XML 34 R19.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.8.0.1
Commitments and Contingencies
12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2017
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]  
Commitments and Contingencies
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
Insurance
We maintain general liability insurance with limits of $300,000,000 per occurrence and per property, and all-risk property and rental value insurance coverage with limits of $1.7 billion per occurrence, including coverage for acts of terrorism, with sub-limits for certain perils such as floods and earthquakes on each of our properties.
 
Fifty Ninth Street Insurance Company, LLC (“FNSIC”), our wholly owned consolidated subsidiary, acts as a direct insurer for coverage for acts of terrorism, including nuclear, biological, chemical and radiological (“NBCR”) acts, as defined by the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act, which expires in December 2020.  Coverage for acts of terrorism (including NBCR acts) is up to $1.7 billion per occurrence and in the aggregate.  Coverage for acts of terrorism (excluding NBCR acts) is fully reinsured by third party insurance companies and the Federal government with no exposure to FNSIC.  For NBCR acts, FNSIC is responsible for a $293,000 deductible ($306,000 effective January 1, 2018) and 17% of the balance (18% effective January 1, 2018) of a covered loss, and the Federal government is responsible for the remaining 83% (82% effective January 1, 2018) of a covered loss.  We are ultimately responsible for any loss incurred by FNSIC.
 
We continue to monitor the state of the insurance market and the scope and costs of coverage for acts of terrorism.  However, we cannot anticipate what coverage will be available on commercially reasonable terms in the future.  We are responsible for deductibles and losses in excess of our insurance coverage, which could be material.
 
Our mortgage loans are non-recourse to us and contain customary covenants requiring us to maintain insurance.  Although we believe that we have adequate insurance coverage for purposes of these agreements, we may not be able to obtain an equivalent amount of coverage at reasonable costs in the future. Further, if lenders insist on greater coverage than we are able to obtain, it could adversely affect our ability to finance our properties.
Tenant Matters
On April 4, 2017, Sears closed its 195,000 square foot store at our Rego Park I property. Annual revenue from Sears is approximately $10,600,000, under a lease which expires in March 2021. In its 2016 annual report on Form 10-K, Sears indicated that substantial doubt exists related to its ability to continue as a going concern. There are $3,865,000 of receivables arising from the straight-lining of rent and $406,000 of unamortized deferred leasing costs on our consolidated balance sheet related to the Sears lease as of December 31, 2017 which we will continue to assess for recoverability.
On September 19, 2017, the bankruptcy court approved the terms of an order stipulation between Le Cirque, a restaurant operator which leases 13,000 square feet at our 731 Lexington Avenue property (approximately $1,200,000 of annual revenue), and the Company which terminated the lease on January 5, 2018 (original lease expiration was May 2021). As a result, we began accelerating depreciation and amortization of approximately $2,780,000 of tenant improvements and deferred leasing costs over the new lease term, of which approximately $2,650,000 was recognized in the year ended December 31, 2017 and approximately $130,000 will be recognized in the quarter ending March 31, 2018.

ALEXANDER’S, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED)

10.    COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES - continued
Rego Park I Litigation
In June 2014, Sears Roebuck and Co. (“Sears”) filed a lawsuit in the Supreme Court of the State of New York against Vornado and us (and certain of our subsidiaries) with regard to space that Sears leases at our Rego Park I property alleging that the defendants are liable for harm that Sears has suffered as a result of (a) water intrusions into the premises, (b) two fires in February 2014 that caused damages to those premises, and (c) alleged violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act in the premises’ parking garage. Sears asserted various causes of actions for damages and sought to compel compliance with landlord’s obligations to repair the premises and to provide security, and to compel us to abate a nuisance that Sears claims was a cause of the water intrusions into its premises. In addition to injunctive relief, Sears sought, among other things, damages of not less than $4 million and future damages it estimated would not be less than $25 million. In March 2016, Sears withdrew its claim for future damages leaving a remaining claim for property damages, which we estimate to be approximately $650,000 based on information provided by Sears. We intend to defend the remaining claim vigorously. The amount or range of reasonably possible losses, if any, is not expected to be greater than $650,000.

Paramus
In 2001, we leased 30.3 acres of land located in Paramus, New Jersey to IKEA Property, Inc. The lease has a purchase option in 2021 for $75,000,000. The property is encumbered by a $68,000,000 interest-only mortgage loan with a fixed rate of 2.90%, which matures on October 5, 2018. The annual triple-net rent is the sum of $700,000 plus the amount of debt service on the mortgage loan. If the purchase option is exercised, we will receive net cash proceeds of approximately $7,000,000 and recognize a gain on sale of land of approximately $60,000,000. If the purchase option is not exercised, the triple-net rent for the last 20 years would include debt service sufficient to fully amortize $68,000,000 over the remaining 20 years lease term.
 
Letters of Credit
Approximately $1,474,000 of standby letters of credit were issued and outstanding as of December 31, 2017.
 
Other
In October 2015, the New York City Department of Finance (“NYC DOF”) issued a Notice of Determination to us assessing an additional $22,910,000 of transfer taxes (including interest and penalties as of December 31, 2017) in connection with the sale of Kings Plaza Regional Shopping Center in November 2012. We believe that the NYC DOF’s claim is without merit and intend to vigorously contest this assessment. We have determined that the likelihood of a loss related to this issue is not probable and, after consultation with legal counsel, that the outcome of this assessment is not expected to have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
 
We received approximately $396,000, $825,000 and $2,100,000 from bankruptcy recoveries during the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively, which is included as “interest and other income, net” in our consolidated statements of income.
 
There are various other legal actions against us in the ordinary course of business. In our opinion, the outcome of such matters in the aggregate will not have a material effect on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.