Note 8 - Asset Impairment Charges	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2011
Asset Impairment Charges [Text Block]	Note 8. Asset Impairment Charges Long-lived assets classified as held and used and definite-lived intangible assets are reviewed for impairment whenever events or circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of such assets may not be recoverable. An estimate of future undiscounted net cash flows associated with the long-lived assets is used to determine if the carrying value of the assets is recoverable. An impairment charge is recorded if the asset is determined to not be recoverable and the carrying value of the asset exceeds its fair value. 2011 Asset Impairments In 2011, a triggering event was determined to have occurred associated with two properties due to changes in expected future use and additional market data. We evaluated the future undiscounted net cash flows for both properties and determined the carrying values were not recoverable. As a result, we recorded asset impairment charges of $0.9 million in the nine-month period ended September 30, 2011 on our Consolidated Statements of Operations. No asset impairment charges were recorded for the three-month period ended September 30, 2011. 2010 Asset Impairments In the second quarter of 2010, we changed our strategy regarding our real estate held for development. Previously, we had contemplated disposition in the normal course of business under a highest and best use scenario allowing for a “market reasonable” marketing period. At that time, we adopted a strategy focused on a more immediate disposition to potential buyers meeting broader needs and characteristics. This strategy included engaging buyers with a different commercial retail use and allowed us to redeploy the invested capital to higher-growth potential opportunities within our business. We experienced an increase in sales interest by prospective buyers; although offers were made at prices significantly lower than we anticipated. In certain cases, these offers were made at amounts that we considered to be significantly lower than the value of these properties from a long-term income approach at their highest and best use. Also, in some cases, the offers represented amounts less than current replacement cost. However, given the prospect of accepting these offers and effecting a quick sale, or alternatively continuing the capital investment in these non-operational properties for a longer period until we, or other market participants, could find a suitable operational use for these properties, we decided to accept certain offers and redeploy the capital elsewhere. As a result of the above factors, we believe events and circumstances indicated the carrying amount of our non-operational assets were no longer recoverable at that time, triggering an interim impairment test on the totality of our portfolio of such assets. We continued to evaluate specific properties as facts and circumstances changed for potential impairment. In connection with the impairment tests performed, we recorded asset impairment charges of $14.8 million in the nine-month period ended September 30, 2010 as a component of asset impairment charges on our Consolidated Statements of Operations. We recorded no impairment charges for the three-month period ended September 30, 2010. See also Note 11.

Note 8 - Asset Impairment Charges

9 Months Ended

Sep. 30, 2011

Note 8. Asset Impairment Charges

Long-lived assets classified as held and used and definite-lived intangible assets are reviewed for impairment whenever events or circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of such assets may not be recoverable. An estimate of future undiscounted net cash flows associated with the long-lived assets is used to determine if the carrying value of the assets is recoverable. An impairment charge is recorded if the asset is determined to not be recoverable and the carrying value of the asset exceeds its fair value.

2011 Asset Impairments

In 2011, a triggering event was determined to have occurred associated with two properties due to changes in expected future use and additional market data. We evaluated the future undiscounted net cash flows for both properties and determined the carrying values were not recoverable. As a result, we recorded asset impairment charges of $0.9 million in the nine-month period ended September 30, 2011 on our Consolidated Statements of Operations. No asset impairment charges were recorded for the three-month period ended September 30, 2011.

2010 Asset Impairments

In the second quarter of 2010, we changed our strategy regarding our real estate held for development. Previously, we had contemplated disposition in the normal course of business under a highest and best use scenario allowing for a “market reasonable” marketing period. At that time, we adopted a strategy focused on a more immediate disposition to potential buyers meeting broader needs and characteristics. This strategy included engaging buyers with a different commercial retail use and allowed us to redeploy the invested capital to higher-growth potential opportunities within our business.

We experienced an increase in sales interest by prospective buyers; although offers were made at prices significantly lower than we anticipated. In certain cases, these offers were made at amounts that we considered to be significantly lower than the value of these properties from a long-term income approach at their highest and best use. Also, in some cases, the offers represented amounts less than current replacement cost. However, given the prospect of accepting these offers and effecting a quick sale, or alternatively continuing the capital investment in these non-operational properties for a longer period until we, or other market participants, could find a suitable operational use for these properties, we decided to accept certain offers and redeploy the capital elsewhere.

As a result of the above factors, we believe events and circumstances indicated the carrying amount of our non-operational assets were no longer recoverable at that time, triggering an interim impairment test on the totality of our portfolio of such assets. We continued to evaluate specific properties as facts and circumstances changed for potential impairment. In connection with the impairment tests performed, we recorded asset impairment charges of $14.8 million in the nine-month period ended September 30, 2010 as a component of asset impairment charges on our Consolidated Statements of Operations. We recorded no impairment charges for the three-month period ended September 30, 2010. See also Note 11.