SUBSEQUENT EVENTS	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2016
Subsequent Events [Abstract]
SUBSEQUENT EVENTS	SUBSEQUENT EVENTS On April 5, 2016, the loan for Vista Ridge Mall matured and was not repaid. On April 19, 2016, the Company was notified by the lender of the default related to the maturity. The Company is working vigorously with the lender to convey the property in full satisfaction of the debt. On April 11, 2016, certain Company stockholders filed a putative class action lawsuit in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware against the members of the Special Committee, Brookfield Asset Management, BPY and the Brookfield entities party to the merger agreement (Brookfield Asset Management, BPY and such other Brookfield entities being referred to as the “Brookfield Parties”), alleging that: (i) the Brookfield Parties, as purported controlling stockholders of the Company, breached their fiduciary duties to Company stockholders by causing the Company to agree to the merger transactions for inadequate consideration and pursuant to an unfair process; (ii) the Special Committee members breached their fiduciary duties to Company stockholders by agreeing to sell the Company for inadequate consideration and pursuant to an unreasonable process; and (iii) the Brookfield Parties, in the alternative, aided and abetted the Special Committee members’ alleged breaches. In particular, the plaintiffs allege, among other things, that the Brookfield Parties used their purported “control” of the Company to obtain a below-market price, that the Special Committee was “tainted by conflicts,” and that the Special Committee’s attempts to seek an alternative buyer were “perfunctory.” Among other relief, the plaintiffs are seeking injunctive relief preventing the parties from consummating the merger transactions, rescissionary damages in the event the merger transactions are consummated, and an award of attorneys’ fees and expenses. The Company believes the claims asserted in the lawsuit are without merit and the Special Committee intends to vigorously defend the lawsuit. It is possible that additional claims beyond the lawsuit described above will be brought by the current plaintiffs or by others in an effort to enjoin the proposed merger or seek monetary relief. We are not able to predict the outcome of this action, or others, nor can the Company predict the amount of time and expense that will be required to resolve the actions. An unfavorable resolution of any such litigation surrounding the proposed merger could delay or prevent the consummation of the merger. In addition, the cost to the Company of defending the actions, even if resolved favorably, could be substantial. Such actions could also divert the attention of the Company's management and resources from day-to-day operations.

SUBSEQUENT EVENTS

On April 5, 2016, the loan for Vista Ridge Mall matured and was not repaid. On April 19, 2016, the Company was notified by the lender of the default related to the maturity. The Company is working vigorously with the lender to convey the property in full satisfaction of the debt.

On April 11, 2016, certain Company stockholders filed a putative class action lawsuit in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware against the members of the Special Committee, Brookfield Asset Management, BPY and the Brookfield entities party to the merger agreement (Brookfield Asset Management, BPY and such other Brookfield entities being referred to as the “Brookfield Parties”), alleging that: (i) the Brookfield Parties, as purported controlling stockholders of the Company, breached their fiduciary duties to Company stockholders by causing the Company to agree to the merger transactions for inadequate consideration and pursuant to an unfair process; (ii) the Special Committee members breached their fiduciary duties to Company stockholders by agreeing to sell the Company for inadequate consideration and pursuant to an unreasonable process; and (iii) the Brookfield Parties, in the alternative, aided and abetted the Special Committee members’ alleged breaches. In particular, the plaintiffs allege, among other things, that the Brookfield Parties used their purported “control” of the Company to obtain a below-market price, that the Special Committee was “tainted by conflicts,” and that the Special Committee’s attempts to seek an alternative buyer were “perfunctory.” Among other relief, the plaintiffs are seeking injunctive relief preventing the parties from consummating the merger transactions, rescissionary damages in the event the merger transactions are consummated, and an award of attorneys’ fees and expenses.

The Company believes the claims asserted in the lawsuit are without merit and the Special Committee intends to vigorously defend the lawsuit.

It is possible that additional claims beyond the lawsuit described above will be brought by the current plaintiffs or by others in an effort to enjoin the proposed merger or seek monetary relief. We are not able to predict the outcome of this action, or others, nor can the Company predict the amount of time and expense that will be required to resolve the actions. An unfavorable resolution of any such litigation surrounding the proposed merger could delay or prevent the consummation of the merger. In addition, the cost to the Company of defending the actions, even if resolved favorably, could be substantial. Such actions could also divert the attention of the Company's management and resources from day-to-day operations.