Good morning and thank you for joining us for the second quarter 2026 Acadia Realty Trust earnings conference call. My name is George Horst, and I'm a summer intern for property management.

Before we begin, please be aware that statements made during the call that are not historical may be deemed forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 and actual results may differ materially from those indicated by such forward-looking statements. Due to a variety of risks and uncertainties, including those disclosed in the company's most recent Form 10-K and other periodic filings with the SEC, forward-looking statements speak only as of the date of this call, July 29th, 2026, and the company undertakes no duty to update them.

During this call, management may refer to certain non-GAAP financial measures, including funds from operations and net operating income. Please see Acadia's earnings press release posted on its website for reconciliations of these non-GAAP financial measures with the most directly comparable GAAP financial measures.

Once the call becomes open for questions, we ask that you limit your first round to two questions per caller to give everyone the opportunity to participate. You may ask further questions by reinserting yourself into the queue, and we will answer as time permits.

Now, it is my pleasure to turn the call over to Ken Bernstein, President and Chief Executive Officer, who will begin today's management remarks.

Thank you, George. Great job.

Welcome, everyone. As you can see in our press release, we had another strong quarter driven by continued momentum across both internal as well as external growth initiatives.

While geopolitical events have certainly added unwanted uncertainty to the global economy, our results tell a different story. In fact, it's worth pausing at this point for a moment.

For instance, the Tariffs of Liberation Day were announced on April 2nd of last year, this is really the natural quarter to compare against to see what's actually happened to our business. Since then, we delivered earnings growth of 11% year-over-year.

Last quarter, same-property NOI came in ahead of our projections at 8.7%. We produced record leasing activity with rent spreads exceeding 90% this quarter compared to single digits a year ago.

While the headlines have been relentless, what our retailers are telling us is a very different story. The US has become increasingly relevant, the consumer has remained resilient, and retailers are doubling down on must-have real estate.

That strength shows up across the key drivers of our business. First, with respect to internal growth, which AJ Levine will discuss in more detail, our operating metrics continue to reflect the strength of our street retail thesis.

Second, with respect to external growth, as Reggie Livingston will discuss, we were busy last quarter on the transactional front, with important street retail additions to our REIT portfolio and more to come. Simultaneously, we were harvesting profits from several assets in our investment management platform, where we've now disposed of or recapitalized over $500 million year-to-date at a nearly 2x equity multiple.

Then third, as John Gottfried will discuss, our balance sheet metrics are right where we want them, with plenty of dry powder to fuel future growth. Taking a step back, what this quarter really reflects is our street retail thesis being validated in real time.

On previous calls, we discussed why tenant demand and tenant performance in street retail is so strong, and those same drivers remain firmly in place: limited new supply, strong tenant performance driven by the affluent consumers who shop our corridors, and then most significantly, the increasing demand due to the long-term migration of brands away from wholesale or department stores and towards their own direct-to-consumer stores. This DTC shift has been gaining steam over the past few years, and it appears we're still in the early stages of this important multi-year demand driver.

It's an important reason why we are seeing the strongest growth coming from the street retail portion of our portfolio. This increased demand and ensuing market rent growth is only half the story.

The other key driver of our results comes from the differentiated structure of our street retail leases that allows us to capture this growth faster than in other formats. First, our street retail leases generate higher contractual rent escalators, generally with 3% annual growth.

They also require lighter relative capital on re-tenanting, more of that top-line growth drops to the bottom line. Most importantly, our street retail leases carry fair market value resets that allow us to have faster and more frequent mark-to-market opportunities, a structural advantage that simply does not exist in other formats.

This means that to the extent that we are now operating in a longer-term inflationary environment, as we have experienced over the past couple of years, these resets provide for inflation protection as well. The combination of superior contractual growth and more frequent mark-to-market opportunities means our street retail portfolio is positioned to generate 200 to 300 basis points of incremental same-store growth above what we achieve in our suburban portfolio.

In fact, over the last three years, we have delivered closer to 400 basis points of superior growth. Given that demand seems to be increasing, we expect this outperformance to continue.

We're also seeing proof of concept where our performance is being further enhanced when we achieve scale in a given corridor. We have found that once we own about 20%, 25% of the retail of one of our key streets, we can better drive curation, better drive sales performance, market intelligence, and operating efficiencies that result in about a 10% incremental NOI increase for our properties.

Thus, with these tailwinds and goals in mind, our acquisitions are focused on those deals that both stand on their own from a return perspective, but also position us to further recognize the benefits of scale. Since the third quarter of 2024, we have invested approximately $700 million in street retail acquisitions in our REIT portfolio.

With our current pipeline, our goal is to hit $1 billion by year-end, nearly doubling the size of our street retail portfolio. These investments have already created approximately 3% FFO accretion per share and an even higher percentage of NAV accretion.

Importantly, this focus is bringing us closer to our goal of being the premier owner-operator of street retail in the US, which is also bringing scale benefits to our platform. Now to be clear, our discipline here is unchanged.

Our investments continue to be accretive to earnings and accretive to net asset value from day one and continue to deliver on our target of initial accretion of 1 penny of FFO for every $200 million we deploy. As a result, the benefits of scale that we hope to recognize in the future are additive to what these deals already deliver on their own.

In conclusion, the results we are delivering today are a direct reflection of the strategy we have been executing for several years now, both with respect to our focus on street retail for our REIT portfolio as well as our execution through our investment management platform. The internal and external opportunities in front of us give us a clear line of sight into multi-year top-line growth, with increasing confidence that this growth will continue to drop to the bottom line.

With that, I'd like to thank the team for their continued hard work, and I will turn the call over to AJ Levine.

Thanks, Ken. Good morning, everyone.

I'll start off with an update on leasing activity and the trends that are driving our results this quarter. Then I'll focus specifically on the rent growth we've seen on our key streets and how that's translating through to pry-loose and mark-to-market opportunities in our portfolio.

Starting with leasing activity, during the second quarter we signed approximately $8.9 million in new leases, which is the highest volume for any quarter in our company's history. While we continue to see strong fundamentals and leasing momentum from all sides of our portfolio—street, urban, and suburban—it's the performance of our streets that continues to fuel the majority of our growth.

Approximately 80% of the new ABR signed in the second quarter is from our street and urban markets, where we'll see the highest contractual growth at 3% per annum, as well as more frequent opportunities to mark to market through FMV resets. Even with the record volumes we've achieved during the second quarter, the pipeline of prospective leases in advanced negotiation remains strong, with over $10 million in additional ABR being actively negotiated.

As far as what's driving that demand, there are several factors at play. The first being the current supply-demand dynamic on our streets, with vacancy rates in markets like Madison Avenue, Greene Street in Soho, North 6th Street in Williamsburg, Armitage Avenue and the Gold Coast in Chicago, and Melrose Place in Los Angeles at historical lows.

As far as tenant demand, the decline of traditional wholesale channels, coupled with the recognized benefits of DTC retail, has given rise to the deepest pool of specialty, advanced contemporary, and luxury tenants that we've seen, perhaps ever. It's clear from the activity on our streets and from speaking with our tenants that retailer demand continues to meaningfully outpace supply.

That is naturally creating heightened competition for space, supported by unmitigated consumer demand. That brings us to the second factor, which is tenant sales growth and occupancy costs, especially for those tenants catering to the higher-earning customers that shop our streets.

The annual sales growth that we've seen from tenants such as Aritzia on M Street, Alo Yoga on Michigan Avenue, Violet Grey on Melrose Place, DÔEN on Bleecker Street, Tecovas on Henderson Avenue, and Zimmermann in Soho is averaging over 25% year-over-year. The blended health ratio for those tenants is below 9.5%.

Unlike the 2015-2016 cycle, when rents ran well ahead of what sales could support and ultimately had to correct, today's tenants remain healthy and four-wall profitable, even before taking into account the halo effect and other benefits of omnichannel retail. As we look for additional opportunities for growth, this is where we find it.

What the sales data continues to signal is that despite several years of elevated rent growth on our streets, we still have significant room to run. The third dynamic, which is perhaps the most intentional, is the scale that we are building along these dynamic corridors that is allowing us to curate our streets, positively influence tenant performance, and ultimately capture the outsized rent growth.

A good example of these dynamics at play would be Armitage Avenue in Chicago, where we control over 30% of the retail on the street and have spent years thoughtfully curating with brands like Serena & Lily, Jenni Kayne, HUCKBERRY, and Levain Bakery. Over 65% of our GLA on Armitage has undergone some form of a rent reset since 2019, and over that time, rents on the street have effectively doubled.

The street has virtually zero vacancy, but that hasn't stopped us from unlocking embedded value, both qualitative and quantitative. Through our pry-loose strategy and FMV resets, we continue to improve merchandising and drive rents on the street.

In our latest example from the second quarter, we re-leased a space on Armitage at a 75% spread. When you consider that the prior tenant's initial rent from 2019 was $76 a square foot and the new rent is $155 a square foot, that means that rents on Armitage have grown over 100% since 2019.

That's 10.5% annual rent CAGR. Just one year ago, we signed a lease on Armitage at $130 a square foot, which means that rents on the street have increased by 20% year-over-year and signals that the market is, in fact, accelerating.

That level of growth doesn't happen by accident. It flows from thoughtful, intentional merchandising, space by space, tenant by tenant, prying loose an underperforming tenant and replacing them with the likes of Jenni Kayne, who has the ability to generate sales at 2x the previous tenant—the type of planning and impact that can only come from achieving scale within a market.

While this level of rent growth is fairly unique to our streets, it is not unique to Armitage Avenue. We've seen similar dynamic on M Street in DC, on North 6th Street in Williamsburg, on Newbury Street in Boston, and on Worth Avenue in Palm Beach.

On Greene Street in Soho, for example, where, again, supply is near all-time lows and competition for space is the strongest it's been in over a decade, this past quarter we signed a new lease with a European luxury retailer at a 34% spread. When you factor in the 3% contractual increases typical of street retail, the true spread against the previous tenant's starting rent from 2022 was closer to 43%.

Again, that's close to 10% CAGR over the last four years. On Melrose Place, we re-tenanted a space at a 48% spread.

Again, when you compare today's market rent against the market when the previous tenant last renewed in 2021, the growth over that period is 66%. That's 11% CAGR.

Those are just a few examples, but overall spreads for the quarter came in at 91%. Now let me be clear, we recognize that posting 90% spreads is extraordinary.

Given the current market dynamics of street retail, the double-digit market rent CAGR over the last several years, and the performance and demand we're seeing from our retailers, we do expect to see consistent double-digit spreads moving forward, plus the 3% contractual growth that is standard for our streets. The spread is the headline, but the compounding is what really drives returns over time.

What makes all of this particularly powerful for our portfolio is that because of FMV resets that are unique to street retail, we are able to capture this rent growth sooner than we can from suburban leases, and therefore a meaningful portion of our portfolio will be resetting to current market in the near term, allowing us to seize the momentum in real time. John will walk you through what that embedded mark-to-market translates to in terms of earnings growth potential.

It's also worth noting that the average payback period for the quarter's new conforming street leases was slightly above nine months. That's accounting for commissions and CapEx.

Whereas the payback period on a new suburban box is typically five to seven years. That's just one more reason why not all spreads are created equal.

In summation, despite a record quarter of leasing activity, the runway ahead remains significant. Market rents on our core streets have compounded meaningfully since 2019.

Those rents continue to accelerate as available supply further contracts, and our lease structure ensures that we can capture that growth on a recurring basis. As always, I'd like to thank the team for their hard work, and with that, I'll turn the call over to Reggie.

Thanks, AJ, and good morning, everyone. I'll start my remarks covering our recent transaction activity and current pipeline, which is keeping us on our traditional pace of $400 to $500 million of street retail acquisitions per year.

Year-to-date, we've closed over $228 million in acquisitions for our REIT portfolio, including $149 million in Q2 to date, all while hitting our key metrics: accretive to NAV, accretive to FFO at a rate of a penny per $200 million, with NOI CAGR in excess of 5%. More specifically, our recent activity included 4 and 28 Newbury Street in Boston.

These assets are anchored by Chanel and Cartier and present a meaningful value creation opportunity we're actively working to harvest. 8800 Melrose Avenue in West Hollywood, which is leased to Jacquemus, the acclaimed French retailer.

This, too, has value creation opportunities that could drive cash yields to north of 8% in the near term through redevelopment and re-tenanting. Finally, we added another door in the key Flatiron/Union Square market, where we now own five storefronts and are further realizing the benefits of scale there.

On top of those acquisitions, we're excited about our pipeline. We've built a platform that routinely closes $100 million a quarter of street retail, and we expect to exceed that pace for 2026, and John has raised all the money needed to do it.

This pipeline has all the Acadia hallmarks, including off-market deals leveraging the less-crowded street retail space and our first-call advantage, tenant-driven market intelligence infused in our underwriting, building more scale on corridors that continue to experience outsized rent growth, and below-market leases that allow us to harvest that growth in a relatively short period of time and stabilize significantly above our going-in yield. In fact, we've already delivered several examples of converting below-market leases to market rent on our recent acquisitions.

On our 2024 Soho portfolio purchase, we've signed leases that will increase NOI by 90%, stabilizing to a 6% yield and a high-6s yield in a few years through another FMV opportunity, all on an asset that would trade below a 5 cap today. Same with one of our 2024 Williamsburg purchases, where we've more than doubled the NOI, also slated to stabilize to a 6 yield on an asset that would trade at a low-5s cap rate today.

In other words, we don't just buy deals with upside, but we're actually executing on our plan to capture that upside. On the IMP side, the increased capital appetite for open-air retail has certainly made competition for this product stiff, but we remain confident we'll secure the right assets at attractive prices, a confidence driven by our history of doing so.

On the flip side, we're taking advantage of this increased competition through selective dispositions of IMP assets where we've successfully completed our business plan. To date, we've sold and recap north of $500 million, with another $200 million-plus of dispositions by year-end.

This continues the success of this platform, where we've achieved a nearly 2x equity multiple and mid-teens IRR on these deals this year. In conclusion, the bottom line is we're well on our way to crossing the threshold of $1 billion of street retail over the last two years, and we're doing it in a way that's accretive, disciplined, and building scale, with a growing pipeline to fuel more growth.

With that, I'll turn it over to John.

Thanks, Reggie, and good morning. I will start off my remarks with comments on our second quarter performance, including building blocks for the balance of the year and into 2027, and then closing with an update on our balance sheet.

As outlined in our release, we delivered 31 cents of FFO. It was another clean quarter that exceeded our expectations, enabling us to once again raise our full-year earnings guidance.

To keep it simple, it was our street retail portfolio that drove the quarter, contributing nearly 16% same-property growth, equating to nearly 2 cents of incremental FFO versus the prior year quarter. The growth was pervasive across our street markets, and in our scaled corridors, the growth was even more pronounced.

For example, on M Street in Georgetown and Armitage Avenue in Chicago, we exceeded 20% same-property growth during the quarter. As a matter of practice, we do not revise our same-property guidance during the year.

That said, with same-property growth of 7.3% through the first six months and continued strength expected in the second half of the year, our full-year model has us trending above the midpoint of our 5% to 9% range. I want to spend a moment on our signed-not-open pipeline.

As AJ highlighted, through our team's record leasing, our SNO pipeline increased nearly 60% during the second quarter, reaching an all-time high of $16.5 million or roughly 7% of our pro rata ABR. About half of our pipeline is projected to commence in 2026 and is heavily weighted to the fourth quarter.

That's when the grocer T&T and LA Fitness' Club Studio, both in our San Francisco redevelopment projects, are slated to come online, with the balance of our SNO expected to commence throughout 2027. When factoring in our estimate of rent commencement dates, let me now translate the anticipated impact of our SNO pipeline on FFO.

In aggregate, our SNO pipeline represents about 8 cents of incremental FFO, net of roughly 3 cents that we're capitalizing within our development and redevelopment projects. Based on estimated commencement dates, we expect to realize a penny or so in the second half of 2026, another 3 to 5 cents in 2027, and the balance in 2028, building to the full 8-cent run rate.

Now let me turn to a topic AJ touched on in his remarks involving market rent growth and the potential earnings upside of below-market leases in our street retail portfolio. We have historically been reluctant to provide specific mark-to-market data across our streets, but given the high volume of leasing activity that has and continues to occur, we now have enough empirical data that supports our increased conviction in the opportunity ahead.

Just to point out, we have already been capturing this market growth in our streets over the last few years, having increased our street and urban occupancy by over 500 basis points, accelerating mark-to-markets through fair market value resets that are unique to our street retail, and through our pry-loose efforts, all of which have been driving the double-digit rent spreads, same-property, and FFO growth that we have been experiencing. Even after all of that, we still have plenty of room to run.

We estimate that our high-growth streets are still approximately 25% below market today. Keep in mind, this does not include the additional upside we anticipate from market rental growth over the remaining lease term, which further increases the mark-to-market opportunity.

For purposes of walking through the earnings impact, let's just stick with the 25% that we think we capture today. This represents about $20 to $25 million, with some of the largest contributors being Soho in Manhattan, which we estimate to be about 35% below market; Henderson Avenue in Dallas, about 60%; Armitage Avenue in Chicago at about 50%; and North 6th Street in Williamsburg at about 25%.

In terms of timing, between natural lease expirations, FMV resets, and our pry-loose efforts, our team is highly focused on capturing a meaningful amount of this mark-to-market opportunity within the next five years. Thus, between several hundred basis points remaining street lease-up, 3% embedded contractual growth, the executed leases in our SNO, and our below-market street retail portfolio, we are increasingly confident in our ability to continue producing 5%-plus same-property growth and strong earnings growth over the next several years.

Let me now turn to our 2026 guidance. Given the strong operating fundamentals and increased confidence heading into the second half of the year, together with the accretion from our external growth, we raised our full-year earnings guidance again this quarter, now targeting approximately 10% year-over-year FFO growth at the midpoint.

It's worth noting that this strength more than offset about a penny or so of positive and dilution from our investment management business, which is the short-term dilution we absorb when we profitably sell investment management assets ahead of redeploying the proceeds, which is a reminder we do not build into our initial guidance. As you heard from Reggie, we have sold or recapitalized well in excess of a half a billion dollars of investment management assets at nearly a 2x multiple, with more in the pipeline.

While short-term dilutive, it gives us meaningful dry powder to redeploy into future earnings growth as we reinvest that capital. Now moving to our balance sheet, and starting with our capital raising activities.

Our acquisition goal is to add roughly $400 to $500 million of accretive street retail on-balance sheet each year. Based on our penny per $200 million target, this translates to over 2 cents of annual FFO accretion.

As you heard from Reggie, with a very busy second half of the year ahead of us, we remain on track to achieve that goal again. During the second quarter, as this pipeline of accretive external opportunities began to increase, we match funded it with approximately $200 million of equity.

Following this raise, we have all the equity we need to achieve our current external growth goal, along with the funding we need to complete our Henderson development project, which we are continuing to anticipate an 8% to 10% yield on our costs. In terms of our balance sheet, we have virtually no maturities over the next several years, nearly $1 billion of liquidity, and significant dry powder to fund our REIT expansion and investment management businesses.

In summary, we had an outstanding quarter, achieved record leasing volumes, better-than-expected operating metrics, and a balance sheet that has ample capacity to support the disciplined execution of our growth strategy. With that, I will turn the call over to questions.

Thanks, it's Nick Joseph here with Craig. Just on the street retail strength that you're seeing, curious number one if you're hearing from any of the retailers on changes in consumer behavior, and then on the rent levels that you're seeing today, if you think these are sustainable or are they stretching same-store economics at all?

Let me start, and then AJ chime in. There are some shifts underway that I think are important and we shouldn't lose sight of as it relates to open-air retail in general, discretionary retail specifically, and you need to take into account omnichannel.

To be more specific, over the last few years, the move out of wholesale, out of the department stores as department stores have been reducing the number of doors they have, retailers are recognizing that the most profitable channels and the most important ones are them having their own store as opposed to being in department stores. Similarly, in an omnichannel world, online is still very important to these retailers, but the store is the most profitable channel.

From an overall makeup, what we're seeing is a bunch of retailers that were not historically, 5, 10 years ago, active users of their own stores showing up. That's the first step.

Then AJ, why don't you chime in in terms of health and what our tenants are telling us in terms of the profitability and viability of these stores?

There's a few things I would point to. First, sales growth, health ratios.

Sales growth is outpacing market rent growth, health ratios are actually declining, which is a good indicator of where rents can go. As Ken mentioned, this is the deepest pool of tenants and the tightest supply that any of us can remember.

Some of those are European retailers that are entering the US for the first time, expanding in the US, looking to the US as their main growth driver moving forward. Some of these are, again, traditional wholesale players that are pivoting to DTC, and momentum, right?

Most of the rent growth that we've seen has actually happened post-2024. This isn't just a pop that happened coming out of COVID that's now leveling out.

It is sustainable, and of course, don't want to discount our ability to actually curate because of the scale that we've achieved in a number of these markets. We can actually influence rents by influencing tenant performance through co-tenancy.

We do believe that this is a sustainable trend moving forward.

Thanks, that's very helpful. Then maybe just on the kind of balance sheet and kind of tying that to the busy acquisition pipeline that you spoke of.

How do you think about forward equity offerings from here? How do you think about pricing relative to the returns that you're targeting?

Yes, I think as outlined in our remarks, I think we have the equity we need. We talked about getting to about $0.5 billion of acquisitions, which we think by the end of the year, we get there, and we have the equity we need as well as to fund our Henderson project.

Not looking to raise any additional equity to what we have currently under a wrap. In terms of forward equity, I think just given the timing, if you think about why we like that product, Reggie's out shaking hands on deals and we would look through the math as to does this hit our metrics: NAV accretive, FFO accretive, growth accretive, etc.

When we lock in that price of capital, and often times through the diligence and closing process it takes several months to get to that point, I want to make sure Reggie has that capital on hand to fund it. I think we do like that element to fund it, and we raise equity when we have conviction that we're going to put that to work.

Thank you.

Good morning. Thanks for taking my questions.

My line's kind of been going in and out, I apologize if either of these were touched on during the remarks. I guess first, I was wondering if you could just kind of tell us what are the going-in cap rates on acquisitions year-to-date?

Then how should we think about both the timing and the magnitude of yield expansion on those?

While we touched on it briefly, Reg, why don't you explain? Unfortunately, as it relates to street retail, the cap rates are just one of the many components that we get to think about.

I think, Andrew, here's how I would look at it. The going-in cap rate, maybe for suburban retail, is a little more relevant.

The way we think about it is, think about everything that we've discussed with the expansion of rent growth in various corridors. It's really about where do we stabilize to, and how can we use the platform to pull certain levers to stabilize to, call it, 6s-plus yield in a near timeframe.

A lot of that we can actually do because of fair market value resets, the rent growth in these various corridors, re-tenanting, pry loose, curation, and etc. We think about it less from a going-in cap rate standpoint and more about where we stabilize to.

We're often finding opportunities where we are stabilizing 100, 200 bps above where it would trade today. That's really the difference between a going-in cap rate with meager growth and the opportunities that we're able to harvest.

Okay. Thank you.

Then could you just remind us what share count you're assuming in the FFO guidance and if that includes settling all forward shares this year?

Hey, Andrew, think of when we bring down the acquisition, that's when we will draw down on the shares. I think we're just going to continue match funding as we did this quarter.

It's really going to vary with the timing of the closing of the deals.

Okay. Thank you.

Hey, guys, thanks. Solid underlying results.

Interested in your disposition a little bit as well. Maybe diving into that.

Obviously, you sold some of your JV assets. Got pretty decent pricing on that.

Maybe talk about how you thought about that, and I think the local press has also talked about Clark and Diversey portfolio being for sale in Chicago. Maybe you can talk a little bit about where you think that would have to price at in order for you to put that off the books?

Let me start and then Reg chime in with some details. We don't comment on press articles.

That's just a matter of practice. What we have said before, and is the case for our on-balance sheet REIT dispositions, is while we will entertain them periodically over time, they will not create earnings dilution.

They will not create NAV dilution. We have the balance sheet we need, and so we can be just strategic about any dispositions with respect to that.

Then Reg, why don't you just touch on the overall disposition market where it feels the most crowded, where we see opportunity?

I think what we've always said historically is that one of the reasons we like street retail on balance sheet is it's a much less crowded field, and a lot of the suburban product, grocery-anchored center, power centers, it is increasingly become a crowded field as retail's kind of having its day from an institutional investor standpoint. We are kind of leaning into that, and in our Fund IV, Fund V dispositions that you've read about, we are getting solid pricing for it, and a lot of it is because of this increased competition that investors are out there for it.

Only when we have completed our business plan are we doing this, we're getting maximum value when we take it to market.

Thanks. You guys are in a couple of really hot street nodes.

How would you rank in terms of medium-term upside and also in terms of your ability to invest capital, a Soho market versus a Williamsburg versus a M Street and/or a Boston? Where do you see the greatest opportunities right now?

Let me start, and then both AJ and Reg, feel free to add additional color to it. Where we are most excited by far is where we can own enough assets on a given corridor that we can create what we call the benefits of scale.

As I said in the prepared remarks, it doesn't mean 100%. Usually when we get to about 25% of the stores in a given market, because we, our team, are active day in, day out, we can have a meaningful impact on that given corridor.

The ones I'm most excited about are those corridors where our curation can raise the sales of a given corridor, where our curation can help us really drive the rents, and we're at scale in about half of the key streets that we're active in. In terms of which ones in the medium term are going to have the most growth, well, to some degree you're asking us to pick our favorite children.

To state the obvious, it's in those that are in the earlier or earliest stages of stabilization. Henderson Avenue in Texas would be a prime example.

Hey, AJ, what else would you add to that?

The Flatiron, upper Madison Avenue, still not back to prior peaks. I think they still have a lot of room to run.

Obviously, available supply is extremely constrained there. Bleecker Street is a market that's really resonating with a lot of these traditional wholesale retailers that are pivoting to DTC.

I also think Soho still ranks at the top of the list. It's still a good amount of room to run just given the demand we're seeing in Soho.

I think a good amount of room to run to put more capital to work as well.

That's as close as we'll get to talking about our favorite kids.

Thanks, guys. Appreciate it.

Hi, thanks. Good morning.

First question, John, you mentioned that you do not regularly revise the same-store growth forecast during the year, but said that you're trending above the midpoint of the 5% to 9% range. Does the FFO guidance reflect that view and has that been sort of adjusted accordingly?

Can you clarify that and just discuss the driver of the 2-cent increase at the low end of the range and just talk about where you sort of derisked the outlook as far as the year goes?

Again, Todd, I think at the beginning of the year, I in hindsight put in a way too wide of a range at the 5% to 9%. What we have not done is on a regular basis update it.

Rationale really being for us is I think it indicates an element of precision on a portfolio of our size that we just don't want to articulate on a quarterly basis. Going forward, we are going to have a much tighter range, but at least at this point, do not want to update where we are going forward quarterly.

Then we raise the low end of our guidance 2 cents, really combination of things. One is as we continue to redeploy the external growth that we have deployed is one piece of it.

Credit is a second piece of it. I think we had credit assumptions built in.

We are continuing to see strength in there. We're getting spaces open.

We have a very significant signed-not-yet-open portfolio. You'll see that not only did we put a bunch of leases online this quarter, we've added more to it, and our team is getting those spaces open on time, if not ahead of where we thought those would be.

Between really a combination of the accretion from acquisitions, the ability to get stores open faster, and really just the overall tenant health, that's what drove it. I think in terms of where do we land in the midpoint between our new range, still half the year left, I think we'll leave where we trend, but definitely trending on the upward slope of that.

That's helpful. Then

my second question, now that Acadia owns 100% of Fund II's interests in City Point, effectively 95% of the asset, can you just talk in a little bit more detail about the NOI upside opportunity and timeframe to realize the earnings growth from that asset? I think leasing has generally been excluded from the SNO pipeline that you've discussed.

Can you clarify that a little bit or talk about that a little bit? Then can you also just talk about the longer-term ownership of that asset and how it fits into the core portfolio, whether you plan to keep that on balance sheet or whether there's an opportunity to recapitalize that asset or perhaps monetize it in some way or form over time?

John, why don't you start, and then AJ add some leasing update color?

Sure. I think a couple of things.

One to point out, the 16.5 million of SNO, that is pro rata across our entire portfolio. That would include City Point.

Because it's in a investment management, it's not in our same store. It is in our whatever share of leasing we've signed that has not yet opened, that will be in the 16.5 million.

As you pointed out, as we put into our materials last night, we did acquire the remaining pieces of the partners in Fund II. Just that complexity of the loan and the timing, that's now all behind us.

The upside is in front of us. I'll start off on some of the leasing, but I think as we look at the asset and the opportunity, we have made incredible progress in terms of what leasing we have done, what we have currently signed or in process of being signed.

We think the upside to that is we are probably again in the 12 to 18 months to really starting to see that lift from the asset. You've been to the asset multiple times, it's a combination of getting the couple of remaining spaces on the park, those leased, as well as getting the mark-to-markets that we think are available to us and increasingly playing out where we see the strength of some of the opens of some of the new, the likes of Sephora, getting the mark to market on Prince Street within City Point, not to be confused with Soho, to get those mark-to-markets, which those will be the more of the longer-dated ones as we navigate through those.

We are seeing a clear visibility, and now that the ownership is where it is, that gives us significant runway to do that. Then the last point on where do we see the ownership of it, what I will tell you we're not going to do is that given the future growth in front of us, given we have the capital balance sheet, we don't need to sell that upside at a discount to somebody else.

We are going to monetize that and then look to explore whether it makes sense to bring in institutional capital at that point, but not anything near-term where we'd be looking to bring in a capital partner. If AJ, you want to give a little more color on leasing?

As you mentioned, the space that we have left is our most valuable space, and the way that we're going to unlock that value is really just to stay the course, be selective, focus on curation, finding the right tenants and driving sales. This past quarter, we signed Warby Parker and Lovesac, Activate.

They'll complement lululemon, Sephora, Swarovski, of course Trader Joe's. We're creating that right ecosystem.

We've seen really strong sales growth continue. We see it show up in the food hall, as well as from our retailers.

Of course, the spaces that are occupied on the ground floor, those are the spaces that are going to roll the most frequently, and we'll be able to again capture that upside rent. Stay the course, focus on curation, and there's a good amount of upside ahead of us.

Thank you.

Good morning. Your portfolio leased rate is at 94.7%.

Three questions related to that. Where do you see the overall leased rate going over the next 12 to 18 months?

Within that, where can Chicago realistically get to in that horizon? Then more broadly, outside of Chicago, are there any specific assets you would call out as near-term needle movers on the leasing upside front?

Paulina, let me start with that. I think the 94.7, and this is just you're well of this, but keep in mind that is a blend of our entire REIT portfolio, meaning suburban and street and urban.

If you look at the street portion of that is lower, right? I think that if you look at the street portion of that is a good 100 basis points lower than that, and that's our more higher-dollar value per ABR space.

That's the one thing I want to point out, that still have several hundred basis points of room to run on the street. You would think full occupancy within the street, we peaked at in the 97% range, but I think we could safely say 95%, 96%, particularly given the strength that we've talked about today from the street, which is a significant upside.

Then in terms of suburban, I would say suburban, we're probably pretty full at this point throughout our suburban portfolio. I think in the 95% to 97% range on suburban feels about full occupancy there.

On a blended, when you blend our mix of street and urban and suburban, you're going to be in the 95% to 96% range because you're always going to have a level of churn. Then your question on Chicago.

I think if we look in Chicago, if we look across our markets, really do not have a lot of vacancy there with the exception of North Michigan Avenue, which is not in that statistic. That's in our redevelopment pool.

That is 96,000 square feet we have on North Michigan that is currently a drag to NOI. Very meaningful upside, and AJ could give some color that we're starting to see green shoots there, but meaningful opportunity from Chicago.

Then Paulina, your last question, can you repeat that piece?

If there are any other particular assets where you see meaningful upside, because, for example, when I look at Soho, West Village, it's at 93% today. That sounds somewhat low given the strength that you're describing in the corridor and relative to the entire industry that it's 96% leased.

Any specific things that you would like to call out on the upside?

I think you're always going to have some level of churn. I think it's unlikely that we would ever be able to operate the second we get a space back that our team is able to immediately turn it.

There is always going to be spots. In terms of upside, Soho, as I pointed out in remarks, there the upside is we think we're 60% below market.

There, given just the naturally shorter lease terms, the fair market value resets, and our team's pry-loose efforts, that's where the upside is, as AJ and his team could get that space back. Then where I'd say there's meaningful upside is if we go through again, we look at where do we have the greatest opportunity, Henderson in Dallas.

There, given the development we're doing there, we're strategically holding space back. There're meaningful growth in Dallas as well through lease-up.

Also San Francisco. In San Francisco, very big rebound as you are aware, but I think between we've brought in two large anchors there between T&T at City Center, LA Fitness and Sprouts at 555 9th.

We still have ample room to add to that. Again, in the 94.7 occupancy mentioned, because that's in redevelopment, that's not in that numbers as well.

Meaningful vacancies in San Francisco that is a strengthening market that we can lease into.

Just to emphasize even further the importance, I would argue that fair market value resets are going to be over the next few years more important than the important occupancy gains that we had over the last few years, because not only does the natural maturity and fair market value reset when it occurs create a pop for us, but what AJ and his team have proven now multiple times is retailers coming to us years ahead of that FMV reset and negotiating well in advance the increase in rent because retailers often are putting significant dollars, their own dollars, into stores, and they need to know that they have more than one, three, or even five years of certainty of rent. All of that you put together, I feel more excited about the upside embedded in our portfolio today, recognizable over the next few years, than I did even when we were in lease-up mode a couple of years ago.

Thank you. A second question is, when you underwrite acquisitions across the different street retail corridors, those that you like, do you find expected returns are broadly similar, or do some markets offer meaningfully more credible upside than others today, whether because where they are in the recovery cycle, liquidity, or something else?

It really does depend on the asset. It really is fact dependent.

There are a ton of deals where whether they're early innings, mature markets, it's all about rent-to-market. Can you get to that rent-to-market based on the FMV?

It's less about the market delivering different returns and more about the asset and the business plan and the execution.

That being said, I will reiterate again, where you will see us most active is deals that check the box in terms of right price, right unlevered IRRs, right long-term growth, everything we've discussed, but also where we can build scale. We thankfully are able to, and we've proven this now, and I think you'll see in our upcoming acquisitions, that we are adding to corridors that we have the highest level of confidence in.

They are achieving our returns up front, and then over time, I think they will surprise to the upside. In fact, a deal we recently acquired over the last year, we underwrote, say, $300 a foot, and now AJ and team are finalizing leases at 30% higher than that.

That's just one example of where, by controlling enough stores on a given street, we know the tenants' interests, we know who wants to be there, and we can do it promptly and professionally.

Thank you.

Hey, try it again this time with hopefully the right pin. Sorry about that.

We thought you were bringing Anthony along now. There.

Bait and switch, there we go. I know I missed some stuff, but I did hear the comments about scale and where it's seen to work.

When I look at the street portfolio, you're in six or seven markets if you include the smaller exposures. I guess, looking over the next three years, five years, where do you think you're going to see the most investment opportunities?

Is it more in the larger existing markets like New York? Is it kind of focusing on building out those smaller markets or even adding kind of new markets to the list?

I think you will see us add a couple new markets. To be clear, my guess is when you came up with six, you just lumped all of New York City as one market, when I think our retailers view the West Village very different from Soho, very different from North 6th Street in Williamsburg, and certainly Northern Madison Avenue.

Those are multiple different markets, but all New York. As I said in the beginning, we are continuing to add to our capital acquisitions on Henderson Avenue in Dallas.

I think you should expect to see us continue to deploy there given the strong tenant interest, strong results we're having. I think you should expect most of our additions to be in markets that we are currently active.

Last quarter, we planted seeds in Palm Beach on Worth Avenue, on Newbury Street, those are two more markets. If over the next few years we added two more, I would tell you we would be in a position where we would be highly relevant to the vast majority of our retailers nationwide: New York, Boston, Chicago, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Dallas, Florida, Georgetown in DC, all really important markets, and that will enable us to be the premier owner-operators of street retail in the US without having to add a couple more.

If you wanted to guess, you could come up with five potential, and we'll show up in two.

Got it. Okay.

For a second question, there was John, some nice color on the mark-to-markets. I know these spreads are going to be volatile, but if we're trying to dumb it down and thinking about go-forward spreads, is there any reason we can't say, okay, for the street portfolio, we're taking your 25% that you threw out there, blend that with the suburban for 10%, and as a proxy for the next few years, outside of market rent growth, that should be a good starting point to think about spreads?

Easy for me just to say yes, Mike, but I think the the reality is it's going to be lease dependent, as as part of that, right? I think that'd be the only So over, throughout that, our our target is we want to do this over the foreseeable future.

If you were to average those, then yes, that would be 25%. When we have markets such as Soho that are 60%, there is going to be volatility, just inevitably, quarter quarter-to-quarter.

I I would love to for you to be able to just say just spread it equally, but I think I would disappoint you if if that was if that played out. Over that extended period, our goal is to do 25%-plus, just given, keep in mind, we are not trending rents, that rents are continuing to rise above the contractual growth we're getting.

Got it. Thank you.

thank you. Yes, I was talking to myself.

I wanted to ask a question on the fair market value resets. I know you've given a lot of color.

In general, are those resetting in every five to eight years? Can you give color on the percentage that's resetting in '27 and '28?

The short answer is, in general, it's every five years after primary term. Sometimes when we sign an initial lease, it'll have a 10-year primary term, but thereafter, it's on every option period, and those options tend to run five years.

AJ, in terms of his other question?

In terms of the number of leases that would be rolling to FMV in the next year, it's definitely a significant number, and then when you add those to the active pry-loose pipeline, we should be able to meaningfully capture that growth.

Okay. The other question I have is, within the corridors, as you're curating the corridor themselves, at what percentage of ownership do you tend to start pricing yourself out?

Where do you see that the benefit that's going to the other properties you don't own start to create acquisition problems for that corridor?

It's tricky, and Reg, feel free to chime in as well. I'd say it's more art than science, and remember the economy comes into play.

There will be times where we feel like we are priced out of a given market, but then the cyclicality of the economy kicks in and other buyers disappear. First and foremost, because when we are active in a given corridor like Armitage Avenue, we have best market intelligence.

As long as we can afford to be patient, and we can, you'll see us consistently, every year we may add one or two buildings, and there's not a lot of competition for that. Conversely, in a place like Soho, when a market really gets moving, yeah, then we may have to step to the sidelines, pause for a bit.

Thankfully, we have enough other markets where we have a unique position that we have been able year in, year out to do $300 to $500 million of acquisitions without getting priced out.

It does irritate us, as you've pointed out, though, when we curate a street and make other people rich, what you'll see down on Henderson Avenue, for instance, is we're continuing to add buildings because we'd rather hold onto that for ourselves.

Great. Understand.

Thank you.

Thank you. A short follow-up.

You talked about the lighter CapEx as a structural advantage of street retail. Can you help quantify that, whether perhaps as a CapEx run rate as a percentage of NOI, or however you find it most intuitive to frame it?

Paulina, what I would say, right now we're in an extraordinary period of lease-up. If you were just to look at our CapEx right now, it's going to run at a higher percentage just because we're bringing so many tenants in.

Let me talk about upon stabilization, what is between recurring lease-up, the CapEx to maintain the asset, and improvements that we need as part of that. We'll start with what we see in our portfolio on power centers.

On the power we own, which is primarily in our investment management, we target in the 15% range of NOI for that full CapEx load. Grocer is going to be lower by a couple hundred basis points, call that between 10% to 12%.

Then street, we are in the 7% to 10% range on street CapEx. That's again what we like about the street.

It's higher growth, lower CapEx, which gets us to the higher net effective rental growth. The part of the reason, the dollars may be higher, but your rents are higher, which brings that percentage down, which is important to keep in mind.

Does that answer your question?

Perfectly. Yes.

Thank you so much.

Thank you all for taking the time. Anthony Paolone, we miss you, but we look forward to speaking to you all again soon.