Clipper Realty Inc.: Form 10-Q for the period ended Jun 30, 2025

You should read the following discussion of our financial condition and results of operations together with our condensed consolidated financial statements and related notes included in Part I-Item 1 of this Form 10-Q, as well as our consolidated financial statements and notes thereto included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2024. This discussion contains forward-looking statements based upon current expectations that involve risks and uncertainties. Our actual results may differ materially from those discussed in these forward-looking statements. See “Cautionary Note Concerning Forward-Looking Statements” in this Form 10-Q.

Overview of Our Company

Clipper Realty Inc. (the “Company” or “we”) is a self-administered and self-managed real estate company that acquires, owns, manages, operates and repositions multifamily residential and commercial properties in the New York metropolitan area, with a current portfolio in Manhattan and Brooklyn. Our primary focus is to own, manage and operate our portfolio and to acquire and reposition additional multifamily residential and commercial properties in the New York metropolitan area. The Company has been organized and operates in conformity with the requirements for qualification and taxation as a real estate investment trust (“REIT”) under the U.S. federal income tax law and elected to be treated as a REIT commencing with the taxable year ended December 31, 2015.

As of June 30, 2025, the Company owned:

• two neighboring residential/retail rental properties at 50 Murray Street and 53 Park Place in the Tribeca neighborhood of Manhattan;
• one residential property complex in the East Flatbush neighborhood of Brooklyn consisting of 59 buildings;
• two primarily commercial properties in Downtown Brooklyn (one of which includes 36 residential apartment units);
• one residential/retail rental property at 1955 1st Avenue in Manhattan;
• one residential rental property at 107 Columbia Heights in the Brooklyn Heights neighborhood of Brooklyn;
• one residential rental property at 1010 Pacific Street in the Prospect Heights neighborhood of Brooklyn; and
• the Dean Street property, to be redeveloped as a residential/retail rental building.

On May 30, 2025, the Company completed the sale of 10 West 65th Street in Manhattan, a 6-story residential building with approximately 76,000 square feet of residential rental GLA.for gross proceeds of $45,500. The Company incurred $1,900 in closing costs and paid $800 in accrued interest at closing. At closing, the Company repaid in full its $31,200 mortgage note (the “Mortgage”) with Flagstar Bank (“Flagstar”) (see note 4 below). The Company recorded a loss on the disposal of long-lived assets of $685 in the three and six months ended June 30, 2025, after previously recording a loss on impairment of long-lived assets of $33,780 in the three months ended March 31, 2025 (see note 10 below).

These properties are located in the most densely populated major city in the United States, each with immediate access to mass transportation.

The Company’s ownership interest in its initial portfolio of properties, which includes the Tribeca House, Flatbush Gardens and the two Livingston Street properties, was acquired in the formation transactions in connection with the private offering. These properties are owned by the LLC subsidiaries, which are managed by the Company through the Operating Partnership. The Operating Partnership’s interests in the LLC subsidiaries generally entitle the Operating Partnership to all cash distributions from, and the profits and losses of, the LLC subsidiaries other than the preferred distributions to the continuing investors who hold Class B LLC units in these LLC subsidiaries. The continuing investors own an aggregate amount of 26,317,396 Class B LLC units, representing 62.1% of the Company’s common stock on a fully diluted basis. Accordingly, the Operating Partnership’s interests in the LLC subsidiaries entitle the Operating Partnership to receive 37.9% of the aggregate distributions from the LLC subsidiaries. The Company, through the Operating Partnership, owns all of the ownership interests in the Aspen property, the Clover House property, the 1010 Pacific Street property and the Dean Street property.

How We Derive Our Revenue

Our revenue consists primarily of rents received from our residential, commercial and, to a lesser extent, retail tenants. We have two reportable operating segments, Residential Rental Properties and Commercial Rental Properties. See Note 9, “Segment Reporting” to our condensed consolidated financial statements included in this Form 10-Q.

Trends

During the second quarter of 2025, the Company’s residential properties continued to have elevated occupancy levels and experienced growth in rental rates, as a result of a robust rental market in the New York metro area. The average rental rate per square foot at the Tribeca House property at June 30, 2025 was $85.60, up from $80.93 at June 30, 2024. At the Flatbush Gardens property, average residential rent per square foot at June 30, 2025, was $31.27, up from $28.10 at June 30, 2024. At the Clover House property, average residential rent per square foot at June 30, 2025, was $87.76, an increase from $83.68 at June 30, 2024. Urban office markets have generally been negatively impacted as a result of the increase in remote working that began during the COVID-19 pandemic, leading to less demand for office space.

As of June 30, 2025, the Company’s office properties had not been adversely affected from a rent perspective as a result of its long-term leases with the City of New York. However, as of August 23, 2025, the City of New York will vacate 250 Livingston Street. The Company is currently seeking new tenants to replace the City of New York. However, there is no assurance that the Company will be able to replace the City of New York as its tenant or will be able to replace it at comparable rents. Until a new tenant is located, the Company expects to lose approximately $16 million per annum in combined rental income and property tax and common area maintenance reimbursements.

Additionally, the lease at 141 Livingston Street expires in December 2025. In April of 2025, the Company and the City of New York agreed to the terms of a five-year extension of the lease, with an option for the City of New York to terminate the lease after two years with six-months’ notice. The City of New York sent the lease to the Company for signature and the Company sent the lease to the loan special servicer for approval in accordance with the terms of the loan agreement on April 22, 2025. On May 21, 2025, the special servicer approved the lease subject to certain conditions. The Company rejected the conditions and the lease is now subject to the overall litigation dispute. There can be no assurance that the lease will be approved or finalized. Furthermore, the Company is at risk of not replacing the City of New York as its tenant or not being able to replace it at comparable rents. See note 4 to condensed consolidated financial statements, “- Liquidity and Capital Resources” below and Part II, Item 1A. Risk Factors.”

Throughout the first half of 2025 and all of 2024, we continued to benefit from relatively low interest rates on our debt. Our weighted average interest rate as of June 30, 2025, was approximately 4.2% per annum.

Results of Operations

Our focus throughout 2024 and year-to-date 2025 has been to manage our properties to optimize revenues and control costs, while continuing to renovate and reposition certain properties. The discussion below highlights the specific properties contributing to the changes in the results of operations focuses on the properties that were in operation for the full period in each comparison and excludes the results of 10 West 65th Street due to its sale on May 30, 2025.

Income Statement for the Three Months Ended June 30, 2025, and 2024

(in thousands)

28

Revenue. Residential rental income increased to $28,363 for the three months ended June 30, 2025, from $26,709 for the three months ended June 30, 2024, primarily due to increases in rental rates and leased occupancy at all properties in 2025 partially offset by higher bad debt expense. For example, base rent per square foot increased at the Tribeca House property to $85.60 (100% leased occupancy) at June 30, 2025, from $80.93 (99.8% leased occupancy) at June 30, 2024, the Flatbush Gardens property to $31.27 (98.4% leased occupancy) at June 30, 2025, from $28.10 (98.5% leased occupancy) at June 30, 2024.

Commercial rental income increased to $9,979 for the three months ended June 30, 2025, from $9,595 for the three months ended June 30, 2024 due to slightly higher escalation income at our commercial properties and rents from new leases.

Property operating expenses. Property operating expenses include property-level costs such as compensation costs for property-level personnel, repairs and maintenance, supplies, utilities and landscaping. Property operating expenses increased to $9,446 for the three months ended June 30, 2025, from $8,780 for the three months ended June 30, 2024, primarily due to higher tenant legal and payroll costs at the Flatbush Gardens property partially offset by lower utilities costs across the Company.

Real estate taxes and insurance. Real estate taxes and insurance expenses increased to $7,333 for the three months ended June 30, 2025, from $7,165 for the three months ended June 30, 2024, primarily due to slightly increased real estate taxes and insurance premiums across the portfolio.

General and administrative. General and administrative expenses increased to $3,732 for the three months ended June 30, 2025, from $3,379 for the three months ended June 30, 2024 primarily due to higher LTIP amortization.

Depreciation and amortization. Depreciation and amortization expense increased to $7,314 for the three months ended June 30, 2025, from $7,163 for the three months ended June 30, 2024 due to additions to real estate across the portfolio.

Interest expense, net. Interest expense, net, increased to $11,157 for the three months ended June 30, 2025, from $11,096 for the three months ended June 30, 2024.

Net loss. As a result of the foregoing, net loss decreased to $656 for the three months ended June 30, 2025, from $1,279 for the three months ended June 30, 2024.

Income Statement for the Six Months Ended June 30, 2025 and 2024

(in thousands)

30

Revenue. Residential rental income increased to $56,483 for the six months ended June 30, 2025, from $51,805 for the six months ended June 30, 2024, primarily due to increases in rental rates and leased occupancy at all properties in 2025 partially offset by higher bad debt expense. For example, base rent per square foot increased at the Tribeca House property to $85.60 (100% leased occupancy) at June 30, 2025, from $80.93 (99.8% leased occupancy) at June 30, 2024, the Flatbush Gardens property to $31.27 (98.4% leased occupancy) at June 30, 2025, from $28.10 (98.5% leased occupancy) at June 30, 2024.

Commercial rental income increased to $20,183 for the six months ended June 30, 2025, from $19,245 for the six months ended June 30, 2024, due to slightly higher escalation income at our commercial properties and rents from new leases.

Property operating expenses. Property operating expenses include property-level costs such as compensation costs for property-level personnel, repairs and maintenance, supplies, utilities and landscaping. Property operating expenses increased to $19,357 for the six months ended June 30, 2025, from $17,203 for the six months ended June 30, 2024, primarily due to due to higher tenant legal, supplies and payroll costs at the Flatbush Gardens property and higher utilities costs across the Company partially offset by lower repair and maintenance costs primarily at Flatbush Gardens.

Real estate taxes and insurance. Real estate taxes and insurance expenses increased to $14,682 for the six months ended June 30, 2025, from $14,029 for the six months ended June 30, 2024, primarily due to higher real estate taxes and insurance premiums.

General and administrative. General and administrative expenses increased to $7,438 for the six months ended June 30, 2025, from $6,806 for the six months ended June 30, 2024 primarily due to higher LTIP amortization, partially offset by lower professional fees..

Depreciation and amortization. Depreciation and amortization expense increased to $14,660 for the six months ended June 30, 2025, from $14,250 for the six months ended June 30, 2024, due to the additions to real estate across the portfolio during the six months ended June 30, 2024.

Interest expense, net. Interest expense, net, decreased to $22,120 for the six months ended June 30, 2025, from $22,187 for the six months ended June 30, 2024.

Net loss. As a result of the foregoing, net loss decreased to $1,607 for the six months ended June 30, 2025, from $3,425 for the six months ended June 30, 2024.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

As of June 30, 2025, we had $1,268 million of indebtedness, net of unamortized issuance costs, secured by our properties, $32,029 of cash and cash equivalents, and $28,809 of restricted cash. See Note 4, “Notes Payable” of our consolidated financial statements for a discussion of the Company’s property-level debt.

As a REIT, we are required to distribute at least 90% of our REIT taxable income, computed without regard to the dividends paid deduction and excluding net capital gains, to stockholders on an annual basis. We expect that these needs will be met from cash generated from operations and other sources, including proceeds from secured mortgages and unsecured indebtedness, proceeds from additional equity issuances and cash generated from the sale of property.

Short-Term and Long-Term Liquidity Needs

Our short-term liquidity needs will primarily be to fund operating expenses, recurring capital expenditures, property taxes and insurance, interest and scheduled debt principal payments, general and administrative expenses, and distributions to stockholders and unit holders. We generally expect to meet our short-term liquidity requirements through net cash provided by operations and cash on hand, and we believe we will have sufficient resources to meet our short-term liquidity requirements

Our principal long-term liquidity needs will primarily be to fund additional property acquisitions, major renovation and upgrading projects, and debt payments and retirements at maturity. We do not expect that net cash provided by operations will be sufficient to meet all of these long-term liquidity needs. We anticipate meeting our long-term liquidity requirements by using cash as an interim measure and funds from public and private equity offerings and long-term secured and unsecured debt offerings. The Company sold the property known as 10 West 65th Street during the quarter ended June 30, 2025, and was able to net approximately $13,000 in proceeds from such sale that are included in our cash balances at June 30, 2025. Additionally, the Company refinanced its existing construction loan at its Dean Street property with a maximum of $160 million bridge loan, of which $141,750 million was drawn at closing, and the potential to draw additional amounts that can be used for general corporate purposes.

We believe that as a publicly traded REIT, we will have access to multiple sources of capital to fund our long-term liquidity requirements. These sources include the incurrence of additional debt and the issuance of additional equity. However, we cannot provide assurance that this will be the case. Our ability to secure additional debt will depend on a number of factors, including our cash flow from operations, our degree of leverage, the value of our unencumbered assets and borrowing restrictions that may be imposed. Our ability to access the equity capital markets will depend on a number of factors as well, including general market conditions for REITs and market perceptions about our company.

We believe that our current cash flows from operations and cash on hand, coupled with additional mortgage debt, will be sufficient to allow us to continue operations, satisfy our contractual obligations and make distributions to our stockholders and the members of our LLC subsidiaries for at least the next twelve months. However, no assurance can be given that we will be able to refinance any of our outstanding indebtedness in the future on favorable terms or at all.

Distributions

In order to qualify as a REIT for Federal income tax purposes, we must currently distribute at least 90% of our taxable income to our shareholders. On May 7, 2025 the company declared dividends and distributions on our common shares, Class B LLC units and LTIP units totaling $4.6 million paid on May 30, 2025. During the three months ended June 30, 2025 and 2024, we paid dividends and distributions on our common shares, Class B LLC units and LTIP units totaling $9.2 million and $8.8 million, respectively.

Cash Flows for the Six Months Ended June 30, 2025 and 2024 (in thousands)

Cash flows provided by (used in) operating activities, investing activities and financing activities for the six months ended June 30, 2025 and 2024, were as follows:

Net cash flow provided by operating activities was $15,044 for the six months ended June 30, 2025, compared to $15,044 for the six months ended June 30, 2024.

Net cash provided in investing activities was $17,967 for the six months ended June 30, 2025, compared to $42,051 used for the six months ended June 30, 2024. The increase was primarily due to proceeds from the sale of 10 West 65th Street and decreased capital spending at the Dean Street development as it approached its completion.

Net cash used by financing activities was $10,225 for the six months ended June 30, 2025, compared to $27,526 provided for the six months ended June 30, 2024. Cash was used in the six months ended June 30, 2025, for the repayment of $31,438 mortgage loan in conjunction with sale of 10 West 65th Street, $9,227 of dividend and distribution payments and $2,996 of loan issuance costs, partially offset by of $34,231 related to the Dean Street property borrowings on the construction loan and subsequent refinance. Cash was provided in the six months ended June 30, 2024, by $37,303 of borrowings related to the Dean Street property and partially offset by distributions of $8,792.

Income Taxes

No provision has been made for income taxes since all of the Company’s operations are held in pass-through entities and accordingly the income or loss of the Company is included in the individual income tax returns of the partners or members.

We elected to be treated as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes, beginning with our first taxable three months ended March 31, 2015. As a REIT, we generally will not be subject to federal income tax on income that we distribute to our stockholders. If we fail to qualify as a REIT in any taxable year, we will be subject to federal income tax on our taxable income at regular corporate tax rates. We believe that we are organized and operate in a manner that will enable us to qualify and be taxed as a REIT and we intend to continue to operate to satisfy the requirements for qualification as a REIT for federal income tax purposes.

Inflation

Inflation has recently become a factor in the United States economy and has increased the cost of acquiring, developing, replacing and operating properties. A substantial portion of our interest costs relating to operating properties are fixed through 2027. Leases at our residential rental properties, which comprise approximately 74% of our revenue, are short-term in nature and permit rent increases to recover increased costs, and our longer-term commercial and retail leases generally allow us to recover some increased operating costs.

Non-GAAP Financial Measures

In this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, we disclose and discuss funds from operations (“FFO”), adjusted funds from operations (“AFFO”), adjusted earnings before interest, income taxes, depreciation and amortization (“Adjusted EBITDA”) and net operating income (“NOI”), all of which meet the definition of “non-GAAP financial measures” set forth in Item 10(e) of Regulation S-K promulgated by the SEC.

While management and the investment community in general believe that presentation of these measures provides useful information to investors, neither FFO, AFFO, Adjusted EBITDA, nor NOI should be considered as an alternative to net income (loss) or income from operations as an indication of our performance. We believe that to understand our performance further, FFO, AFFO, Adjusted EBITDA, and NOI should be compared with our reported net income (loss) or income from operations and considered in addition to cash flows computed in accordance with GAAP, as presented in our consolidated financial statements.

Funds From Operations and Adjusted Funds From Operations

FFO is defined by the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts (“NAREIT”) as net income (computed in accordance with GAAP), excluding gains (or losses) from sales of property and impairment adjustments, plus depreciation and amortization, and after adjustments for unconsolidated partnerships and joint ventures. Our calculation of FFO is consistent with FFO as defined by NAREIT.

AFFO is defined by us as FFO excluding amortization of identifiable intangibles incurred in property acquisitions, straight-line rent adjustments to revenue from long-term leases, amortization costs incurred in originating debt, interest rate cap mark-to-market adjustments, amortization of non-cash equity compensation, acquisition and other costs, transaction pursuit costs, loss on modification/extinguishment of debt, gain on involuntary conversion, gain on termination of lease, impairment of long-lived assets, disposals of long-lived assets and certain litigation-related expenses, less recurring capital spending.

Historical cost accounting for real estate assets implicitly assumes that the value of real estate assets diminishes predictably over time. In fact, real estate values have historically risen or fallen with market conditions. FFO is intended to be a standard supplemental measure of operating performance that excludes historical cost depreciation and valuation adjustments from net income. We consider FFO useful in evaluating potential property acquisitions and measuring operating performance. We further consider AFFO useful in determining funds available for payment of distributions. Neither FFO nor AFFO represent net income (loss) or cash flows from operations computed in accordance with GAAP. You should not consider FFO and AFFO to be alternatives to net income (loss) as reliable measures of our operating performance; nor should you consider FFO and AFFO to be alternatives to cash flows from operating, investing or financing activities (computed in accordance with GAAP) as measures of liquidity.

Neither FFO nor AFFO measure whether cash flow is sufficient to fund all of our cash needs, including principal amortization, capital improvements and distributions to stockholders. FFO and AFFO do not represent cash flows from operating, investing or financing activities computed in accordance with GAAP. Further, FFO and AFFO as disclosed by other REITs might not be comparable to our calculations of FFO and AFFO.

The following table sets forth a reconciliation of the Company’s FFO and AFFO for the periods presented to net loss, computed in accordance with GAAP (amounts in thousands):

Adjusted Earnings Before Interest, Income Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization

We believe that Adjusted EBITDA is a useful measure of our operating performance. We define Adjusted EBITDA as net income (loss) before allocation to non-controlling interests, plus real estate depreciation and amortization, amortization of identifiable intangibles, straight-line rent adjustments to revenue from long-term leases, amortization of non-cash equity compensation, interest expense (net), acquisition and other costs, transaction pursuit costs, loss on modification/extinguishment of debt, impairment of long-lived assets, disposals of long-lived assets and certain litigation-related expenses, less gain on involuntary conversion and gain on termination of lease.

We believe that this measure provides an operating perspective not immediately apparent from GAAP income from operations or net income (loss). We consider Adjusted EBITDA to be a meaningful financial measure of our core operating performance.

However, Adjusted EBITDA should only be used as an alternative measure of our financial performance. Further, other REITs may use different methodologies for calculating Adjusted EBITDA, and accordingly, our Adjusted EBITDA may not be comparable to that of other REITs.

The following table sets forth a reconciliation of Adjusted EBITDA for the periods presented to net loss, computed in accordance with GAAP (amounts in thousands):

Net Operating Income

We believe that NOI is a useful measure of our operating performance. We define NOI as income from operations plus real estate depreciation and amortization, general and administrative expenses, acquisition and other costs, transaction pursuit costs, amortization of identifiable intangibles and straight-line rent adjustments to revenue from long-term leases, impairment of long-lived assets less gain on termination of lease. We believe that this measure is widely recognized and provides an operating perspective not immediately apparent from GAAP income from operations or net income (loss). We use NOI to evaluate our performance because NOI allows us to evaluate the operating performance of our company by measuring the core operations of property performance and capturing trends in rental housing and property operating expenses. NOI is also a widely used metric in valuation of properties.

However, NOI should only be used as an alternative measure of our financial performance. Further, other REITs may use different methodologies for calculating NOI, and accordingly, our NOI may not be comparable to that of other REITs.

The following table sets forth a reconciliation of NOI for the periods presented to income from operations, computed in accordance with GAAP (amounts in thousands):

Critical Accounting Policies

Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations is based upon our consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with GAAP. The preparation of these consolidated financial statements requires management to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses. Management bases its estimates on historical experience and assumptions that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying value of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions. We believe that there have been no material changes to the items that we disclosed as our critical accounting policies under Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

See Note 2, “Significant Accounting Policies” of our consolidated financial statements for a discussion of recent accounting pronouncements.

Our future income, cash flows and fair value relevant to our financial instruments depend upon prevailing market interest rates. Market risk refers to the risk of loss from adverse changes in market prices and interest rates. Based upon the nature of our operations, the principal market risk to which we are exposed is the risk related to interest rate fluctuations. Many factors, including governmental monetary and tax policies, domestic and international economic and political considerations, and other factors that are beyond our control, contribute to interest rate risk.

A one percent change in interest rates on our $142.8 million of variable rate debt as of June 30, 2025, would impact annual net loss by approximately $1.4 million.

At June 30, 2025, the Company had one interest rate cap with US Bank that caps the SOFR portion of the interest rate on the 953 Dean Street Loans at 6%.

The fair value of the Company’s notes payable was approximately $1,245.0 million and $1,160.4 million as of June 30, 2025 and December 31, 2024, respectively

Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

The Company carried out an evaluation under the supervision and with the participation of the Company's management, including the Company's Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of the Company's disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”)) as of June 30, 2025. Based upon that evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that the Company's disclosure controls and procedures are effective to ensure that information required to be disclosed by the Company in the reports it files or submits under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is recorded, processed, and summarized, within the time periods specified in the SEC's rules and forms.

We continue to review and document our disclosure controls and procedures, including our internal controls and procedures for financial reporting, and may from time to time make changes aimed at enhancing their effectiveness and to ensure that our systems evolve with our business.

Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting

There were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting identified in management’s evaluation pursuant to Rules 13a-15(d) or 15d-15(d) of the Exchange Act during the period covered by this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q that materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

The risk factors disclosed in the section entitled “Risk Factors” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024, set forth information relating to various risks and uncertainties that could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, liquidity, and operating results. Such risk factors continue to be relevant to an understanding of our business, financial condition, liquidity and operating results as of June 30, 2025, and there have been no material changes to those risk factors for the six months ended June 30, 2025 except for the following updates:

We depend on two commercial leases with certain agencies of the City of New York (NYC), as a single government tenant in our office buildings, with one lease terminating effective August 23, 2025, and the other lease expiring on December 27, 2025. Our inability to replace NYC as a tenant at rent rates comparable to the rates in the lease that terminates in August 2025 or to enter into a five-year extension of the lease expiring in December 2025 could cause a material adverse effect on us, including our financial condition, results of operations and cash flow.

Our rental revenue depends on entering into leases with and collecting rents from tenants. As of June 30, 2025, Kings County Court, the Human Resources Administration, and the Department of Environmental Protection, all of which are agencies of the City of New York, leased an aggregate of 548,580 rentable square feet of commercial space at our commercial office properties at 141 Livingston Street and 250 Livingston Street, the rents from which represented approximately 21% of our total revenues for the three months ended June 30, 2025. We are also subject to covenants covering these leases in our loan agreements related to our commercial office properties located at 250 Livingston Street and 141 Livingston Street. Breaches of these covenants could result in defaults under the loan agreements.

250 Livingston Street Property

As of February 23, 2024, The City of New York, a municipal corporation acting through the Department of Citywide Administrative Services (“NYC”), notified us of its intention to terminate its lease at 250 Livingston Street effective August 23, 2025. The lease generally provides for rent payments in the amount of $15.4 million per annum. We may be unable to replace NYC as a tenant or unable to replace it with other commercial tenants at comparable rent rates, may incur substantial costs to improve the vacated space or may have to offer significant inducements to fill the space, all of which may have an adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flow.

On March 18, 2025, we were notified by legal counsel to the servicer for the loan related to the 250 Livingston Street property that, due to the failure of our subsidiary, 250 Livingston Owner LLC, to cause all revenue generated by the 250 Livingston Street property to be deposited into the cash management account as required by the loan agreement related to the $125 million building mortgage loan, an event of default occurred under the $125 million building mortgage loan. The notice provided that if the 250 Livingston Owner LLC fails to cure the event of default, the lender may, among other things, accelerate the $125 million building mortgage loan and demand all amounts owing to the lender to be immediately payable, institute proceedings for the foreclosure of all liens securing the loan and sell the 250 Livingston Street Property, or file a lawsuit against the 250 Livingston owner LLC or the guarantors. As of May 12, 2025, we have complied with the lender’s requirement to have the deposits made by all tenants deposited directly into the cash management account. On May 8, 2025, we transferred $6.3 million to the cash management account to cover amounts owed prior to the activation of the cash management account. On May 15, 2025, legal counsel for the lender notified us that they allege that we are in default on the $125 million mortgage loan due to its allegation that we, as the guarantor, did not maintain a net worth of not less than $100 million as of December 31, 2024, as required under the loan agreement. We replied to the lender disputing such calculation and alleging that the lender did not calculate net worth in a reasonable manner and provided our lender with our own calculation of net worth that shows a net worth in excess of the required amount. On May 28, 2025, the lender replied to us concurring with us and notifying us that they agree that we are compliant with the $100 million requirement. On July 28, 2025, we were notified by legal counsel for the lender that they alleged that we were once again in default for failure to remit all revenue derived from 250 Livingston into the cash management account. We responded by disputing the allegations in the May 8, 2025, letter and noting all rents from the tenants have been deposited into the cash management account.

All amounts remaining in such cash management account after the lender’s allocations set forth in the loan agreement will be disbursed to us once the tenant cure conditions are satisfied under the loan agreement. If we are unable to replace the NYC lease at comparable rents, we may not be able to cure the conditions listed in the loan agreement. If the excess cash is not released to us, it could impact our available cash to fund corporate operations and pay dividends and distributions to our stockholders.

141 Livingston Street Property

The 141 Livingston Street lease expires on December 27, 2025, and if NYC were to decide not to renew or extend such lease on its stated termination date, pursuant to the terms of the lease, we would be at risk of not being able to replace NYC as a tenant, leasing the space below the current rates, incurring costs to improve the space or offer other inducements to fill the space, all of which may have an adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flow.

Our subsidiary, 141 Livingston Owner LLC (the “Borrower”) and Citi Real Estate Funding Inc. entered into the loan agreement related to a $100 million loan. The loan is evidenced by promissory mortgage notes and secured by the 141 Livingston Street property. We and our Operating Partnership subsidiary serve as limited guarantors of certain obligations under the loan, including those related to the reserve monthly deposit discussed below.

If we are not able to extend or replace the NYC lease at our 141 Livingston Street property for a minimum of a five-year term, we will be required to either fund a reserve account in the amount of $10 million payable in equal monthly payments over the 18 months after lease expiration or deliver to the lender a letter of credit in the amount of $10 million.

On October 28, 2024, we received notice that, as of October 7, 2024, the servicing of the mortgage notes was transferred to a special servicer (the “Special Servicer”) due to our alleged failure to make certain required payments under the loan agreement, including, but not limited to, the reserve deposit starting on July 7, 2024. The Special Servicer demanded that we pay (i) $2.2 million of reserve payments into a reserve account immediately (for July-October 2024) and continued monthly payments of $555,555 for an additional 14 months, (ii) $1.2 million of default interest and late charges through October 7, 2024, and (iii) an additional $10,417 per diem interest for each day thereafter.

On November 11, 2024, the Special Servicer notified the Borrower that, due to its alleged event of default under the Loan Agreement, as a result of the failure to make the payments described above, the mortgage notes have been accelerated, and all amounts under the loan agreement were due and payable. Such amounts included, but were not limited to, $100.0 million principal amount of the mortgage notes, approximately $5.0 million of default yield maintenance premium, $10.0 million aggregate reserve deposit, and the above-described penalty default interest and penalties.

We believe that (i) we have made timely payments under the loan agreement, (ii) the servicer and the Special Servicer have misinterpreted the terms of the loan agreement requiring monthly reserve payments beginning on July 7, 2024, (iii) we have no current obligation to make such reserve payments under the loan agreement and (iv) we should not be obligated to pay the default interest and late charges.

On December 18, 2024, we received notice from the Special Servicer that due to its allegation that we as the Guarantor did not maintain a net worth of not less than $100 million as of December 31, 2022 and 2023, respectively, as required under the loan agreement, we were in default on the loan. We replied to the Special Servicer disputing such calculation and alleging that the Special Servicer did not calculate net worth in a reasonable manner. We provided the Special Servicer with our own calculation of net worth that shows a net worth in excess of the required amount.

On January 21, 2025, we received notice from the Special Servicer alleging that certain elements of our insurance on the building at 141 Livingston Street were not in compliance with the loan agreement requirements, including, but not limited to, due to a deductible in excess of what is permitted under the terms of the loan agreement and the use of an insurance carrier with a rating agency rating below that which is permitted under the terms of the loan agreement.

On March 12, 2025, we received a letter from counsel to the successor to the special servicer reaffirming the occurrence of alleged events of default under the loan agreement described above and demanding the establishment of a restricted account, a cash management account and a debt service account. In addition, the letter demanded that tenants of 141 Livingston Street be sent notices directing them to make lease payments to the cash management account.

We believe that we are not required to establish the foregoing accounts or send such notices to the tenants. However, if we are required to establish such accounts and deliver such notices, it could impact our available cash to fund corporate operations and pay dividends and distributions to our stockholders.

On March 20, 2025, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as trustee for the benefit of the registered holders of certain pass-through certificates issued by trusts that are the holders of the promissory mortgage notes secured by the 141 Livingston Street property, referred to as “Plaintiff,” filed a lawsuit against the Borrower, as well as us and our Operating Partnership subsidiary, as guarantors, in the Supreme Court of the State of New York. Plaintiff demands, among other things, that (i) the 141 Livingston Street property be sold and the Plaintiff be paid the amounts due under the loan agreement, with interest thereon to the time of such payment, together with, among other items, the expenses of the sale, Plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees; (ii) Plaintiff be paid all rents and revenues of the 141 Livingston Street property as they become due and payable; (iii) a receiver be appointed to manage the 141 Livingston Street property, with power among other things to demand and recover payment from anyone who has received a distribution from 141 Borrower after any event of default; (iv) Plaintiff have such other and further relief as may be just and equitable; (v) guarantors pay to Plaintiff the amount of any losses or damages suffered or incurred by Plaintiff as the court may determine to be just and equitable and amounts owed under the guaranty. We believe that the claims set forth in this complaint are without merit and intend to vigorously defend against this lawsuit.

On April 7, 2025, we filed an Affirmation in opposition to the motion of the Plaintiff for the appointment of a receiver and in support of defendants cross motion to dismiss the action and cancel notice of pendency with the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Kings. A hearing on the motions was scheduled for April 8, 2025, but it was adjourned until May 6, 2025. The Plaintiff submitted additional filings on April 29, 2025, and we submitted our replies on May 6, 2025. On May 13, 2025, the Court denied (i) the Plaintiff’s motion to appoint a receiver to manage the 141 Livingston Street property, “as Plaintiff’s likelihood of ultimately prevailing on its claims herein appears remote” and (ii) the Company’s cross motion to dismiss the lawsuit, “as Plaintiff’s contentions do raise a question of fact”. On XXX new events happened that we need to add.

In April 2025, we and the NYC agreed to the terms of a five-year extension of the current lease, with an option for the NYC to terminate the lease after two years with a prior six-month notice. The NYC has sent the lease to us to sign. On April 22, 2025, we sent the lease to the loan special servicer for approval in accordance with the terms of the loan agreement. On May 21, 2025 the special servicer approved the lease subject to certain conditions. We rejected the conditions that amongst other changes required us to change the terms of the cancellation provisions in the lease and make amendments to the loan documents to be in the line with the lenders allegations in the above lawsuit. There can be no assurance that the lease will be approved or finalized.

On June 11, 2025, the lender filed an appeal of the denial of the receiver. On June 23, 2025, the Lender filed an amended complaint seeking a declaratory judgment that its conditions for its consent to the lease were reasonable. On July 2, 2025, the lender filed a renewed motion for a temporary receiver. On July 11, 2025, the Company filed an answer with counter claims, seeking among other things declaratory relief that the lenders conditions are unreasonable for the proposed lease renewal. On July 18, 2025 We filed opposition to the renewed receiver motion. On July 30, 2025, the judge heard arguments on the renewed motion for a temporary receiver. The motion is currently pending. On July 31, the lender filed motion to dismiss counter claims. Currently we have until September 3, 2025, to respond and a hearing is currently scheduled for September 10, 2025.

There can be no assurance that the lease will be approved or finalized or that we will prevail in or successfully settle the litigation described above. Failure to successfully resolve the dispute related to 141 Livingston Street property could materially affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. Further, even if we were successful in defending against this lawsuit, such defense would distract our management team from our operations, which could have an adverse effect on our business. In addition, any uncertainties resulting from the continuation of any litigation could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

See Note 4, Notes Payable, to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) included in Part I of this Form 10-Q for additional information related to 141 Livingston Street property and 250 Livingston Street property.

David Bistricer, our Co-Chairman of the board of directors and Chief Executive Officer, and Sam Levinson, our Co-Chairman of the board of directors and Head of the Investment Committee, have outside business interests that will take their time and attention away from us, which could materially and adversely affect us. In addition, notwithstanding the Investment Policy, members of our senior management may in certain circumstances engage in activities that compete with our activities or in which their business interests and ours may be in conflict.

David Bistricer, our Co-Chairman of the board of directors and Chief Executive Officer, Sam Levinson our Co-Chairman of the board of directors and Chairman of the Investment Committee and other members of our senior management team continue to own interests in properties and businesses that were not contributed to us in the formation transactions. For instance, each of David Bistricer, our Co-Chairman of the board of directors and Chief Executive Officer, JJ Bistricer, our Chief Operating Officer, Sam Levinson, our Co-Chairman of the board of directors and Chairman of the Investment Committee, and Jacob Schwimmer, our Chief Property Management Officer, has ownership interests in real estate outside of the Company. David Bistricer, our Co-Chairman of the board of directors and Chief Executive Officer, and JJ Bistricer, our Chief Operating Officer, own Clipper Equity. However, Clipper Equity does not own any real estate assets.

We have adopted an Investment Policy that provides that our officers, including David Bistricer, JJ Bistricer and Jacob Schwimmer, are not required to present certain identified investment opportunities to us, including assets located outside the New York metropolitan area, for-sale condominium or cooperative conversions, development projects, projects that would require us to obtain guarantees from third parties or to backstop obligations of other parties, and land acquisitions. As a result, except to the extent that our officers must present certain identified business opportunities to us, our officers have no duty to refrain from engaging, directly or indirectly, in the same business activities or similar business activities or lines of business in which we or our subsidiaries engage or propose to engage or to refrain from otherwise competing with us, and therefore may compete with us for investments in properties and for tenants. These individuals also may pursue acquisition opportunities that may be complementary to our business, and, as a result, those acquisition opportunities may not be available to us.

We and members of our senior management may also determine to enter into joint ventures or co-investment relationships with respect to one or more properties. As a result of the foregoing, there may at times be a conflict between the interests of members of our senior management and our business interests. Further, although David Bistricer, JJ Bistricer and Jacob Schwimmer will devote such portion of their business time and attention to our business as is appropriate and will be compensated on that basis, under their employment agreements, they will also devote substantial time to other business and investment activities.