we originally invested in the Center.

Possible environmental liabilities could adversely affect us.

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 costs of removal or remediation of hazardous or toxic substances on, under or in that real property. These laws often impose liability whether or not the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the presence of hazardous or toxic substances. The costs of investigation, removal or remediation of hazardous or toxic substances may be substantial. In addition, the presence of hazardous or toxic substances, or the failure to remedy environmental hazards properly, may adversely affect the owner's or operator's ability to sell or rent affected real property or to borrow money using affected real property as collateral.

Persons or entities that arrange for the disposal or treatment of hazardous or toxic substances may also be liable for the costs of removal or remediation of hazardous or toxic substances at the disposal or treatment facility, whether or not that facility is owned or operated by the person or entity arranging for the disposal or treatment of hazardous or toxic substances. Laws exist that impose liability for release of asbestos containing materials (“ACMs”) into the air, and third parties may seek recovery from owners or operators of real property for personal injury associated with exposure to ACMs. In connection with our ownership, operation, management, development and redevelopment of the Centers, or any other centers or properties we acquire in the future, we may be potentially liable under these laws and may incur costs in responding to these liabilities.

Some of our properties are subject to potential natural or other disasters.

Some of our Centers are located in areas that are subject to natural disasters, including our Centers in California or in other areas with higher risk of earthquakes, our Centers in flood plains or in areas that may be adversely affected by tornados, as well as our Centers in coastal regions that may be adversely affected by increases in sea levels or in the frequency or severity of hurricanes, tropical storms or other severe weather conditions. The occurrence of natural disasters can delay redevelopment or development projects, increase investment costs to repair or replace damaged properties, increase future property insurance costs and negatively impact the tenant demand for lease space. If insurance is unavailable to us or is unavailable on acceptable terms, or our insurance is not adequate to cover losses from these events, our financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected.

Uninsured losses could adversely affect our financial condition.

Each of our Centers has comprehensive liability, fire, extended coverage and rental loss insurance with insured limits customarily carried for similar properties. We do not insure certain types of losses (such as losses from wars), because they are either uninsurable or not economically insurable. In addition, while we or the relevant joint venture, as applicable, carry specific earthquake insurance on the Centers located in California, the policies are subject to a deductible equal to 5% of the total insured value of each Center, a $100,000 per occurrence minimum and a combined annual aggregate loss limit of $150 million on these Centers. We or the relevant joint venture, as applicable, carry specific earthquake insurance on the Centers located in the Pacific Northwest and in the New Madrid Seismic Zone. However, the policies are subject to a deductible equal to 2% of the total insured value of each Center, a $50,000 per occurrence minimum and a combined annual

aggregate loss limit of $200 million on these Centers. While we or the relevant joint venture also carries standalone terrorism insurance on the Centers, the policies are subject to a $50,000 deductible and a combined annual aggregate loss limit of $1 billion. Each Center has environmental insurance covering eligible third‑party losses, remediation and non-owned disposal sites, subject to a $100,000 deductible and a $50 million three-year aggregate loss limit. Some environmental losses are not covered by this insurance because they are uninsurable or not economically insurable. Furthermore, we carry title insurance on substantially all of the Centers for generally less than their full value.

If an uninsured loss or a loss in excess of insured limits occurs, we could lose all or a portion of the capital we have invested in a property, as well as the anticipated future revenue from the property, but may remain obligated for any mortgage debt or other financial obligations related to the property.

We face risks associated with security breaches through cyber attacks, cyber intrusions or otherwise, as well as other significant disruptions of our information technology (IT) networks and related systems.

We face risks associated with security breaches, whether through cyber attacks or cyber intrusions over the Internet, malware, computer viruses, attachments to e-mails, persons inside our organization or persons with access to systems inside our organization, and other significant disruptions of our IT networks and related systems. The risk of a security breach or disruption, particularly through cyber attack or cyber intrusion, including by computer hackers, foreign governments and cyber terrorists, has generally increased as the number, intensity and sophistication of attempted attacks and intrusions from around the world have increased. Our IT networks and related systems are essential to the operation of our business and our ability to perform day-to-day operations and, in some cases, may be critical to the operations of certain of our tenants. Although we make efforts to maintain the security and integrity of these types of IT networks and related systems, and we have implemented various measures to manage the risk of a security breach or disruption, there can be no assurance that our security efforts and measures will be effective or that attempted security breaches or disruptions would not be successful or damaging. A security breach or other significant disruption involving our IT networks and related systems could disrupt the proper functioning of our networks and systems; result in misstated financial reports, violations of loan covenants and/or missed reporting deadlines; result in our inability to properly monitor our compliance with the rules and regulations regarding our qualification as a REIT; result in the unauthorized access to, and destruction, loss, theft, misappropriation or release of proprietary, confidential, sensitive or otherwise valuable information of ours or others, which others could use to compete against us or for disruptive, destructive or otherwise harmful purposes and outcomes; require significant management attention and resources to remedy any damages that result; subject us to claims for breach of contract, damages, credits, penalties or termination of leases or other agreements; or damage our reputation among our tenants and investors generally. Moreover, cyber attacks perpetrated against our Anchors and tenants, including unauthorized access to customers’ credit card data and other confidential information, could diminish consumer confidence and consumer spending and negatively impact our business.

Inflation may adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

If inflation increases in the future, we may experience any or all of the following:


•	Difficulty in replacing or renewing expiring leases with new leases at higher rents;


•	Decreasing tenant sales as a result of decreased consumer spending which could adversely affect the ability of our tenants to meet their rent obligations and/or result in lower percentage rents; and


•	An inability to receive reimbursement from our tenants for their share of certain operating expenses, including common area maintenance, real estate taxes and insurance.

Inflation also poses a risk to us due to the possibility of future increases in interest rates. Such increases would adversely impact us due to our outstanding floating-rate debt as well as result in higher interest rates on new fixed-rate debt. In certain cases, we may limit our exposure to interest rate fluctuations related to a portion of our floating-rate debt by the use of interest rate cap and swap agreements. Such agreements, subject to current market conditions, allow us to replace floating-rate debt with fixed-rate debt in order to achieve our desired ratio of floating-rate to fixed-rate debt. However, in an increasing interest rate environment the fixed rates we can obtain with such replacement fixed-rate cap and swap agreements or the fixed-rate on new debt will also continue to increase.

We have substantial debt that could affect our future operations.

Our total outstanding loan indebtedness at December 31, 2014 was $7.1 billion (consisting of $6.3 billion of consolidated debt, less $0.2 billion attributable to noncontrolling interests, plus $1.0 billion of our pro rata share of unconsolidated joint venture debt). Approximately $406.8 million of such indebtedness (at our pro rata share) matures in 2015.

As a result of this substantial indebtedness, we are required to use a material portion of our cash flow to service principal and interest on our debt, which limits the amount of cash available for other business opportunities. We are also subject to the risks normally associated with debt financing, including the risk that our cash flow from operations will be insufficient to meet required debt service and that rising interest rates could adversely affect our debt service costs. In addition, our use of interest rate hedging arrangements may expose us to additional risks, including that the counterparty to the arrangement may fail to honor its obligations and that termination of these arrangements typically involves costs such as transaction fees or breakage costs. Furthermore, most of our Centers are mortgaged to secure payment of indebtedness, and if income from the Center is insufficient to pay that indebtedness, the Center could be foreclosed upon by the mortgagee resulting in a loss of income and a decline in our total asset value. Certain Centers also have debt that could become recourse debt to us if the Center is unable to discharge such debt obligation and, in certain circumstances, we may incur liability with respect to such debt greater than our legal ownership.

We are obligated to comply with financial and other covenants that could affect our operating activities.

Our unsecured credit facilities contain financial covenants, including interest coverage requirements, as well as limitations on our ability to incur debt, make dividend payments and make certain acquisitions. These covenants may restrict our ability to pursue certain business initiatives or certain transactions that might otherwise be advantageous. In addition, failure to meet certain of these financial covenants could cause an event of default under and/or accelerate some or all of such indebtedness which could have a material adverse effect on us.

We depend on external financings for our growth and ongoing debt service requirements.

We depend primarily on external financings, principally debt financings and, in more limited circumstances, equity financings, to fund the growth of our business and to ensure that we can meet ongoing maturities of our outstanding debt. Our access to financing depends on the willingness of banks, lenders and other institutions to lend to us based on their underwriting criteria which can fluctuate with market conditions and on conditions in the capital markets in general. In addition, levels of market disruption and volatility could materially adversely impact our ability to access the capital markets for equity financings. There are no assurances that we will continue to be able to obtain the financing we need for future growth or to meet our debt service as obligations mature, or that the financing will be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all. Any debt refinancing could also impose more restrictive terms.

RISKS RELATED TO OUR ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

Certain individuals have substantial influence over the management of both us and the Operating Partnership, which may create conflicts of interest.

Under the limited partnership agreement of the Operating Partnership, we, as the sole general partner, are responsible for the management of the Operating Partnership's business and affairs. Three of the principals of the Operating Partnership serve as our executive officers and as members of our board of directors. Accordingly, these principals have substantial influence over our management and the management of the Operating Partnership. As a result, certain decisions concerning our operations or other matters affecting us may present conflicts of interest for these individuals.

Outside partners in Joint Venture Centers result in additional risks to our stockholders.

We own partial interests in property partnerships that own 16 Joint Venture Centers as well as several development sites. We may acquire partial interests in additional properties through joint venture arrangements. Investments in Joint Venture Centers involve risks different from those of investments in Wholly Owned Centers.

We have fiduciary responsibilities to our joint venture partners that could affect decisions concerning the Joint Venture Centers. Third parties in certain Joint Venture Centers (notwithstanding our majority legal ownership) share control of major decisions relating to the Joint Venture Centers, including decisions with respect to sales, refinancings and the timing and amount of additional capital contributions, as well as decisions that could have an adverse impact on us.

In addition, we may lose our management and other rights relating to the Joint Venture Centers if:


•	we fail to contribute our share of additional capital needed by the property partnerships; or


•	we default under a partnership agreement for a property partnership or other agreements relating to the property partnerships or the Joint Venture Centers.

Our legal ownership interest in a joint venture vehicle may, at times, not equal our economic interest in the entity because of various provisions in certain joint venture agreements regarding distributions of cash flow based on capital account balances, allocations of profits and losses and payments of preferred returns. As a result, our actual economic interest (as distinct from our legal ownership interest) in certain of the Joint Venture Centers could fluctuate from time to time and may not wholly align with our legal ownership interests. Substantially all of our joint venture agreements contain rights of first refusal, buy-sell provisions, exit rights, default dilution remedies and/or other break up provisions or remedies which are customary in real estate joint venture agreements and which may, positively or negatively, affect the ultimate realization of cash flow and/or capital or liquidation proceeds.

Our holding company structure makes us dependent on distributions from the Operating Partnership.

Because we conduct our operations through the Operating Partnership, our ability to service our debt obligations and pay dividends to our stockholders is strictly dependent upon the earnings and cash flows of the Operating Partnership and the ability of the Operating Partnership to make distributions to us. Under the Delaware Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act, the Operating Partnership is prohibited from making any distribution to us to the extent that at the time of the distribution, after giving effect to the distribution, all liabilities of the Operating Partnership (other than some non-recourse liabilities and some liabilities to the partners) exceed the fair value of the assets of the Operating Partnership. An inability to make cash distributions from the Operating Partnership could jeopardize our ability to maintain qualification as a REIT.

An ownership limit and certain of our Charter and bylaw provisions could inhibit a change of control or reduce the value of our common stock.

The Ownership Limit. In order for us to maintain our qualification as a REIT, not more than 50% in value of our outstanding stock (after taking into account certain options to acquire stock) may be owned, directly or indirectly or through the application of certain attribution rules, by five or fewer individuals (as defined in the Internal Revenue Code to include some entities that would not ordinarily be considered “individuals”) at any time during the last half of a taxable year. To assist us in maintaining our qualification as a REIT, among other purposes, our Charter restricts ownership of more than 5% (the “Ownership Limit”) of the lesser of the number or value of our outstanding shares of stock by any single stockholder or a group of stockholders (with limited exceptions). In addition to enhancing preservation of our status as a REIT, the Ownership Limit may:


•	have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a change in control of us or other transaction without the approval of our board of directors, even if the change in control or other transaction is in the best interests of our stockholders; and


•	limit the opportunity for our stockholders to receive a premium for their common stock or preferred stock that they might otherwise receive if an investor were attempting to acquire a block of stock in excess of the Ownership Limit or otherwise effect a change in control of us.

Our board of directors, in its sole discretion, may waive or modify (subject to limitations and upon any conditions as it may direct) the Ownership Limit with respect to one or more of our stockholders, if it is satisfied that ownership in excess of this limit will not jeopardize our status as a REIT.

Selected Provisions of our Charter, Bylaws and Maryland Law. Some of the provisions of our Charter, bylaws and Maryland law may have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a third party from making an acquisition proposal for us and may inhibit a change in control that some, or a majority, of our stockholders might believe to be in their best interests or that could give our stockholders the opportunity to realize a premium over the then-prevailing market prices for our shares. These provisions include the following:


•	advance notice requirements for stockholder nominations of directors and stockholder proposals to be considered at stockholder meetings;


•	the obligation of the directors to consider a variety of factors with respect to a proposed business combination or other change of control transaction;


•	the authority of the directors to classify or reclassify unissued shares and issue one or more series of common stock or preferred stock;


•	the authority to create and issue rights entitling the holders thereof to purchase shares of stock or other securities from us; and


•	limitations on the amendment of our Charter and bylaws, the change in control of us, and the liability of our directors and officers.

In addition, the Maryland General Corporation Law prohibits business combinations between a Maryland corporation and an interested stockholder (which includes any person who beneficially holds 10% or more of the voting power of the corporation's outstanding voting stock or any affiliate or associate of ours who was the beneficial owner, directly or indirectly, of 10% or more of the voting power of the corporation's outstanding stock at any time within the two year period prior to the date in question) or its affiliates for five years following the most recent date on which the interested stockholder became an interested stockholder and, after the five-year period, requires the recommendation of the board of directors and two supermajority stockholder votes to approve a business combination unless the stockholders receive a minimum price determined by the statute. As permitted by Maryland law, our Charter exempts from these provisions any business combination between us and the principals and their respective affiliates and related persons. Maryland law also allows the board of directors to exempt particular business combinations before the interested stockholder becomes an interested stockholder. Furthermore, a person is not an interested stockholder if the transaction by which he or she would otherwise have become an interested stockholder is approved in advance by the board of directors.

The Maryland General Corporation Law also provides that the acquirer of certain levels of voting power in electing directors of a Maryland corporation (one-tenth or more but less than one-third, one-third or more but less than a majority and a majority or more) is not entitled to vote the shares in excess of the applicable threshold, unless voting rights for the shares are approved by holders of two-thirds of the disinterested shares or unless the acquisition of the shares has been specifically or generally approved or exempted from the statute by a provision in our Charter or bylaws adopted before the acquisition of the shares. Our Charter exempts from these provisions voting rights of shares owned or acquired by the principals and their respective affiliates and related persons. Our bylaws also contain a provision exempting from this statute any acquisition by any person of shares of our common stock. There can be no assurance that this bylaw will not be amended or eliminated in the future. The Maryland General Corporation Law and our Charter also contain supermajority voting requirements with respect to our ability to amend certain provisions of our Charter, merge, or sell all or substantially all of our assets. Furthermore, the Maryland General Corporation Law permits our board of directors, without stockholder approval and regardless of what is currently provided in our Charter or bylaws, to adopt certain Charter and bylaw provisions, such as a classified board, that may have the effect of delaying or preventing a third party from making an acquisition proposal for us.

FEDERAL INCOME TAX RISKS

The tax consequences of the sale of some of the Centers and certain holdings of the principals may create conflicts of interest.

The principals will experience negative tax consequences if some of the Centers are sold. As a result, the principals may not favor a sale of these Centers even though such a sale may benefit our other stockholders. In addition, the principals may have different interests than our stockholders because they are significant holders of limited partnership units in the Operating Partnership.

If we were to fail to qualify as a REIT, we would have reduced funds available for distributions to our stockholders.

We believe that we currently qualify as a REIT. No assurance can be given that we will remain qualified as a REIT. Qualification as a REIT involves the application of highly technical and complex Internal Revenue Code provisions for which there are only limited judicial or administrative interpretations. The complexity of these provisions and of the applicable income tax regulations is greater in the case of a REIT structure like ours that holds assets in partnership form. The determination of various factual matters and circumstances not entirely within our control, including determinations by our partners in the Joint Venture Centers, may affect our continued qualification as a REIT. In addition, legislation, new regulations, administrative interpretations or court decisions could significantly change the tax laws with respect to our qualification as a REIT or the U.S. federal income tax consequences of that qualification.

In addition, we currently hold certain of our properties through subsidiaries that have elected to be taxed as REITs and we may in the future determine that it is in our best interests to hold one or more of our other properties through one or more subsidiaries that elect to be taxed as REITs. If any of these subsidiaries fails to qualify as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes, then we may also fail to qualify as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes.

If in any taxable year we were to fail to qualify as a REIT, we will suffer the following negative results:


•	we will not be allowed a deduction for distributions to stockholders in computing our taxable income; and


•	we will be subject to U.S. federal income tax on our taxable income at regular corporate rates.

In addition, if we were to lose our REIT status, we would be prohibited from qualifying as a REIT for the four taxable years following the year during which the qualification was lost, absent relief under statutory provisions. As a result, net income and the funds available for distributions to our stockholders would be reduced for at least five years and the fair market value of our shares could be materially adversely affected. Furthermore, the Internal Revenue Service could challenge our REIT status for past periods. Such a challenge, if successful, could result in us owing a material amount of tax for prior periods. It is possible that future economic, market, legal, tax or other considerations might cause our board of directors to revoke our REIT election.

Even if we remain qualified as a REIT, we might face other tax liabilities that reduce our cash flow. Further, we might be subject to federal, state and local taxes on our income and property. Any of these taxes would decrease cash available for distributions to stockholders.

Complying with REIT requirements might cause us to forego otherwise attractive opportunities.

In order to qualify as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes, we must satisfy tests concerning, among other things, our sources of income, the nature of our assets, the amounts we distribute to our stockholders and the ownership of our stock. We may also be required to make distributions to our stockholders at disadvantageous times or when we do not have funds readily available for distribution. Thus, compliance with REIT requirements may cause us to forego opportunities we would otherwise pursue.

In addition, the REIT provisions of the Internal Revenue Code impose a 100% tax on income from “prohibited transactions.” Prohibited transactions generally include sales of assets that constitute inventory or other property held for sale in the ordinary course of business, other than foreclosure property. This 100% tax could impact our desire to sell assets and other investments at otherwise opportune times if we believe such sales could be considered prohibited transactions.

Complying with REIT requirements may force us to borrow or take other measures to make distributions to our stockholders.

As a REIT, we generally must distribute 90% of our annual taxable income (subject to certain adjustments) to our stockholders. From time to time, we might generate taxable income greater than our net income for financial reporting purposes, or our taxable income might be greater than our cash flow available for distributions to our stockholders. If we do not have other funds available in these situations, we might be unable to distribute 90% of our taxable income as required by the REIT rules. In that case, we would need to borrow funds, liquidate or sell a portion of our properties or investments (potentially at disadvantageous or unfavorable prices), in certain limited cases distribute a combination of cash and stock (at our stockholders' election but subject to an aggregate cash limit established by the Company) or find another alternative source of funds. These alternatives could increase our costs or reduce our equity. In addition, to the extent we borrow funds to pay distributions, the amount of cash available to us in future periods will be decreased by the amount of cash flow we will need to service principal and interest on the amounts we borrow, which will limit cash flow available to us for other investments or business opportunities.

Tax legislative or regulatory action could adversely affect us or our investors.

In recent years, numerous legislative, judicial and administrative changes have been made to the U.S. federal income tax laws applicable to investments similar to an investment in our stock. Additional changes to tax laws are likely to continue in the future, and we cannot assure you that any such changes will not adversely affect the taxation of us or our stockholders. Any such changes could have an adverse effect on an investment in our stock or on the market value or the resale potential of our properties.

ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

None.

ITEM 2. PROPERTIES

The following table sets forth certain information regarding the Centers and other locations that are wholly owned or partly owned by the Company as of December 31, 2014, excluding Great Northern Mall.



Count	Company's Ownership(1)	Name of Center/Location(2)	Year of Original Construction/ Acquisition	Year of Most Recent Expansion/ Renovation	Total GLA(3)	Mall and Freestanding GLA	Percentage of Mall and Freestanding GLA Leased		Non-Owned Anchors (3)	Company-Owned Anchors (3)	Sales PSF (4)
	CONSOLIDATED CENTERS:
1	100%	Arrowhead Towne Center	1993/2002	2004	1,198,000	390,000	94.9	%	Dillard's, JCPenney, Macy's, Sears	Dick's Sporting Goods, Forever 21	$673
		Glendale, Arizona							Dillard's, JCPenney, Macy's, Sears	Dick's Sporting Goods, Forever 21
2	100%	Capitola Mall(5)	1977/1995	1988	577,000	188,000	89.9	%	Macy's, Sears, Target	Kohl's	$334
		Capitola, California							Macy's, Sears, Target	Kohl's
3	100%	Cascade Mall	1989/1999	1998	589,000	264,000	91.4	%	Target	JCPenney, Macy's, Macy's Men's, Children's & Home, Sears(6)	$317
		Burlington, Washington							Target	JCPenney, Macy's, Macy's Men's, Children's & Home, Sears(6)
4	50.1%	Chandler Fashion Center	2001/2002	-	1,320,000	634,000	93.6	%	Dillard's, Macy's, Nordstrom, Sears	—	$606
	50.1%	Chandler, Arizona							Dillard's, Macy's, Nordstrom, Sears
5	100%	Danbury Fair Mall	1986/2005	2010	1,271,000	583,000	97.6	%	JCPenney, Macy's, Sears	Forever 21, Lord & Taylor	$643
		Danbury, Connecticut							JCPenney, Macy's, Sears	Forever 21, Lord & Taylor
6	100%	Deptford Mall	1975/2006	1990	1,040,000	343,000	98.5	%	JCPenney, Macy's, Sears	Boscov's	$526
		Deptford, New Jersey							JCPenney, Macy's, Sears	Boscov's
7	100%	Desert Sky Mall	1981/2002	2007	892,000	281,000	92.8	%	Burlington Coat Factory, Dillard's, Sears	La Curacao, Mercado de los Cielos	$302
		Phoenix, Arizona							Burlington Coat Factory, Dillard's, Sears	La Curacao, Mercado de los Cielos
8	100%	Eastland Mall(5)	1978/1998	1996	1,044,000	554,000	94.8	%	Dillard's, Macy's	JCPenney	$371
		Evansville, Indiana							Dillard's, Macy's	JCPenney
9	100%	Fashion Outlets of Chicago	2013/—	-	529,000	529,000	94.4	%	—	—	$651
		Rosemont, Illinois
10	100%	Flagstaff Mall	1979/2002	2007	347,000	143,000	71.8	%	Dillard's, Sears	JCPenney	$340
		Flagstaff, Arizona							Dillard's, Sears	JCPenney
11	100%	FlatIron Crossing	2000/2002	2009	1,434,000	790,000	93.9	%	Dillard's, Macy's, Nordstrom	Dick's Sporting Goods	$532
		Broomfield, Colorado							Dillard's, Macy's, Nordstrom	Dick's Sporting Goods
12	50.1%	Freehold Raceway Mall	1990/2005	2007	1,668,000	870,000	98.6	%	JCPenney, Lord & Taylor, Macy's, Nordstrom, Sears	—	$590
		Freehold, New Jersey							JCPenney, Lord & Taylor, Macy's, Nordstrom, Sears
13	100%	Fresno Fashion Fair	1970/1996	2006	963,000	402,000	98.4	%	Macy's Women's & Home	Forever 21, JCPenney, Macy's Men's & Children's	$601
		Fresno, California							Macy's Women's & Home	Forever 21, JCPenney, Macy's Men's & Children's
14	100%	Green Acres Mall(5)(7)	1956/2013	2007	1,790,000	746,000	93.0	%	—	BJ's Wholesale Club, JCPenney, Kohl's, Macy's, Macy's Men's/Furniture Gallery, Sears, Walmart	$577
		Valley Stream, New York
15	100%	Kings Plaza Shopping Center(5)	1971/2012	2002	1,191,000	463,000	91.9	%	Macy's	Lowe's, Sears	$673
		Brooklyn, New York							Macy's	Lowe's, Sears
16	100%	La Cumbre Plaza(5)	1967/2004	1989	491,000	174,000	85.6	%	Macy's	Sears	$417
		Santa Barbara, California							Macy's	Sears
17	100%	Lakewood Center	1953/1975	2008	2,066,000	1,000,000	97.3	%	—	Costco, Forever 21, Home Depot, JCPenney, Macy's, Target	$431
		Lakewood, California								Costco, Forever 21, Home Depot, JCPenney, Macy's, Target
18	100%	Los Cerritos Center(8)	1971/1999	2010	1,113,000	437,000	98.5	%	Macy's, Nordstrom, Sears	Forever 21	$720
		Cerritos, California							Macy's, Nordstrom, Sears	Forever 21
19	100%	Northgate Mall	1964/1986	2010	753,000	282,000	96.0	%	—	Kohl's, Macy's, Sears	$392
		San Rafael, California								Kohl's, Macy's, Sears



Count	Company's Ownership(1)	Name of Center/Location(2)	Year of Original Construction/ Acquisition	Year of Most Recent Expansion/ Renovation	Total GLA(3)	Mall and Freestanding GLA	Percentage of Mall and Freestanding GLA Leased		Non-Owned Anchors (3)	Company-Owned Anchors (3)	Sales PSF (4)
20	100%	NorthPark Mall	1973/1998	2001	1,050,000	400,000	90.6	%	Dillard's, JCPenney, Sears, Von Maur	Younkers	$307
		Davenport, Iowa							Dillard's, JCPenney, Sears, Von Maur	Younkers
21	100%	Oaks, The	1978/2002	2009	1,137,000	579,000	97.9	%	JCPenney, Macy's, Macy's Men's & Home	Nordstrom	$512
		Thousand Oaks, California							JCPenney, Macy's, Macy's Men's & Home	Nordstrom
22	100%	Pacific View	1965/1996	2001	1,021,000	372,000	95.0	%	JCPenney, Sears, Target	Macy's	$405
		Ventura, California							JCPenney, Sears, Target	Macy's
23	100%	Queens Center(5)	1973/1995	2004	967,000	411,000	99.1	%	JCPenney, Macy's	—	$1,088
		Queens, New York							JCPenney, Macy's
24	100%	Santa Monica Place	1980/1999	2010	466,000	242,000	92.7	%	—	Bloomingdale's, Nordstrom	$754
		Santa Monica, California								Bloomingdale's, Nordstrom
25	84.9%	SanTan Village Regional Center	2007/—	2009	1,028,000	691,000	99.1	%	Dillard's, Macy's	—	$497
		Gilbert, Arizona							Dillard's, Macy's
26	100%	South Plains Mall	1972/1998	1995	1,127,000	468,000	95.2	%	Sears	Bealls, Dillard's (two), JCPenney	$455
		Lubbock, Texas							Sears	Bealls, Dillard's (two), JCPenney
27	100%	Stonewood Center(5)	1953/1997	1991	932,000	358,000	99.5	%	—	JCPenney, Kohl's, Macy's, Sears	$544
		Downey, California								JCPenney, Kohl's, Macy's, Sears
28	100%	Superstition Springs Center(9)	1990/2002	2002	1,082,000	388,000	92.8	%	Dillard's, JCPenney, Macy's, Sears	—	$350
		Mesa, Arizona							Dillard's, JCPenney, Macy's, Sears
29	100%	Towne Mall	1985/2005	1989	350,000	179,000	89.8	%	—	Belk, JCPenney, Sears	$323
		Elizabethtown, Kentucky								Belk, JCPenney, Sears
30	100%	Tucson La Encantada	2002/2002	2005	242,000	242,000	94.5	%	—	—	$733
		Tucson, Arizona
31	100%	Twenty Ninth Street(5)	1963/1979	2007	847,000	555,000	97.8	%	Macy's	Home Depot	$605
		Boulder, Colorado							Macy's	Home Depot
32	100%	Valley Mall	1978/1998	1992	507,000	234,000	92.6	%	Target	Belk, JCPenney	$271
		Harrisonburg, Virginia							Target	Belk, JCPenney
33	100%	Valley River Center(9)	1969/2006	2007	920,000	344,000	98.3	%	Macy's	JCPenney, Sports Authority	$461
		Eugene, Oregon							Macy's	JCPenney, Sports Authority
34	100%	Victor Valley, Mall of	1986/2004	2012	576,000	303,000	98.6	%	Macy's	JCPenney, Sears	$492
		Victorville, California							Macy's	JCPenney, Sears
35	100%	Vintage Faire Mall	1977/1996	2008	1,129,000	428,000	96.6	%	Forever 21, Macy's Women's & Children's, Sears	JCPenney, Macy's Men's & Home	$633
		Modesto, California							Forever 21, Macy's Women's & Children's, Sears	JCPenney, Macy's Men's & Home
36	100%	Washington Square	1974/1999	2005	1,441,000	506,000	94.8	%	Macy's, Sears	Dick's Sporting Goods, JCPenney, Nordstrom	$1,012
		Portland, Oregon							Macy's, Sears	Dick's Sporting Goods, JCPenney, Nordstrom
37	100%	Wilton Mall	1990/2005	1998	736,000	501,000	94.0	%	JCPenney	Bon-Ton, Sears	$276
		Saratoga Springs, New York							JCPenney	Bon-Ton, Sears