ITEM 1.     FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

REAL ESTATE ASSOCIATES LIMITED III

BALANCE SHEETS

(Unaudited)

(In thousands)

See Accompanying Notes to Financial Statements

REAL ESTATE ASSOCIATES LIMITED III

STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

 (Unaudited)

(In thousands, except per interest data)

See Accompanying Notes to Financial Statements

REAL ESTATE ASSOCIATES LIMITED III

STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN PARTNERS' (DEFICIENCY) CAPITAL

 (Unaudited)

(In thousands)

See Accompanying Notes to Financial Statements

REAL ESTATE ASSOCIATES LIMITED III

STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

 (Unaudited)

(In thousands)

See Accompanying Notes to Financial Statements

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(Unaudited)

Note 1 – Organization and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

General

The information contained in the following notes to the unaudited financial statements is condensed from that which would appear in the annual audited financial statements; accordingly, the financial statements included herein should be reviewed in conjunction with the financial statements and related notes thereto contained in the annual report for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010 prepared by Real Estate Associates Limited III (the "Partnership" or "Registrant"). Accounting measurements at interim dates inherently involve greater reliance on estimates than at year end.  The results of operations for the interim periods presented are not necessarily indicative of the results expected for the entire year.

In the opinion of the Partnership’s management, the accompanying unaudited financial statements contain all adjustments (consisting primarily of normal recurring items) necessary to present fairly the financial position as of June 30, 2011 and the results of operations and changes in cash flows for the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively. The balance sheet at December 31, 2010 has been derived from the audited financial statements at that date but does not include all of the information and disclosures required by generally accepted accounting principles for complete financial statements.

The general partners collectively have a one percent interest in profits and losses of the Partnership.  The limited partners have the remaining 99 percent interest which is allocated in proportion to their respective individual investments.  The general partners of the Partnership are National Partnership Investments Corp. ("NAPICO" or the "Corporate General Partner") and National Partnership Investment Associates. The Corporate General Partner is a subsidiary of Apartment Investment and Management Company (“Aimco”), a publicly traded real estate investment trust.

At June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010, the Partnership had outstanding 5,699 limited partnership units (the “Units”) or 11,398 limited partnership interests. A Unit consists of two limited partnership interests.

Basis of Presentation

The accompanying unaudited financial statements have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. 

The Partnership’s management evaluated subsequent events through the time this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q was filed.

Certain reclassifications have been made to the 2010 balances to conform to the 2011 presentation.

Method of Accounting for Investments in Local Partnerships

The investments in local limited partnerships (the “Local Partnerships”) are accounted for on the equity method. 

Net Loss Per Limited Partnership Interest

Net loss per limited partnership interest was computed by dividing the limited partners’ share of net loss by the number of limited partnership interests outstanding at the beginning of the year.  The number of limited partnership interests used was 11,398 for both the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010.

The Partnership consolidates any variable interest entities in which the Partnership holds a variable interest and is the primary beneficiary. Generally, a variable interest entity, or VIE, is an entity with one or more of the following characteristics: (a) the total equity investment at risk is not sufficient to permit the entity to finance its activities without additional subordinated financial support; (b) as a group the holders of the equity investment at risk lack (i) the ability to make decisions about an entity’s activities through voting or similar rights, (ii) the obligation to absorb the expected losses of the entity, or (iii) the right to receive the expected residual returns of the entity; or (c) the equity investors have voting rights that are not proportional to their economic interests and substantially all of the entity’s activities either involve, or are conducted on behalf of, an investor that has disproportionately few voting rights. The primary beneficiary of a VIE is generally the entity that has (a) the power to direct the activities of the VIE that most significantly impact the VIE’s economic performance, and (b) the obligation to absorb losses or the right to receive benefits that could potentially be significant to the VIE.

In determining whether it is the primary beneficiary of a VIE, the Partnership considers qualitative and quantitative factors, including, but not limited to: which activities most significantly impact the VIE’s economic performance and which party controls such activities; the amount and characteristics of the Partnership’s investment; the obligation or likelihood for the Partnership or other investors to provide financial support; and the similarity with and significance to the business activities of the Partnership and the other investors.  Significant judgments related to these determinations include estimates about the current and future fair values and performance of real estate held by these VIEs and general market conditions.

At June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010, the Partnership holds variable interests in five and six VIEs, respectively, for which the Partnership is not the primary beneficiary.  The Partnership has concluded, based on its qualitative consideration of the partnership agreement, the partnership structure and the role of the general partner in each of the Local Partnerships, that the general partner of each of the Local Partnerships is the primary beneficiary of the respective Local Partnership.   In making this determination, the Partnership considered the following factors:

·         the general partners conduct and manage the business of the Local Partnerships;

·         the general partners have the responsibility for and sole discretion over selecting a property management agent for the Local Partnerships’ underlying real estate properties;

·         the general partners are responsible for approving operating and capital budgets for the properties owned by the Local Partnerships;

·         the general partners are obligated to fund any recourse obligations of the Local Partnerships;

·         the general partners are authorized to borrow funds on behalf of the Local Partnerships; and

·         the Partnership, as a limited partner in each of the Local Partnerships, does not have the ability to direct or otherwise significantly influence the activities of the Local Partnerships that most significantly impact such entities’ economic performance.

The five VIEs at June 30, 2011 consist of Local Partnerships that are directly engaged in the ownership and management of five apartment properties with a total of 335 units. The Partnership is involved with those VIEs as a non-controlling limited partner equity holder. The Partnership’s maximum exposure to loss as a result of its involvement with the unconsolidated VIEs is limited to the Partnership’s recorded investments in and receivables from these VIEs, which were zero at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010.  The Partnership may be subject to additional losses to the extent of any financial support that the Partnership voluntarily provides in the future.

Note 2 – Investments in and Advances to Local Partnerships

At June 30, 2011, the Partnership holds limited partnership interests in five Local Partnerships, located in two states and Puerto Rico, that own residential low income rental projects consisting of 335 apartment units. At December 31, 2010 the Partnership held limited partnership interests in six Local Partnerships, located in three states and Puerto Rico, that owned residential low income rental projects consisting of 386 apartment units. The mortgage loans of these projects are payable to or insured by various governmental agencies.

The Partnership, as a limited partner, does not have a contractual relationship with the Local Partnerships or exercise control over the activities and operations, including refinancing or selling decisions, of the Local Partnerships that would require or allow for consolidation. Accordingly, the Partnership accounts for its investments in the Local Partnerships using the equity method. The Partnership is allocated profits and losses of the Local Partnerships based upon its respective ownership percentage (between 95% and 99%). Distributions of surplus cash from operations from most of the Local Partnerships are restricted by the Local Partnerships’ Regulatory Agreements with the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”). These restrictions limit the distribution to a portion, generally less than 10%, of the initial invested capital. The excess surplus cash is deposited into a residual receipts reserve, of which the ultimate realization by the Partnership is uncertain as HUD frequently retains it upon sale or dissolution of the Local Partnership. The Partnership is allocated profits and losses and receives distributions from refinancings and sales in accordance with the Local Partnerships’ partnership agreements. These agreements usually limit the Partnership’s distributions to an amount substantially less than its ownership percentage in the Local Partnership.

The individual investments are carried at cost plus the Partnership’s share of the Local Partnership’s profits less the Partnership’s share of the Local Partnership’s losses, distributions and impairment charges. The Partnership is not legally liable for the obligations of the Local Partnerships and is not otherwise committed to provide additional support to them. Therefore, it does not recognize losses once its investment in each of the Local Partnerships reaches zero.  Distributions from the Local Partnerships are accounted for as a reduction of the investment balance until the investment balance is reduced to zero. When the investment balance has been reduced to zero, subsequent distributions received are recognized as income in the accompanying statements of operations. 

For those investments where the Partnership has determined that the carrying value of its investments approximates the estimated fair value of those investments, the Partnership’s policy is to recognize equity in income of the Local Partnerships only to the extent of distributions received and amortization of acquisition costs from those Local Partnerships.  Therefore, the Partnership limits its recognition of equity earnings to the amount it expects to ultimately realize.

Two Local Partnerships, Santa Maria Limited Dividend Partnership Assoc. and Marina Del Rey Limited Dividend Partnership Assoc., are currently marketing their properties for sale. The Partnership has no investment balances remaining in these two Local Partnerships at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010.

At June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010, the investment balance in the five and six Local Partnerships, respectively, had been reduced to zero.

During the six months ended June 30 2011, the Partnership assigned its limited partnership interest in Village Apartments (“Village”) to an affiliate of the operating general partner of Village. The Partnership believed that Village’s liabilities exceeded the fair value of the property. In addition, Village faced foreclosure as the lender had issued an acceleration notice on Village’s mortgage. The Partnership did not receive any proceeds for the assignment. The Partnership’s investment balance in Village was zero at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010.

The following are unaudited condensed combined estimated statements of operations for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010 for the Local Partnerships in which the Partnership has invested (in thousands). The 2011 and 2010 amounts exclude the operations of Village Apartments for which the Partnership assigned its interests in May 2011:

In addition to being the Corporate General Partner of the Partnership, NAPICO or one of its affiliates is the local operating general partner for two of the Local Partnerships included above.

The current policy of the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) is to not renew the Housing Assistance Payment (“HAP”) Contracts on a long-term basis on the existing terms.  In connection with renewals of the HAP Contracts under current law and policy, the amount of rental assistance payments under renewed HAP Contracts will be based on market rentals instead of above market rentals, which may be the case under existing HAP Contracts.  The payments under the renewed HAP Contracts may not be in an amount that would provide sufficient cash flow to permit owners of properties subject to HAP Contracts to meet the debt service requirements of existing loans insured by the Federal Housing Administration of HUD (“FHA”) unless such mortgage loans are restructured. In order to address the reduction in payments under HAP Contracts as a result of current policy, the Multi- family Assisted Housing Reform and Affordability Act of 1997 (“MAHRAA”) provides for the restructuring of mortgage loans insured by the FHA with respect to properties subject to the Section 8 program.  Under MAHRAA, an FHA-insured mortgage loan can be restructured into a first mortgage loan which will be amortized on a current basis and a low interest second mortgage loan payable to FHA which will only be payable on maturity of the first mortgage loan.  This restructuring results in a reduction in annual debt service payable to the owner of the FHA-insured mortgage loan and is expected to result in an insurance payment from FHA to the holder of the FHA-insured loan due to the reduction in the principal amount.  MAHRAA also phases out project-based subsidies on selected properties serving families not located in rental markets with limited supply, converting such subsidies to a tenant-based subsidy.

Note 3 – Transactions with Affiliated Parties

Under the terms of the Restated Certificate and Agreement of Limited Partnership, the Partnership is obligated to NAPICO for an annual management fee equal to 0.4 percent of the Partnership’s original remaining invested assets of the Local Partnerships and is calculated at the beginning of each year. Invested assets are defined as the costs of acquiring project interests, including the proportionate amount of the mortgage loans related to the Partnership's interest in the capital accounts of the respective Local Partnerships.  The management fee incurred for both the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010 was approximately $14,000 and $28,000, respectively.

Note 4 – Fair Value of Financial Instruments

Financial Accounting Standards Board Accounting Standards Codification Topic 825, “Financial Instruments”, requires disclosure of fair value information about financial instruments, whether or not recognized in the balance sheet, for which it is practicable to estimate fair value. Fair value is defined as the amount at which the instruments could be exchanged in a current transaction between willing parties, other than in a forced or liquidation sale. At June 30, 2011, the Partnership believes that the carrying amount of other assets and liabilities reported on the balance sheet that require such disclosure approximated their fair value due to the short-term maturity of these instruments.

Note 5 - Contingencies

The Corporate General Partner is involved in various lawsuits arising from transactions in the ordinary course of business. In the opinion of management and the Corporate General Partner, the claims will not result in any material liability to the Partnership.

Two Local Partnerships, Santa Maria Limited Dividend Partnership Assoc. and Marina Del Rey Limited Dividend Partnership Assoc., are currently marketing their properties for sale. The Partnership has no investment balances remaining in these two Local Partnerships at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010.

During the six months ended June 30 2011, the Partnership assigned its limited partnership interest in Village Apartments (“Village”) to an affiliate of the operating general partner of Village. The Partnership believed that Village’s liabilities exceeded the fair value of the property. In addition, Village faced foreclosure as the lender had issued an acceleration notice on Village’s mortgage. The Partnership did not receive any proceeds for the assignment. The Partnership’s investment balance in Village was zero at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010.

At June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010, the investment balance in the five and six Local Partnerships, respectively had been reduced to zero.

An annual management fee is payable to the Corporate General Partner of the Partnership and is calculated at 0.4 percent of the Partnership's original remaining invested assets of the Local Partnerships at the beginning of each year.  The management fee is paid to the Corporate General Partner for its continuing management of the Partnership's affairs. The fee is payable beginning with the month following the Partnership's initial investment in a Local Partnership. Management fees were approximately $14,000 and $28,000 for both the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively.

Operating expenses, other than management fees, consist of legal and accounting fees for services rendered to the Partnership and general and administrative expenses. Legal and accounting fees were approximately $26,000 and $41,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively, and approximately $13,000 and $28,000 for the three months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively. The decrease in legal and accounting fees for both periods is primarily due to legal services rendered during the second quarter of 2010 in regards to the potential sale of the Partnership’s limited partnership interest in certain Local Partnerships and a decrease in the cost to prepare the Partnership’s annual tax return. General and administrative expenses were approximately $8,000 and $6,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, and approximately $5,000 and $3,000 for the three months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively.

The Partnership, as a limited partner in the Local Partnerships in which it has invested, is subject to the risks incident to the management and ownership of improved real estate.  The Partnership investments are also subject to adverse general economic conditions, and, accordingly, the status of the national legislation which could increase vacancy levels, rental payment defaults, and operating expenses, which in turn, could substantially increase the risk of operating losses for the projects.

The current policy of the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) is to not renew the Housing Assistance Payment (“HAP”) Contracts on a long-term basis on the existing terms.  In connection with renewals of the HAP Contracts under current law and policy, the amount of rental assistance payments under renewed HAP Contracts will be based on market rentals instead of above market rentals, which may be the case under existing HAP Contracts.  The payments under the renewed HAP Contracts may not be in an amount that would provide sufficient cash flow to permit owners of properties subject to HAP Contracts to meet the debt service requirements of existing loans insured by the Federal Housing Administration of HUD (“FHA”) unless such mortgage loans are restructured. In order to address the reduction in payments under HAP Contracts as a result of current policy, the Multi- family Assisted Housing Reform and Affordability Act of 1997 (“MAHRAA”) provides for the restructuring of mortgage loans insured by the FHA with respect to properties subject to the Section 8 program.  Under MAHRAA, an FHA-insured mortgage loan can be restructured into a first mortgage loan which will be amortized on a current basis and a low interest second mortgage loan payable to FHA which will only be payable on maturity of the first mortgage loan.  This restructuring results in a reduction in annual debt service payable to the owner of the FHA-insured mortgage loan and is expected to result in an insurance payment from FHA to the holder of the FHA-insured loan due to the reduction in the principal amount. MAHRAA also phases out project-based subsidies on selected properties serving families not located in rental markets with limited supply, converting such subsidies to a tenant-based subsidy.

When the HAP Contracts are subject to renewal, there can be no assurance that the Local Partnerships in which the Partnership has an investment will be permitted to restructure their mortgage indebtedness under MAHRAA.  In addition, the economic impact on the Partnership of the combination of the reduced payments under the HAP Contracts and the restructuring of the existing FHA-insured mortgage loans under MAHRAA is uncertain. 

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

The Partnership owns limited partnership interests in unconsolidated Local Partnerships, in which the Partnership’s ownership percentage ranges from 95% to 99%.  However, based on the provisions of the relevant partnership agreements, the Partnership, as a limited partner, does not have control or a contractual relationship with the Local Partnerships that would require or allow for consolidation under accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (see “Note 1 – Organization and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies” of the financial statements in “Item 1. Financial Statements”).  There are no lines of credit, side agreements or any other derivative financial instruments between the Local Partnerships and the Partnership.  Accordingly the Partnership’s maximum risk of loss related to these unconsolidated Local Partnerships is limited to the recorded investments in and receivables from the Local Partnerships.  See “Note 2 – Investments in and Advances to Local Partnerships” of the financial statements in “Item 1. Financial Statements” for additional information about the Partnership’s investments in unconsolidated Local Partnerships.

Other

In addition to its indirect ownership of the general partnership interest in the Partnership, Aimco and its affiliates owned 492 limited partnership units (the "Units") (or 984 limited partnership interests) in the Partnership representing 8.63% of the outstanding Units as of June 30, 2011. A Unit consists of two limited partnership interests. A number of these Units were acquired pursuant to tender offers made by Aimco or its affiliates. It is possible that Aimco or its affiliates will acquire additional Units in exchange for cash or a combination of cash and units in AIMCO Properties, L.P., the operating partnership of Aimco, either through private purchases or tender offers. Pursuant to the Partnership Agreement, unitholders holding a majority of the Units are entitled to take action with respect to a variety of matters that include, but are not limited to, voting on certain amendments to the Partnership Agreement and voting to remove the Corporate General Partner. Although the Corporate General Partner owes fiduciary duties to the limited partners of the Partnership, the Corporate General Partner also owes fiduciary duties to Aimco as its sole stockholder. As a result, the duties of the Corporate General Partner, as corporate general partner, to the Partnership and its limited partners may come into conflict with the duties of the Corporate General Partner to Aimco as its sole stockholder.

Variable Interest Entities

The Partnership consolidates any variable interest entities in which the Partnership holds a variable interest and is the primary beneficiary. Generally, a variable interest entity, or VIE, is an entity with one or more of the following characteristics: (a) the total equity investment at risk is not sufficient to permit the entity to finance its activities without additional subordinated financial support; (b) as a group the holders of the equity investment at risk lack (i) the ability to make decisions about an entity’s activities through voting or similar rights, (ii) the obligation to absorb the expected losses of the entity, or (iii) the right to receive the expected residual returns of the entity; or (c) the equity investors have voting rights that are not proportional to their economic interests and substantially all of the entity’s activities either involve, or are conducted on behalf of, an investor that has disproportionately few voting rights. The primary beneficiary of a VIE is generally the entity that has (a) the power to direct the activities of the VIE that most significantly impact the VIE’s economic performance, and (b) the obligation to absorb losses or the right to receive benefits that could potentially be significant to the VIE.

In determining whether it is the primary beneficiary of a VIE, the Partnership considers qualitative and quantitative factors, including, but not limited to: which activities most significantly impact the VIE’s economic performance and which party controls such activities; the amount and characteristics of the Partnership’s investment; the obligation or likelihood for the Partnership or other investors to provide financial support; and the similarity with and significance to the business activities of the Partnership and the other investors.  Significant judgments related to these determinations include estimates about the current and future fair values and performance of real estate held by these VIEs and general market conditions.

At June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010, the Partnership holds variable interests in five and six VIEs, respectively, for which the Partnership is not the primary beneficiary.  The Partnership has concluded, based on its qualitative consideration of the partnership agreement, the partnership structure and the role of the general partner in each of the Local Partnerships, that the general partner of each of the Local Partnerships is the primary beneficiary of the respective Local Partnership.   In making this determination, the Partnership considered the following factors:

·         the general partners conduct and manage the business of the Local Partnerships;

·         the general partners have the responsibility for and sole discretion over selecting a property management agent for the Local Partnerships’ underlying real estate properties;

·         the general partners are obligated to fund any recourse obligations of the Local Partnerships;

·         the general partners are authorized to borrow funds on behalf of the Local Partnerships; and

·         the Partnership, as a limited partner in each of the Local Partnerships, does not have the ability to direct or otherwise significantly influence the activities of the Local Partnerships that most significantly impact such entities’ economic performance.

The five VIEs at June 30, 2011 consist of Local Partnerships that are directly engaged in the ownership and management of five apartment properties with a total of 335 units. The Partnership is involved with those VIEs as a non-controlling limited partner equity holder. The Partnership’s maximum exposure to loss as a result of its involvement with the unconsolidated VIEs is limited to the Partnership’s recorded investments in and receivables from these VIEs, which were zero at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010.  The Partnership may be subject to additional losses to the extent of any financial support that the Partnership voluntarily provides in the future.

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States requires the Partnership to make estimates and assumptions. Judgments and assessments of uncertainties are required in applying the Partnership’s accounting policies in many areas.   The following may involve a higher degree of judgment and complexity.

Method of Accounting for Investments in Local Partnerships

The Partnership, as a limited partner, does not have a contractual relationship with the Local Partnerships or exercise control over the activities and operations, including refinancing or selling decisions, of the Local Partnerships that would require or allow for consolidation. Accordingly, the Partnership accounts for its investments in the Local Partnerships using the equity method. The Partnership is allocated profits and losses of the Local Partnerships based upon its respective ownership percentage (between 95% and 99%). Distributions of surplus cash from operations from most of the Local Partnerships are restricted by the Local Partnerships’ Regulatory Agreements with the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”). These restrictions limit the distribution to a portion, generally less than 10%, of the initial invested capital. The excess surplus cash is deposited into a residual receipts reserve, of which the ultimate realization by the Partnership is uncertain as HUD frequently retains it upon sale or dissolution of the Local Partnership. The Partnership is allocated profits and losses and receives distributions from refinancings and sales in accordance with the Local Partnerships’ partnership agreements. These agreements usually limit the Partnership’s distributions to an amount substantially less than its ownership percentage in the Local Partnership. 

The individual investments are carried at cost plus the Partnership’s share of the Local Partnership’s profits less the Partnership’s share of the Local Partnership’s losses, distributions and impairment charges. The Partnership is not legally liable for the obligations of the Local Partnerships and is not otherwise committed to provide additional support to them. Therefore, it does not recognize losses once its investment in each of the Local Partnerships reaches zero.  Distributions from the Local Partnerships are accounted for as a reduction of the investment balance until the investment balance is reduced to zero. When the investment balance has been reduced to zero, subsequent distributions received are recognized as income in the statements of operations. 

ITEM 4.     CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

(a)   Disclosure Controls and Procedures.

The Partnership’s management, with the participation of the principal executive officer and principal financial officer of the Corporate General Partner, who are the equivalent of the Partnership’s principal executive officer and principal financial officer, respectively, has evaluated the effectiveness of the Partnership’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 the end of the period covered by this report. Based on such evaluation, the principal executive officer and principal financial officer of the Corporate General Partner, who are the equivalent of the Partnership’s principal executive officer and principal financial officer, respectively, have concluded that, as of the end of such period, the Partnership’s disclosure controls and procedures are effective.

(b)   Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting.

There has been no change in the Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act) during the fiscal quarter to which this report relates that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting.

ITEM 6.     EXHIBITS

See Exhibit Index.

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.

EXHIBIT INDEX

Exhibit     Description of Exhibit

3           Restated Certificate and Agreement of Limited Partnership herein dated January 5, 1981 incorporated by reference to the Partnership's Form S-11 No. 268983.

3.1         Amendments to Restated Certificate and Agreement of Limited Partnership, incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated January 24, 2005.

3.2         Restated Certificate and Agreement of Limited Partnership incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated January 24, 2005.

10.2        Second Amendment to Amended and Restated Agreement and Certificate of Limited Partnership of Village Apartment, Ltd., dated May 18, 2011, by and between R. L. Ayers, an individual; Village Apartment Limited, Inc., a Tennessee corporation; Real Estate Associates Limited III, a California limited partnership; and Helen Ayers, an individual.

31.1        Certification of equivalent of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Securities Exchange Act Rules 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a), as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

31.2        Certification of equivalent of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Securities Exchange Act Rules 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a), as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

32.1        Certification of equivalent of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.