SQFT Presidio Property Trust Inc

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

Risks Related to our Business, Properties and Operations

Our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows are expected to be adversely affected by the recent COVID-19 pandemic and the impact could be material to us.

The current outbreak of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19), and the resulting volatility it has created, has disrupted our business and we expect that the COVID-19 pandemic may significantly adversely impact our business, financial condition and results of operations going forward. Other potential pandemics or outbreaks could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows in the future. Further, the spread of the COVID-19 outbreak has caused severe disruptions in the U.S. and global economy and financial markets and could potentially create widespread business continuity issues of an unknown magnitude and duration.

Since being reported in December 2019, COVID-19 has spread globally, including to every state in the United States. On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a pandemic, and on March 13, 2020, the United States declared a national emergency with respect to COVID-19.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had, and another pandemic in the future could have, repercussions across regional and global economies and financial markets. The global impact of the outbreak has been rapidly evolving and many countries, including the United States (including the states and cities that comprise the San Diego, California; Denver and Colorado Springs, Colorado; Fargo and Bismarck, North Dakota; and other metro regions, where we own and operate properties) have also instituted quarantines, “shelter in place” mandates, including rules and restrictions on travel and the types of businesses that may continue to operate. As a result, the COVID-19 pandemic is negatively impacting almost every industry, both inside and outside these metro regions, directly or indirectly and has created business continuity issues. For instance, a number of our commercial tenants have announced temporary closures of their offices or stores and requested temporary rent deferral or rent abatement during this pandemic. In addition, jurisdictions where we own and operate properties have implemented, or may implement, rent freezes, eviction freezes, or other similar restrictions. The full extent of the impacts on our business over the long term are largely uncertain and dependent on a number of factors beyond our control.

As a result of the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, we have been and may continue to be impacted by one or more of the following:

The significance, extent and duration of the impact of COVID-19 remains largely uncertain and dependent on future developments that cannot be accurately predicted at this time, such as the continued severity, duration, transmission rate and geographic spread of COVID-19, the extent and effectiveness of the containment measures taken, and the response of the overall economy, the financial markets and the population, once the current containment measures are lifted.

The rapid development and volatility of this situation precludes us from making any prediction as to the ultimate adverse impact of COVID-19. As a result, we cannot provide an estimate of the overall impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our business or when, or if, we (or our tenants) will be able to resume fully normal operations. Nevertheless, COVID-19 presents material uncertainty and risk with respect to our business, financial performance and condition, operating results and cash flows.

The impact of COVID-19 may also exacerbate other risks discussed in this 10-K, any of which could have a material effect on us.

We face numerous risks associated with the real estate industry that could adversely affect our results of operations through decreased revenues or increased costs.

As a real estate company, we are subject to various changes in real estate conditions, and any negative trends in such real estate conditions may adversely affect our results of operations through decreased revenues or increased costs. These conditions include:

Moreover, other factors may adversely affect our results of operations, including potential liability under environmental and other laws and other unforeseen events, many of which are discussed elsewhere in the following risk factors. Any or all of these factors could materially adversely affect our results of operations through decreased revenues or increased costs.

Conditions in the financial markets could affect our ability to obtain financing on reasonable terms and have other adverse effects on our operations.

The financial markets could tighten with respect to secured real estate financing. Lenders with whom we typically deal may increase their credit spreads resulting in an increase in borrowing costs. Higher costs of mortgage financing may result in lower yields from our real estate investments, which may reduce our cash flow available for distribution to our stockholders. Reduced cash flow could also diminish our ability to purchase additional properties and thus decrease our diversification of real estate ownership.

Disruptions in the financial markets and uncertain economic conditions could adversely affect the value of our real estate investments.

Disruptions in the financial markets could adversely affect the value of our real estate investments. Such conditions could impact commercial real estate fundamentals and result in lower occupancy, lower rental rates, and declining values in our real estate portfolio and in the collateral securing our loan investments. As a result, the value of our property investments could decrease below the amounts paid for such investments, the value of collateral securing our loans could decrease below the outstanding principal amounts of such loans, and revenues from our properties could decrease due to fewer and/or delinquent tenants or lower rental rates. These factors would significantly harm our revenues, results of operations, financial condition, business prospects and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

A decrease in real estate values could negatively affect our ability to refinance our existing mortgage obligations or obtain larger mortgages.

A decrease in real estate values would decrease the principal amount of secured loans we can obtain on a specific property and our ability to refinance our existing mortgage loans or obtain larger mortgage loans. In some circumstances, a decrease in the value of an existing property which secures a mortgage loan may require us to prepay or post additional security for that mortgage loan. This would occur where the lender’s initial appraised value of the property decreases below the value required to maintain a loan-to-value ratio specified in the mortgage loan agreement. Thus, any sustained period of depressed real estate prices would likely adversely affect our ability to finance our real estate investments.

We may be adversely affected by unfavorable economic changes in the geographic areas where our properties are located.

Adverse economic conditions in areas where properties securing or otherwise underlying our investments are located (including business layoffs or downsizing, industry slowdowns, changing demographics and other factors) and local real estate conditions (such as oversupply or reduced demand) may have an adverse effect on the value of our real estate portfolio. The deterioration of any of these local conditions could hinder our ability to profitably operate a property and adversely affect the price and terms of a sale or other disposition of the property.

Competition for properties to acquire may limit the opportunities available to us and increase our acquisition costs, which could have a material adverse effect on our growth prospects and negatively impact our profitability.

The market for property to acquire continues to be competitive, which may reduce suitable investment opportunities available to us and increase acquisition purchase prices. Competition for properties offering higher rates of returns may intensify if real estate investments become more attractive relative to other investments. In acquiring real properties, we may experience considerable competition from a field of other investors, including other REITs, private equity investors, institutional investment funds, and real estate investment programs. Many of these competitors are larger than we are and have access to greater financial resources and better access to lower costs of capital. In addition, some of our competitors may have higher risk tolerances or different risk assessments, which could allow them to consider a wider variety of investments. This competition may limit our ability to take advantage of attractive investment opportunities that are consistent with our objectives. Our inability to acquire desirable properties on favorable terms could adversely affect our growth prospects, financial condition, our profitability and our ability to pay dividends.

Our inability to sell a property at the time and on the terms we desire could limit our ability to realize a gain on our investments and pay distributions to our stockholders.

Generally, we seek to sell, exchange or otherwise dispose of our properties when we determine such action to be in our best interests. Many factors beyond our control affect the real estate market and could affect our ability to sell properties for the price, on the terms or within the time frame that we desire. These factors include general economic conditions, the availability of financing, interest rates, supply and demand, and tax considerations. Because real estate investments are relatively illiquid, we have a limited ability to vary our portfolio in response to changes in economic or other conditions. Therefore, our inability to sell properties at the time and on the terms we want could reduce our cash flow, affect our ability to service or reduce our debt obligations, and limit our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

Lease default or termination by one of our major tenants could adversely impact our operations and our ability to pay dividends.

The success of our real estate investments depend on the financial stability of our tenants. A default or termination by a significant tenant (or a series of tenants) on its lease payments could cause us to lose the revenue associated with such lease and seek an alternative source of revenue to meet mortgage payments and prevent a foreclosure, if the property is subject to a mortgage. In the event of a significant tenant default or bankruptcy, we may experience delays in enforcing our rights as landlord and may incur substantial costs in protecting our investment. Additionally, we may be unable to lease the property for the rent previously received or sell the property without incurring a loss. These events could cause us to reduce the amount of distributions to our stockholders.

A property that becomes vacant could be difficult to sell or re-lease and could have a material adverse effect on our operations.

We expect portions of our properties to periodically become vacant by reason of lease expirations, terminations, or tenant defaults. If a tenant vacates a property, we may be unable to re-lease the property without incurring additional expenditures, or at all. If the vacancy continues for a long period of time, if the rental rates upon such re-lease are significantly lower than expected, or if our reserves for these purposes prove inadequate, we will experience a reduction in net income and may be required to reduce or eliminate distributions to our stockholders. In addition, because a property’s market value depends principally upon the value of the leases associated with that property, the resale value of a property with high or prolonged vacancies could suffer, which could further reduce our returns.

We may incur substantial costs in improving our properties.

In order to re-lease or sell a property, substantial renovations or remodeling could be required. For instance, we expect that some of our properties will be designed for use by a particular tenant or business. Upon default or termination of the lease by such a tenant, the property might not be marketable without substantial capital improvements. The cost of construction in connection with any renovations and the time it takes to complete such renovations may be affected by factors beyond our control, including material and labor shortages, general contractor and/or subcontractor defaults and delays, permitting issues, weather conditions, and changes in federal, state and local laws. If we experience cost overruns resulting from delays or other causes in any construction project, we may have to seek additional debt financing. Further, delays in construction will cause a delay in our receipt of revenues from that property and could adversely affect our ability to meet our debt service obligations.

Uninsured and/or underinsured losses may adversely affect returns to our stockholders.

Our policy is to obtain insurance coverage for each of our properties covering loss from liability, fire, and casualty in the amounts and under the terms we deem sufficient to insure our losses. Under tenant leases on our commercial properties, we require our tenants to obtain insurance to cover casualty losses and general liability in amounts and under terms customarily obtained for similar properties in the area. However, in certain areas, insurance to cover some losses, generally losses of a catastrophic nature such as earthquakes, floods, wind, hail, terrorism and wars, is either unavailable or cannot be obtained at a reasonable cost. Consequently, we may not have adequate coverage for such losses. If any of our properties incurs a casualty loss that is not fully insured, we could lose some or all of our investment in the property. In addition, other than any working capital reserve or other reserves we may establish, we likely would have no source of funding to repair or reconstruct any uninsured or underinsured property.

Since we are not required to maintain specific levels of cash reserves, we may have difficulty in the event of increased or unanticipated expenses.

We do not currently have, nor do we anticipate that we will establish in the future, a permanent reserve for maintenance and repairs, lease commissions, or tenant improvements of real estate properties. To the extent that existing expenses increase or unanticipated expenses arise and accumulated reserves are insufficient to meet such expenses, we would be required to obtain additional funds through borrowing or the sale of property. There can be no guarantee that such additional funds will be available on favorable terms, or at all.

We may have to extend credit to buyers of our properties and a default by such buyers could have a material adverse effect on our operations and our ability to pay dividends.

In order to sell a property, we may lend the buyer all or a portion of the purchase price. When we provide financing to a buyer, we bear the risk that the buyer may default or that we may not receive full payment for the property sold. Even in the absence of a buyer default, the distribution of the proceeds of the sale to our stockholders, or the reinvestment of the proceeds in other property, will be delayed until the promissory note or collateral we may accept upon a sale is actually paid, sold, refinanced or otherwise disposed.

We may acquire properties in joint ventures, partnerships or through limited liability companies, which could limit our ability to control or liquidate such holdings.

We may hold properties indirectly with others as co-owners (a co-tenancy interest) or indirectly through an intermediary entity such as a joint venture, partnership or limited liability company. Also, we may on occasion purchase an interest in a long-term leasehold estate or we may enter into a sale-leaseback financing transaction (see risk factor titled “In a sale-leaseback transaction, we are at risk that our seller/lessee will default, which could impair our operations and limit our ability to pay dividends.”). Such ownership structures allow us to hold a more valuable property with a smaller investment, but may reduce our ability to control such properties. In addition, if our co-owner in such arrangements experiences financial difficulties or is otherwise unable or unwilling to fulfill its obligations, we may be forced to find a new co-owner on less favorable terms or lose our interest in such property if no co-owner can be found.

As a general partner or member in DownREIT entities, we could be responsible for all liabilities of such entities.

We own three of our properties indirectly through limited liability companies and limited partnerships under a DownREIT structure. In a DownREIT structure, as well as some joint ventures or other investments we may make, we may utilize a limited liability company or a limited partnership as the holder of our real estate investment. We currently own a portion of these interests as a member, general partner and/or limited partner and in the future may acquire all or a greater interest in such entity. As a sole member or general partner, we are or would be potentially liable for all of the liabilities of the entities, even if we do not have rights of management or control over its operations. Therefore, our liability could far exceed the amount or value of investment we initially made, or then had, in such entities.

Our ability to operate a property may be limited by contract, which could prevent us from obtaining the maximum value from such properties.

Some of our properties will likely be contiguous to other parcels of real property, for example, comprising part of the same shopping center development. In some cases, there could exist significant covenants, conditions and restrictions, known as CC&Rs, relating to such property and any improvements or easements related to that property. The CC&Rs would restrict our operation of that property and could adversely affect the value of such property, either of which could adversely affect our operating costs and reduce the amount of funds that we have available to pay dividends.

We may acquire properties “as is,” which increases the risk that we will have to remedy defects or costs without recourse to the seller.

We may acquire real estate properties “as is,” with only limited representations and warranties from the seller regarding matters affecting the condition, use and ownership of the property. If defects in the property or other matters adversely affecting the property are discovered post-closing, we may not be able to pursue a claim for any or all damages against the seller. Therefore, we could lose some or all of our invested capital in the property as well as rental income. Such a situation could negatively affect our financial condition and results of operations.

In a sale-leaseback transaction, we are at risk that our seller/lessee will default, which could impair our operations and limit our ability to pay dividends.

In our model homes business we frequently lease model home properties back to the seller or homebuilder for a certain period of time. Our ability to meet any mortgage payments is subject to the seller/lessee’s ability to pay its rent and other lease obligations, such as triple net expenses, on a timely basis. A default by the seller/lessee or other premature termination of its leaseback agreement with us and our subsequent inability to release the property could cause us to suffer losses and adversely affect our financial condition and ability to pay dividends.

Our model home business is substantially dependent on the supply and/or demand for single family homes.

Any significant decrease in the supply and/or demand for single family homes could have an adverse effect on our business. Reductions in the number of model home properties built by homebuilders due to fewer planned unit developments, rising construction costs or other factors affecting supply could reduce the number of acquisition opportunities available to us. The level of demand for single family homes may be impacted by a variety of factors including changes in population density, the health of local, regional and national economies, mortgage rates, and the demand and use of model homes in newly developed communities by homebuilders and developers.

We may be unable to acquire and/or manage additional model homes at competitive prices or at all.

Model homes generally have a short life before becoming residential homes and there are a limited number of model homes at any given time. In addition, as each model home is unique, we need to expend resources to complete our due diligence and underwriting process on many individual model homes, thereby increasing our acquisition costs and possibly reducing the amount that we are able to pay for a particular property. Accordingly, our plan to grow our model home business by acquiring additional model homes to lease back to home builders may not succeed.

There are a limited number of model homes and competition to buy these properties may be significant.

We plan to acquire model homes to lease back to home builders when we identify attractive opportunities and have financing available to complete such acquisitions. We may face competition for acquisition opportunities from other investors. We may be unable to acquire a desired property because of competition from other well capitalized real estate investors, including private investment funds and others. Competition from other real estate investors may also significantly increase the purchase price we must pay to acquire properties. In addition, our initial public offering may generate additional competition from other REITs, real estate companies and other investors with more resources than we have that did not previously focus on model homes as an investment opportunity.

A significant percentage of our properties are concentrated in a small number of states, which exposes our business to the effects of certain regional events and occurrences.

Our commercial properties are currently located in Southern California, Colorado and North Dakota. Our model home portfolio consists of properties currently located in seven states, although a significant concentration of our model homes are located in two states. As of December 31, 2020, approximately 95% of our model homes were located in Texas and Florida with approximately 81% located in Texas. This concentration of properties in a limited number of markets may expose us to risks of adverse economic developments that are greater than if our portfolio were more geographically diverse. These economic developments include regional economic downturns and potentially higher local property, sales and income taxes in the geographic markets in which we are concentrated. In addition, our properties are subject to the effects of adverse acts of nature, such as winter storms, hurricanes, hailstorms, strong winds, earthquakes and tornadoes, which may cause damage, such as flooding, to our properties. Additionally, we cannot assure you that the amount of casualty insurance we maintain would entirely cover damages caused by any such event, or in the case of our model homes portfolio or commercial triple net leases, that the insurance maintained by our tenants would entirely cover damages caused by any such event.

As a result of our geographic concentration of properties, we will face a greater risk of a negative impact on our revenues in the event these areas are more severely impacted by adverse economic and competitive conditions and extreme weather than other areas in the United States.

We may be required under applicable accounting principles and standards to make impairment charges against one or more of our properties.

Under current accounting standards, requirements, and principles, we are required to periodically evaluate our real estate investments for impairment based on a number of indicators. Impairment indicators include real estate markets, leasing rates, occupancy levels, mortgage loan status, and other factors which affect the value of a particular property. For example, a tenant’s default under a lease, the upcoming termination of a long-term lease, the pending maturity of a mortgage loan secured by a property, and the unavailability of replacement financing are all impairment indicators. The presence of any of these indicators may require us to make a material impairment charge against the property so affected. If we determine an impairment has occurred, we are required to make an adjustment to the net carrying value of the property which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition for the period in which the impairment charge is recorded.

Discovery of toxic mold on our properties may adversely affect our results of operation.

Litigation and concern about indoor exposure to certain types of toxic molds have been increasing as the public becomes more aware that exposure to mold can cause a variety of health effects and symptoms, including allergic reactions. Toxic molds can be found almost anywhere; when excessive moisture accumulates in buildings or on building materials, mold growth will often occur, particularly if the moisture remains undiscovered or unaddressed. We attempt to acquire properties where there is no toxic mold or where there has not been any proceeding or litigation with respect to the presence of toxic mold. However, we cannot provide assurances that toxic mold will not exist on any of our properties or will not subsequently develop. The presence of toxic mold at any of our properties could require us to undertake a costly remediation program to contain or remove the mold from the affected property. In addition, the presence of toxic mold could expose us to liability from our tenants, employees of our tenants, and others if property damage or health concerns arise.

Our long-term growth may depend on obtaining additional equity capital.

Historically, we relied on cash from the sale of our equity securities to fund the implementation of our business plan, including property acquisitions and building our staff and internal management and administrative capabilities. We terminated our Series A Common Stock private placement on December 31, 2011 and closed on a preferred stock financing in August 2014, which financing was repaid in September 2020. Our continued ability to fund real estate investments, our operations, and payment of dividends to our stockholders will likely be dependent upon our obtaining additional capital through the additional sales of our equity and/or debt securities. Without additional capital, we may not be able to grow our asset base to a size that is sufficient to support our planned growth, current operations, or to pay dividends to our stockholders at rates or at the levels required to maintain our REIT status (see risk factor titled “We may be forced to borrow funds on a short-term basis, to sell assets or to issue securities to meet the REIT minimum distribution or other requirements or for working capital purposes.”). There is no assurance as to when and under what terms we could successfully obtain additional funding through the sale of our equity and/or debt securities. Our access to additional equity or debt capital depends on a number of factors, including general market conditions, the market’s perception of our growth potential, our expected future earnings, and our debt levels.

We currently are dependent on internal cash from our operations, financing and proceeds from property sales to fund future property acquisitions, meet our operational costs and pay dividends to our stockholders.

To the extent the cash we receive from our real estate investments and re-financing of existing properties is not sufficient to pay our costs of operations, our acquisition of additional properties, or our payment of dividends to our stockholders, we would be required to seek capital through additional measures. We may incur additional debt or issue additional preferred and common stock for various purposes, including, without limitation, to fund future acquisitions and operational needs. Other measures of generating or preserving capital could include decreasing our operational costs through reductions in personnel or facilities, reducing or suspending our acquisition of real estate, and reducing or suspending dividends to our stockholders.

Reducing or suspending our property acquisition program would prevent us from fully implementing our business plan and reaching our investment objectives. Reducing or suspending the payment of dividends to our stockholders would decrease our stockholders’ return on their investment and possibly prevent us from satisfying the minimum distribution or other requirements of the REIT provisions (see risk factor titled “We may be forced to borrow funds on a short-term basis, to sell assets or to issue securities to meet the REIT minimum distribution requirement or for working capital purposes.”). Any of these measures would likely have a substantial adverse effect on our financial condition, the value of our common stock, and our ability to raise additional capital.

There can be no assurance that distributions will be paid, maintained or increased over time.

There are many factors that can affect the availability and timing of cash distributions to our stockholders. Distributions are expected to be based upon our FFO, MFFO, financial condition, cash flows and liquidity, debt service requirements and capital or other expenditure requirements for our properties, and any distributions will be authorized at the sole discretion of our board of directors, and their form, timing and amount, if any, will be affected by many factors, such as our ability to acquire profitable real estate investments and successfully manage our real estate properties and our operating expenses. Other factors may be beyond our control. We can therefore provide no assurance that we will be able to pay or maintain distributions or that distributions will increase over time. For example, our distributions were suspended for the periods from the third quarter of 2017 through the third quarter of 2018 and for the final three quarters of 2019 through the date of this prospectus. If we do not have sufficient cash available for distributions, we may need to fund the shortage out of working capital or borrow to provide funds for such distributions, which would reduce the amount of proceeds available for real estate investments and increase our future interest costs. Our inability to pay distributions, or to pay distributions at expected levels, could result in a decrease in the per share trading price of our Series A Common Stock.

If we are unable to find suitable investments, we may not be able to achieve our investment objectives or continue to pay distributions.

Our ability to achieve our investment objectives and to pay distributions on a regular basis is dependent upon our acquisition of suitable property investments and obtaining satisfactory financing arrangements. We cannot be sure that our management will be successful in finding suitable properties on financially attractive terms. If our management is unable to find such investments, we will hold the proceeds available for investment in an interest-bearing account or invest the proceeds in short-term, investment-grade investments. Holding such short-term investments will prevent us from making the long-term investments necessary to generate operating income to pay distributions. As a result, we will need to raise additional capital to continue to pay distributions until such time as suitable property investments become available (see risk factor titled “We may be forced to borrow funds on a short-term basis, to sell assets or to issue securities to meet the REIT minimum distribution or other requirements or for working capital purposes.”). In the event that we are unable to do so, our ability to pay distributions to our stockholders will be adversely affected.

We depend on key personnel, and the loss of such persons could impair our ability to achieve our business objectives.

Our success substantially depends upon the continued contributions of certain key personnel in evaluating and securing investments, selecting tenants and arranging financing. Our key personnel include Jack K. Heilbron and Larry G. Dubose, each of whom would be difficult to replace. If either of these individuals or any of the other members of our management team were to leave, the implementation of our investment strategies could be delayed or hindered, and our operating results could suffer.

We also believe that our future success depends, in large part, upon our ability to hire and retain skilled and experienced managerial and operational personnel. Competition for skilled and experienced professionals has intensified as current unemployment levels are at or near historic lows, and we cannot assure our stockholders that we will be successful in attracting and retaining such personnel.

We rely on third-party property managers to manage our properties and brokers or agents to lease our properties.

We rely on various third-party property managers to manage most of our properties and local brokers or agents to lease vacant space. These third-party property managers have significant decision-making authority with respect to the management of our properties. Although we are significantly engaged with our third-party property managers, our ability to direct and control how our properties are managed on a day-to-day basis may be limited. Major issues encountered by our property managers, broker or leasing agents could adversely impact the operation and profitability of our properties and, consequently, our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows, cash available for distributions and our ability to service our debt obligations.

We may change our investment and business policies without stockholder consent, and such changes could increase our exposure to operational risks.

Our Board of Directors may change our investment and business policies, including our policies with respect to investments, acquisitions, growth, operations, indebtedness, capitalization and distributions, at any time without the consent of our stockholders. Although our independent directors review our investment policies at least annually to determine that the policies we are following are in the best interests of our company and stockholders, a change in such policies could result in our making investments different from, and possibly riskier than, investments made in the past. A change in our investment policies may, among other things, increase our exposure to interest rate risk, default risk and real estate market fluctuations, all of which could materially affect our ability to achieve our investment objectives.

If we failed to comply with applicable exemption requirements in connection with our private placement offerings, we may be liable for damages to certain of our stockholders.

Prior to 2011 and in more recent years, we or one of our affiliated entities conducted private placement offerings in reliance upon the private placement exemptions from registration under Section 4(a)(2) and Rule 506 of Regulation D under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (“Securities Act”), and various exemptions from registration under applicable state securities laws. Many requirements and conditions of these exemptions are subject to factual circumstances and subjective interpretation. There is no assurance that the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), any state securities law administrator, or a trier of fact in a court or arbitration proceeding would not determine that we failed to meet one or more of these requirements. In the event that we are found to have sold our securities without an applicable exemption from registration, we could be liable to the purchasers of our securities in that offering for rescission and possibly monetary damages. If a number of investors were successful in seeking one or more of these remedies, we could face severe financial demands that would adversely affect our business and financial condition.

Further, under applicable laws and regulations, our multiple offerings could be combined (or integrated) and treated as a single offering for federal and state securities law purposes. While we have structured each of our offerings individually so that if they are combined they would meet exemption requirements, the law related to integrated offerings remains somewhat unclear and has not been fully defined by the SEC or the courts. Thus, there is uncertainty as to our burden of proving that we have correctly relied on one or more of these private placement exemptions.

If we are deemed to be an investment company under the Investment Company Act, our stockholders’ investment return may be reduced.

We are not registered as an investment company under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (“Investment Company Act”), based on exceptions we believe are available to us. If we were obligated to register as an investment company, we would have to comply with a variety of substantive requirements under the Investment Company Act that impose, among other things, limitations on capital structure, restrictions on specified investments, prohibitions on transactions with affiliates, and compliance with reporting, record keeping, voting, proxy disclosure and other rules and regulations that would significantly increase our operating expenses.

Provisions of Maryland law may limit the ability of a third party to acquire control of us by requiring our Board of Directors or stockholders to approve proposals to acquire our company or effect a change in control.

Certain provisions of the Maryland General Corporation Law (“MGCL”) may have the effect of inhibiting a third party from making a proposal to acquire us or of impeding a change in control under circumstances that otherwise could provide our stockholders with the opportunity to realize a premium over the then-prevailing market price of their shares of common stock, including:

By resolution, our Board of Directors has exempted business combinations between us and any other person, provided that the business combination is first approved by our Board of Directors (including a majority of our directors who are not affiliates or associates of such person). We cannot assure you that our Board of Directors will not amend or repeal this resolution in the future. In addition, pursuant to a provision in our bylaws we have opted out of the control share provisions of the MGCL.

In addition, the “unsolicited takeover” provisions of Title 3, Subtitle 8 of the MGCL permit our Board of Directors, without stockholder approval and regardless of what is provided in our charter or bylaws, to implement certain takeover defenses, including adopting a classified board or increasing the vote required to remove a director. Such takeover defenses may have the effect of inhibiting a third party from making an acquisition proposal for us or of delaying, deferring or preventing a change in control of us under the circumstances that otherwise could provide our common stockholders with the opportunity to realize a premium over the then-current market price.

Our Board of Directors may approve the issuance of stock, including preferred stock, with terms that may discourage a third party from acquiring us.

Our charter permits our Board of Directors, without any action by our stockholders, to authorize the issuance of stock in one or more classes or series. Our Board of Directors may also classify or reclassify any unissued preferred stock and set or change the preferences, conversion and other rights, voting powers, restrictions, limitations as to dividends and other distributions, qualifications and terms and conditions of redemption of any such stock, which rights may be superior to those of our common stock. Thus, our Board of Directors could authorize the issuance of shares of a class or series of stock with terms and conditions which could have the effect of discouraging a takeover or other transaction in which holders of some or a majority of our outstanding common stock might receive a premium for their shares over the then current market price of our common stock.

Our rights and the rights of our stockholders to take action against our directors and officers are limited.

Our charter eliminates the liability of our directors and officers to us and our stockholders for money damages to the maximum extent permitted under Maryland law. Under current Maryland law and our charter, our directors and officers will not have any liability to us or our stockholders for money damages other than liability resulting from:

Our charter authorizes us and our bylaws obligate us to indemnify each of our directors or officers who is or is threatened to be made a party to, or witness in, a proceeding by reason of his or her service in those or certain other capacities, to the maximum extent permitted by Maryland law, from and against any claim or liability to which such person may become subject or which such person may incur by reason of his or her status as a present or former director or officer of us or serving in such other capacities. In addition, we may be obligated to pay or reimburse the expenses incurred by our present and former directors and officers without requiring a preliminary determination of their ultimate entitlement to indemnification. As a result, we and our stockholders may have more limited rights to recover money damages from our directors and officers than might otherwise exist absent these provisions in our charter and bylaws or that might exist with other companies, which could limit your recourse in the event of actions that are not in our or your best interests.

Our management faces certain conflicts of interest with respect to their other positions and/or interests outside of our company, which could hinder our ability to implement our business strategy and to generate returns to our stockholders.

We rely on our management, including Mr. Heilbron, for implementation of our investment policies and our day-to-day operations. Although the majority of his business time is spent working for our company, Mr. Heilbron engages in other investment and business activities in which we have no economic interest. His responsibilities to these other entities could result in action or inaction that is detrimental to our business, which could harm the implementation of our business strategy. He may face conflicts of interest in allocating his time among us and his other business ventures and in meeting his obligations to us and those other entities. His determinations in these situations may be more favorable to other entities than to us.

Possible future transactions with our management or their affiliates could create a conflict of interest, which could result in actions that are not in the long-term best interest of our stockholders.

Under prescribed circumstances, we may enter into transactions with affiliates of our management, including the borrowing and lending of funds, the purchase and sale of properties and joint investments. Currently, our policy is not to enter into any transaction involving sales or purchases of properties or joint investments with management or their affiliates, or to borrow from or lend money to such persons. However, our policies in each of these regards may change in the future.

We face system security risks as we depend on automated processes and the Internet.

We are increasingly dependent on automated information technology processes. While we attempt to mitigate this risk through offsite backup procedures and contracted data centers that include, in some cases, redundant operations, we could be severely impacted by a catastrophic occurrence, such as a natural disaster or a terrorist attack.

In addition, an increasing portion of our business operations are conducted over the Internet, putting us at risk from cybersecurity attacks, including attempts to make unauthorized transfers of funds, gain unauthorized access to our confidential data or information technology systems, viruses, ransomware, and other electronic security breaches. Such cyber-attacks may involve more sophisticated security threats that could impact day-to-day operations. While we employ a number of measures to prevent, detect and mitigate these threats, there is no guarantee such efforts will be successful at preventing a cyber-attack. Cybersecurity incidents could compromise confidential information of our tenants, employees and vendors and cause system failures and disruptions of operations.

Risks Related to our Indebtedness

We have significant outstanding indebtedness, which requires that we generate sufficient cash flow to satisfy the payment and other obligations under the terms of our debt and exposes us to the risk of default under the terms of our debt.

Our total gross indebtedness as of December 31, 2020 was approximately $127.5 million. We may incur additional debt for various purposes, including, without limitation, to fund future acquisitions and operational needs.

The terms of our outstanding indebtedness provide for significant principal and interest payments. Our ability to meet these and other ongoing payment obligations of our debt depends on our ability to generate significant cash flow in the future. Our ability to generate cash flow, to some extent, is subject to general economic, financial, competitive, legislative and regulatory factors, as well as other factors that are beyond our control. We cannot assure you that our business will generate cash flow from operations, or that capital will be available to us, in amounts sufficient to enable us to meet our payment obligations under our loan agreements and to fund our other liquidity needs. If we are not able to generate sufficient cash flow to service these obligations, we may need to refinance or restructure our debt, sell unencumbered assets subject to defeasance or yield maintenance costs (which we may be limited in doing in light of the relatively illiquid nature of our properties), reduce or delay capital investments, or seek to raise additional capital. If we are unable to implement one or more of these alternatives, we may not be able to meet these payment obligations, which could materially and adversely affect our liquidity. Our outstanding indebtedness, and the limitations imposed on us by the agreements that govern our outstanding indebtedness, could have significant adverse consequences, including the following:

If any one of these events was to occur, our business, results of operations and financial condition would be materially adversely affected.

Mortgage indebtedness and other borrowings increase our operational risks.

Loans obtained to fund property acquisitions will generally be secured by mortgages on our properties. The more we borrow, the higher our fixed debt payment obligations will be and the greater the risk that we will not be able to timely meet these payment obligations. At December 31, 2020, excluding our model home properties, we had a total of approximately $92.7 million of secured financing on our properties. If we are unable to make our debt payments as required, due to a decrease in rental or other revenues or an increase in our other costs, a lender could charge us a default rate of interest and/or foreclose on the property or properties securing its debt. This could cause an adverse effect on our results of operations and/or cause us to lose part or all of our investment, adversely affecting our financial condition by lowering the value of our real estate portfolio.

Lenders often require restrictive covenants relating to our operations, which adversely affects our flexibility and may affect our ability to achieve our investment objectives.

Some of our mortgage loans impose restrictions that affect our distribution and operating policies, our ability to incur additional debt and our ability to resell interests in properties. A number of loan documents contain covenants requiring us to maintain cash reserves or letters of credit under certain circumstances and limiting our ability to further mortgage the property, discontinue certain insurance coverage, replace the property manager, or terminate certain operating or lease agreements related to the property. Such restrictions may limit our ability to achieve our investment objectives.

Financing arrangements involving balloon payment obligations may adversely affect our ability to pay distributions.

Some of our mortgage loans, including the Polar Note, require us to make a lump-sum or “balloon” payment at maturity. We may finance more properties that we acquire in this manner. Our ability to make a balloon payment at maturity could be uncertain and may depend upon our ability to obtain additional financing, to refinance the debt or to sell the property. When the balloon payment is due, we may not be able to refinance debt on favorable terms or sell the property at a price that would cover the balloon payment. The effect of a refinancing or sale could affect the rate of return to stockholders and the value of our common stock.

In addition, making a balloon payment may leave us with insufficient cash to pay the distributions that are required to maintain our qualification as a REIT. At December 31, 2020, excluding our model homes business, we have three mortgages that require a balloon payment in 2021. The model homes division pays off the balance of its mortgages using proceeds from the sale of the underlying homes. Any deficiency in the sale proceeds would have to be paid from existing cash, reducing the amount available for distributions and operations.

Risks Related to our Status as a REIT and Related Federal Income Tax Matters

Failure to qualify as a REIT could adversely affect our operations and our ability to pay distributions.

We elected to be taxed as a REIT for federal income tax purposes commencing with our taxable year ended December 31, 2000. We believe that we have been organized and have operated in a manner that has allowed us to qualify for taxation as a REIT for federal income tax purposes commencing with such taxable year, and we expect to operate in a manner that will allow us to continue to qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes. However, the federal income tax laws governing REITs are extremely complex, and interpretations of the federal income tax laws governing qualification as a REIT are limited. Qualifying as a REIT requires us to meet various tests regarding the nature of our assets and our income, the ownership of our outstanding stock, and the amount of our distributions on an ongoing basis. While we intend to continue to operate so that we will qualify as a REIT, given the highly complex nature of the rules governing REITs, the ongoing importance of factual determinations, including the tax treatment of certain investments and dispositions, and the possibility of future changes in our circumstances, no assurance can be given that we will qualify for any particular year. If we lose our REIT qualification, we would be subject to federal corporate income taxation on our taxable income, and we could also be subject to increased state and local taxes. Additionally, we would not be allowed a deduction for distributions paid to stockholders. Moreover, unless we are entitled to relief under applicable statutory provisions, we could not elect to be taxed as a REIT for four taxable years following the year during which we were disqualified. The income tax consequences could be substantial and would reduce our cash available for distribution to stockholders and investments in additional real estate. We could also be required to borrow funds or liquidate some investments in order to pay the applicable tax. If we fail to qualify as a REIT, we would not be required to make distributions to our stockholders.

As a REIT, we may be subject to tax liabilities that reduce our cash flow.

Even if we continue to qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes, we may be subject to federal, state and local taxes on our income or property, including the following:

Our ownership of taxable REIT subsidiaries is subject to certain restrictions, and we will be required to pay a 100% penalty tax on certain income or deductions if our transactions with our taxable REIT subsidiaries are not conducted on arm’s length terms.

We own and may acquire direct or indirect interests in one or more entities that have elected or will elect, together with us, to be treated as our taxable REIT subsidiaries. A taxable REIT subsidiary is a corporation (or other entity treated as a corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes) other than a REIT in which a REIT directly or indirectly holds stock, and that has made a joint election with such REIT to be treated as a taxable REIT subsidiary. If a taxable REIT subsidiary owns more than 35% of the total voting power or value of the outstanding securities of another corporation, such other corporation will also be treated as a taxable REIT subsidiary. Other than some activities relating to lodging and health care facilities, a taxable REIT subsidiary may generally engage in any business, including the provision of customary or non-customary services to tenants of its parent REIT. A taxable REIT subsidiary is subject to U.S. federal income tax as a regular C corporation. In addition, a 100% excise tax will be imposed on certain transactions between a taxable REIT subsidiary and its parent REIT that are not conducted on an arm’s length basis.

A REIT’s ownership of securities of a taxable REIT subsidiary is not subject to the 5% or 10% asset tests applicable to REITs. Not more than 25% of the value of our total assets could be represented by securities, including securities of taxable REIT subsidiaries, other than those securities includable in the 75% asset test. Further, for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017, not more than 20% of the value of our total assets may be represented by securities of taxable REIT subsidiaries. We anticipate that the aggregate value of the stock and other securities of any taxable REIT subsidiaries that we own will be less than 20% of the value of our total assets, and we will monitor the value of these investments to ensure compliance with applicable asset test limitations. In addition, we intend to structure our transactions with any taxable REIT subsidiaries that we own to ensure that they are entered into on arm’s length terms to avoid incurring the 100% excise tax described above. There can be no assurance, however, that we will be able to comply with these limitations or avoid application of the 100% excise tax discussed above.

We may be forced to borrow funds on a short-term basis, to sell assets or to issue securities to meet the REIT minimum distribution or other requirements or for working capital purposes.

To qualify as a REIT, we must continually satisfy tests concerning, among other things, the nature and diversification of our assets, the sources of our income and the amounts we distribute to our stockholders. In order to maintain our REIT status or avoid the payment of income and excise taxes, we may need to borrow funds on a short-term basis to meet the REIT distribution requirements, even if the then-prevailing market conditions are not favorable for these borrowings. To qualify as a REIT, in general, we must distribute to our stockholders at least 90% of our REIT taxable income (determined without regard to the dividends paid deduction and excluding net capital gains) each year. We have and intend to continue to make distributions to our stockholders. However, our ability to make distributions may be adversely affected by the risk factors described elsewhere herein. In the event of a decline in our operating results and financial performance or in the value of our asset portfolio, we may not have cash sufficient for distribution. Therefore, to preserve our REIT status or avoid taxation, we may need to borrow funds, sell assets or issue additional securities, even if the then-prevailing market conditions are not favorable. Moreover, we may be required to liquidate or forgo otherwise attractive investments in order to satisfy the REIT asset and income tests or to qualify under certain statutory relief provisions. If we are compelled to liquidate our investments to meet any of these asset, income or distribution tests, or to repay obligations to our lenders, we may be unable to comply with one or more of the requirements applicable to REITs or may be subject to a 100% tax on any resulting gain if such sales constitute prohibited transactions.

In addition, we require a minimum amount of cash to fund our daily operations. Due to the REIT distribution requirements, we may be forced to make distributions when we otherwise would use the cash to fund our working capital needs. Therefore, we may be forced to borrow funds, to sell assets or to issue additional securities at certain times for our working capital needs.

The tax imposed on REITs engaging in “prohibited transactions” may limit our ability to engage in transactions that would be treated as sales for U.S. federal income tax purposes.

A REIT’s net income from prohibited transactions is subject to a 100% penalty tax. In general, prohibited transactions are sales or other dispositions of property, other than foreclosure property, held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of business. Although we do not intend to hold any properties that would be characterized as held for sale to customers in the ordinary course of our business unless a sale or disposition qualifies under certain statutory safe harbors, such characterization is a factual determination and no guarantee can be given that the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) would agree with our characterization of our properties or that we will always be able to make use of the available safe harbors.

Legislative or other actions affecting REITs could have a negative effect on our investors or us.

The rules dealing with federal income taxation are constantly under review by persons involved in the legislative process and by the IRS and the U.S. Department of the Treasury. Changes to the tax laws, with or without retroactive application, could adversely affect our investors or us. We cannot predict how changes in the tax laws might affect our investors or us. New legislation, Treasury Regulations, administrative interpretations or court decisions could significantly and negatively affect our ability to qualify as a REIT, the federal income tax consequences of such qualification, or the federal income tax consequences of an investment in us. Also, the law relating to the tax treatment of other entities, or an investment in other entities, could change, making an investment in such other entities more attractive relative to an investment in a REIT.

The stock ownership limit imposed by the Code for REITs and our charter may discourage a takeover that could otherwise result in a premium price for our stockholders.

In order for us to maintain our qualification as a REIT, no more than 50% in value of our outstanding stock may be beneficially owned, directly or indirectly, by five or fewer individuals (including certain types of entities) at any time during the last half of each taxable year. To ensure that we do not fail to qualify as a REIT under this test, our charter restricts ownership by one person or entity to no more than 9.8% in value or number of shares, whichever is more restrictive, of the outstanding shares of our common stock or more than 9.8% in value of the aggregate outstanding shares of all classes and series of our capital stock. This restriction may have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a change in control, including an extraordinary transaction (such as a merger, tender offer or sale of all or substantially all of our assets) that might provide a premium price for holders of our common stock.

Dividends payable by REITs generally are taxed at the higher ordinary income rate, which could reduce the net cash received by stockholders and may be detrimental to our ability to raise additional funds through any future sale of our common stock.

Income from “qualified dividends” payable to U.S. stockholders that are individuals, trusts and estates is generally subject to tax at reduced rates. However, dividends payable by REITs to its stockholders generally are not eligible for the reduced rates for qualified dividends and are taxed at ordinary income rates (but U.S. stockholders that are individuals, trusts and estates generally may deduct 20% of ordinary dividends from a REIT for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017 and before January 1, 2026). Although these rules do not adversely affect the taxation of REITs or dividends payable by REITs, to the extent that the reduced rates continue to apply to regular corporate qualified dividends, investors that are individuals, trusts and estates may perceive investments in REITs to be relatively less attractive than investments in the stocks of non-REIT corporations that pay dividends, which could materially and adversely affect the value of the shares of REITs, including the per share trading price of our common stock, and could be detrimental to our ability to raise additional funds through the future sale of our common stock.

Tax-exempt stockholders will be taxed on our distributions to the extent such distributions are unrelated business taxable income.

Generally, neither ordinary nor capital gain distributions should constitute unrelated business taxable income (“UBTI”) to tax-exempt entities, such as employee pension benefit trusts and individual retirement accounts. Our payment of distributions to a tax-exempt stockholder will constitute UBTI, however, if the tax-exempt stockholder has incurred debt to acquire its shares. Therefore, tax-exempt stockholders are not assured all dividends received will be tax-free.

Risks Related to Legal and Regulatory Requirements

Costs of complying with governmental laws and regulations may reduce our net income and the cash available for distributions to our stockholders.

Our properties are subject to various local, state and federal regulatory requirements, including those addressing zoning, environmental and land use, access for disabled persons, and air and water quality. These laws and regulations may impose restrictions on the manner in which our properties may be used or business may be operated, and compliance with these standards may require us to make unexpected expenditures, some of which could be substantial. Additionally, we could be subject to liability in the form of fines, penalties or damages for noncompliance, and any enforcement actions could reduce the value of a property. Any material expenditures, penalties, or decrease in property value would adversely affect our operating income and our ability to pay dividends to our stockholders.

The costs of complying with environmental regulatory requirements, of remediating any contaminated property, or of defending against claims of environmental liability could adversely affect our operating results.

Under various federal, state and local environmental laws, ordinances and regulations, an owner or operator of real property is responsible for the cost of removal or remediation of hazardous or toxic substances on its property. Environmental laws also may impose restrictions on the manner in which property may be used or businesses may be operated.

For instance, federal regulations require us to identify and warn, via signs and labels, of potential hazards posed by workplace exposure to installed asbestos-containing materials (“ACMs”), and potential ACMs on our properties. Federal, state, and local laws and regulations also govern the removal, encapsulation, disturbance, handling and disposal of ACMs and potential ACMs, when such materials are in poor condition or in the event of construction, remodeling, renovation or demolition of a property. There are or may be ACMs at certain of our properties. As a result, we may face liability for a release of ACMs and may be subject to personal injury lawsuits by workers and others exposed to ACMs at our properties. Additionally, the value of any of our properties containing ACMs and potential ACMs may be decreased.

Although we have not been notified by any governmental authority and are not otherwise aware of any material noncompliance, liability or claim relating to hazardous substances in connection with our properties, we may be found noncompliant in the future. Environmental laws often impose liability without regard to whether the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the release of any hazardous substances. Therefore, we may be liable for the costs of removing or remediating contamination of which we had no knowledge. Additionally, future laws or regulations could impose an unanticipated material environmental liability on any of the properties that we purchase.

The presence of contamination, or our failure to properly remediate contamination of our properties, may adversely affect the ability of our tenants to operate the contaminated property, may subject us to liability to third parties, and may inhibit our ability to sell or rent such property or borrow money using such property as collateral. Any of these occurrences would adversely affect our operating income.

Compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act may require us to make unintended expenditures that could adversely impact our results of operations.

Our properties are generally required to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, or the ADA. The ADA has separate compliance requirements for “public accommodations” and “commercial facilities,” but generally requires that buildings be made accessible to people with disabilities. Compliance with ADA requirements could require removal of access barriers and non-compliance could result in imposition of fines by the U.S. government or an award of damages to private litigants. The parties to whom we lease properties are obligated by law to comply with the ADA provisions, and we believe that these parties may be obligated to cover costs associated with compliance. If required changes to our properties involve greater expenditures than anticipated, or if the changes must be made on a more accelerated basis than anticipated, our tenants may to be able to cover the costs and we could be required to expend our own funds to comply with the provisions of the ADA. Any funds used for ADA compliance will reduce our net income and the amount of cash available for distributions to our stockholders.

Our property taxes could increase due to property tax rate changes, reassessments or changes in property tax laws, which would adversely impact our cash flows.

We are required to pay property taxes for our properties, which could increase as property tax rates increase or as our properties are assessed or reassessed by taxing authorities. In California, under current law, reassessment occurs primarily as a result of a “change in ownership”. A potential reassessment may take a considerable amount of time, during which the property taxing authorities make a determination of the occurrence of a “change of ownership”, as well as the actual reassessed value. In addition, from time to time, there have been proposals to base property taxes on commercial properties on their current market value, without any limit based on purchase price. If any similar proposal were adopted, the property taxes we pay could increase substantially. In California, pursuant to an existing state law commonly referred to as Proposition 13, properties are reassessed to market value only at the time of change in ownership or completion of construction, and thereafter, annual property reassessments are limited to 2% of previously assessed values. As a result, Proposition 13 generally results in significant below-market assessed values over time. From time to time, including recently, lawmakers and political coalitions have initiated efforts to repeal or amend Proposition 13 to eliminate its application to commercial and industrial properties. If successful, a repeal of Proposition 13 could substantially increase the assessed values and property taxes for our properties in California.

Our ability to attract and retain qualified members of our board of directors may be impacted due to new state laws, including recently enacted quotas related to gender and underrepresented communities.

In September 2019, California enacted SB 826 requiring public companies headquartered in California with outstanding shares listed on a major United States stock exchange to maintain minimum female representation on their boards of directors as follows:  by the end of 2019, at least one woman on its board; by the end of 2021, public company boards with five members will be required to have at least two female directors, and public company boards with six or more members will be required to have at least three female directors. In September 2020, California enacted AB 979, which will require every public company with securities listed on a major U.S. stock exchange and that has its principal executive office in California, as listed on its form 10-K to have at least one director from an underrepresented community on its board of directors by the end of the 2021 calendar year and upwards of three directors from an underrepresented community on its board of directors by the end of the 2022 calendar year. Failure to achieve designated minimum levels in a timely manner exposes such companies to costly financial penalties and reputational harm. We cannot assure that we will be able to recruit, attract and/or retain qualified members of the board and meet quotas related to gender and underrepresented communities as a result of the California legislations (should they not be repealed before the compliance deadlines), which may cause certain investors to divest their holdings in our stock and expose us to penalties and/or reputational harm.

The costs of complying with environmental regulatory requirements, of remediating any contaminated property, or of defending against claims of environmental liability could adversely affect our operating results.

Under various federal, state and local environmental laws, ordinances and regulations, an owner or operator of real property is responsible for the cost of removal or remediation of hazardous or toxic substances on its property. Environmental laws also may impose restrictions on the manner in which property may be used or businesses may be operated.

For instance, federal regulations require us to identify and warn, via signs and labels, of potential hazards posed by workplace exposure to installed asbestos-containing materials (“ACMs”), and potential ACMs on our properties. Federal, state, and local laws and regulations also govern the removal, encapsulation, disturbance, handling and disposal of ACMs and potential ACMs, when such materials are in poor condition or in the event of construction, remodeling, renovation or demolition of a property. There are or may be ACMs at certain of our properties. As a result, we may face liability for a release of ACMs and may be subject to personal injury lawsuits by workers and others exposed to ACMs at our properties. Additionally, the value of any of our properties containing ACMs and potential ACMs may be decreased.

Although we have not been notified by any governmental authority and are not otherwise aware of any material noncompliance, liability or claim relating to hazardous substances in connection with our properties, we may be found noncompliant in the future. Environmental laws often impose liability without regard to whether the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the release of any hazardous substances. Therefore, we may be liable for the costs of removing or remediating contamination of which we had no knowledge. Additionally, future laws or regulations could impose an unanticipated material environmental liability on any of the properties that we purchase.

The presence of contamination, or our failure to properly remediate contamination of our properties, may adversely affect the ability of our tenants to operate the contaminated property, may subject us to liability to third parties, and may inhibit our ability to sell or rent such property or borrow money using such property as collateral. Any of these occurrences would adversely affect our operating income.