Hello and welcome to the Camden Property Trust Fourth Quarter Earnings Call. All participants will be in a listen-only mode. (Operator Instructions). Now I would like to turn the conference over to Mrs. Kim Callahan, Vice President of Investor Relations.

Good morning and thank you for joining Camden's fourth quarter 2007 earnings conference call. Before we begin our prepared remarks I would like to advice everyone that we will be making forward-looking statements based on our current expectations and beliefs. These statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from expectations. Further information about these risks can be found in our filings with the SEC and we encourage you to review them. As a reminder, Camden's complete fourth quarter 2007 earnings release is available in the Investor Relations section of our website at camdenliving.com, and it includes reconciliations to non-GAAP financial measures, which may be discussed on this call. Joining me today are Rick Campo, Camden's Chairman and Chief Executive Officer; Keith Oden, President and Chief Operating Officer; and Dennis Steen, Chief Financial Officer. At this time, I will turn the call over to Rick Campo.

Thank, Kim. Good morning. We started 2008 with an award-winning team, great platform, and a strong balance sheet in complicated and uncertain markets. Here is how we see 2008 unfolding. On one hand, the fundamentals of our business are reasonably good. Demographics are strong for the growing echo boom population and continued positive immigration trends. New multi-family supply is manageable based on my conversations with the largest U.S. developers at the recent National Multi Housing Council Annual Meeting. Starts are predicted to fall 25 to 30% this year setting 2008 up for the lowest year for multi-family starts in 10 or 15 years. Multi-family affordability is the best it has been since 2000. Single family home purchases are down significantly with tighter credit standards and it will take time to change the negative sentiment towards home ownership. Home ownership rates have drop to 150 basis points since peak, creating more than 1.5 million in rentals, while some economist think the rate could drop another 200 basis points before it's over. On the other hand, job growth continues to slow in 2007 509,000 jobs were created in our market. With 2008 projected to decline about 50% to 265,000 jobs created, but the real wild card here is that the shadow of supply of single-family homes and what effect they will have on multi-family demand, the answer to that question will unfold during 2008. Our business plan for 2008 is based on same store net operating income of 2.25% to 3.25%. We'll be a net seller of assets this year, and during the last seven months we’ve acquired 4.3 million shares of Camden stock totaling $230 million. Our Board has authorized an additional 250 million of stock buybacks. We believe there is a significant discount between the public and private value of…

Thanks, Rick. As with past years, I will given my annual preview of the market conditions for 2008 in our largest market. Beginning with our top rated markets, I will give our view of current market condition, expressed as a letter grade, and also provide our view of the outlook for each market through year end 2008, as improving, stable or declining. Second, I will provide some additional details of same property guidance for 2008. Starting with the overview of the Camden's market conditions, Denver has made a tremendous turnaround year-over-year, moving from the bottom of last years list to ending 2007 as one of Camden's top performers. We rate current conditions as an A with a stable outlook. Job growth is expected to decline slightly, but a tight housing market will be driver in this market throughout 2008. The premium of buying versus renting absorption levels and population growth will also improve performance. Occupancy levels are anticipated to remain at or above 95% for the full year, which will keep this market as a top performer for rent growth. In Austin, we rate current condition as an A, with a stable outlook. As with the rest of the nation, employment growth is expected to slow, however Austin still anticipates adding more than 23,000 new jobs in 2008. Population growth due to an expanding student base, domestic migration and immigration will increase the demand for housing. Forecasts show 2008 to be another year of rising home prices, therefore widening the spread between renting and buying. In addition, the lack of new supply will foster another solid year of rental rate increases and good NOI growth. In Dallas, we rate current conditions as an A-minus, with an improving outlook. Dallas experienced an economic rebound in 2007 that is projected to hold…

Thanks, Keith. I'll start my comments this morning with a review of our fourth quarter results. Camden reported FFO for the fourth quarter $57.1 million or $0.94 per diluted share slightly higher than the midpoint of our guidance range of $0.91 to $0.96 per share and $0.01 above the first call mean estimates. The slightly better than expected performance is primarily due to property net operating income exceeding our forecast by $1.7 million and un-forecasted land sale gains of approximately $700,000. These two were partially offset by a $1.4 million impairment loss on lands. The $1.7 million favorable variance in property NOI is the result of our favorable variance of $3.2 million in property expenses in the fourth quarter due to a 1.6 million decline in real estate tax expense from the prior quarter primarily due to lower than expected 2007 tax rates in our Florida and Texas markets. With the remaining 1.6 million favorable variance in property expenses, primarily due to lower than anticipated property and casualty losses, employee benefit cost and incentive compensation. The favorable variances in property expenses were partially offset by a $1.5 million shortfall in property revenues due to the slightly lower than anticipated occupancy rates in our stabilized portfolio. Total non-property income and total other expenses were generally in line with our expectations for the quarter. On the transaction front during the fourth quarter, we sold seven of the nine operating assets held for sale resulted in a gain on the sale of discontinued operations of $75.3 million during the quarter. This brings our year-to-date disposition volume to approximately 3,000 units generating a $170 million in proceeds. We have exited our Midwest and Greensboro markets and continue to reduce our portfolio of 20 plus year old assets. The average cap rate on our 2007…

(Operator Instructions) Our first question comes from Mark Biffert at Goldman Sachs.

Hey guys, question for you on the fund. When you look at your acquisition volume that you've projected for '08 as well as the development, will all 800 million if you take the top end of the range come or be a part of that joint venture or that fund that you set up?

If you look at page 25, I believe it shows what we have balance sheet and joint venture, and you can see from an acquisition perspective, we have zero budgeted for 100% owned or on balance sheet. So, the $200 million to $400 million is definitely in the joint venture category, and then on development, we show between a $100 million and $500 million in total. And we are likely to have a couple of developments on balance sheet but not many. Fundamentally the fund and our joint ventures are set up to leverage our return on capital, and today it makes a lot of more sense we think to buy stock as opposed to invest directly into acquisitions or development.

Okay. And then looking at your dispositions for the year, you have $1 billion investment cap on the fund, would you move any existing assets that you own into that as well?

No, not likely. Typically what we are projecting to do is just sell assets, improve the quality of the portfolio over the long-term as opposed to doing joint ventures at this point.

Okay, and then looking at the assets that you sold during the quarter, what was the cap rate on those assets specifically?

Specific in the quarter or year-to-date?

On the quarter, you gave the year-to-date, I think its 6.1, I was just curious because these were sold sort after the credit issues and I'm just wondering how much they may have moved out since the prior year once, early in the year once?

I don't have the specific number, it actually moved down just briefly. But if you would like to, after the call, we can provide you the break-out between the three assets that we have acquired through this last portfolio sale. Generally speaking though, we got pretty much what we expected and I don't think they were significantly negatively impacted by the credit markets really. We found that when we looked at cap rates overall, we are in the sort of nominal cap rates or probably somewhere in 5.9 up to maybe 7 and some change perhaps. And then we looked after 650 in CapEx and this is on 2007 annualized number, so sort of backward looking cap rates, they are below six.

That's great. Looking at, and I guess going to operations, looking at the occupancy dip in the quarter, I mean looking at yield start, typically you guys say, it's going to be focused more around at 95% occupancy. Did you guys just decide to come off it to maintain rents where they were or what was the reason behind the occupancy dip?

Yield start is calibrated till they get to 95% and also there is a trade off between what you have to do on current rents in order to get that occupancy. With the premium on, certainly there is a heavy cost that it puts on the vacancy, but it also looks at what you would have to do on your existing rent. But again historically if you look at our portfolio over the last 10 years, we ended fourth quarter '07 within 30 basis points or what our 10 year average is on occupancy. We do have seasonality in our portfolio, probably more so than most of our peers do, and from a historical perspective it wasn't a big change. Looking at the change quarter-to-quarter, third to fourth, we were down 90 basis points, but again the historical seasonality would have implied 55 basis points down. So we are 35% basis points worse quarter-to-quarter than our 10 year average, and clearly that is a result of weakening market conditions in our markets where we've got the biggest supply issues from single-family housing.

So where do you, where were you able to get the cost savings on your expense side, I mean you saw significant decreases across your entire portfolio. Previously Rick you had talked about that there were some programs you guys were running that you let your staff run, but you thought that you would ultimately cut back if markets got worse. Is that what happened?

Ultimately as I mentioned earlier the actual decreases in costs for the fourth quarter were primarily due to final adjustments of tax rates in Florida and in Texas, and some reserve adjustments for insurance, both property casualty and employee benefit.

Okay.

Which declined from third to fourth.

Alright, great. Thanks.

Our next question comes from Steve Kim at Credit Suisse.

Hi this is Steven Kim. Another question regarding your markets, how divergent are the operations in terms of your A market and your B market?

I am sorry. Can you repeat the question, it was breaking up.

What is the divergent in rental growth between your A market and your B market?

If you are asking in terms of the spread on projection for rental growth next year.

Right, that's right.

Yeah, the high end of the rental growth in our models would be in the 4% range, the low end would be flat, so you got a pretty good distribution between 4 at the top end and dead flat in Orlando.

Got you. And in strength of your development pipeline, how have you been kind of meeting the pro forma projections.

We have, as a matter of fact, the last sort of 4 or 5 that have come in that we closed out last year, we actually came in better than original pro forma both on cost and on total returns. The portfolio that has just been completed and is in lease-up and that is under construction. With sort of softening of the construction market over all and the construction cost increases slowing, we feel pretty good about our cost side of our equation on all those projects. The ones in lease-up now are doing fine from a lease-up perspective. We have seen a little bit of slowness in terms of velocity of leasing, but it hasn’t been significant enough to make us worry about not [hitting] our targets.

So the slow leasing in Old Creek and Royal Oaks is not that significant

Royal Oaks is an age restricted property and we've talked about it a couple of times on the calls and even though we are in good shape on our total returns, it has been a slower at lease-up because age restricted customers very - the sale cycle or closing cycle is a lot longer than your typical pharma projects. So while we believe that our returns going to be really good there, it's just taking longer to lease it up. Old Creek, you had some significant sort of challenges there. We were one canyon away from the big fire in Southern California. We had to evacuate the project a number of times, during this past year because of those issues. And so, that clearly had an impact on leasing up. People can't even stay there and your office can't be opened, it's hard to lease it. So, we had a little bit of slowness, as a result of that.

All right. Thanks and congrats on the work.

Pardon me.

Congratulations on the work and for you guys.

Well thanks

Thank you.

Absolutely.

Our next question comes from Christine O'Connor, Morgan Stanely.

Hi, good morning. If you guys have any way of quantify the amount of competition you are seeing from single family homes, are you tracking the number of people that move out to rentals, is there anyway of just to get an idea of how much suppliers out there, that's competing directly with your apartments?

Yeah. I'm going to give you two answers; the first is on your second question on moveouts to rentals. We do track that and we did have an increase over the prior quarter. In the third quarter, we're at about 1% and that jumped up to about 2% in the fourth quarter. So, if we do track it, roughly 1% of that we can attribute now. That its not clear that we are still capturing when someone says, I'm leaving, why are you leaving, I'm going to a home -- to a house, it's just not clear to me that we've got a great way of determining is that to rent the house or to own even though our folks are now asking that questions directly, but we had some impact from that. The other impact, the only by extrapolation, I think you can get a little bit of a sense in the markets, where we know we've a significant issue with homes that are unsold and trying to find some kind of a place in the occupied housing market. It's going to be rentals to a large extent and if the five markets that we've the most impact, we also saw the biggest decrease in traffic year-over-year. So sort of by extrapolation to, if people are looking at rental homes as an option before they show up at one of our communities and that's going to show up in decreased traffic. So, I think that by extrapolation, you can say that the markets that I mentioned where we had decreased traffic that is by and large, probably attributable to more competition from single family homes. But I got to tell you there is the data on single family homes the aggregated data is very hard to come by. And we've a lot of anecdotal evidence. We've a lot of conservations with our regional and on site staffs. But at the end of the day, the best we can do is sort to extrapolate that we are seeing an impact because those are the markets, where we are having the biggest decline in traffic year-over-year.

[Let's] put out some numbers that talk about 1 million excess housing units, 750,000 homes and 250,000 condos and a lot of people think about the condos are the problem and it's not really the condos. The 250,000 excess condos in America is very small supply and the demographics really support people downsizing and baby boomers getting older and that kind of thing for condos So, and ultimately, if you sort of look at that number, the million excess units then they are going to be located clearly in the markets that [everybody] talks about. The interesting thing about that is one of the bigger issues, I think, is when do people start buying homes and when do you start working down the supply, the two components of new supply coming to the markets is definitely selling dramatically with homebuilders slashing the production dramatically. And then the second part is going to be when people start buying and until you have sort of a homeowner psychology that's where there is a tipping point, where they think that it's time to buy and the home prices aren't going to fall anymore. That's when you start seeing some of the effects of supply go out. When you look at the total numbers in the global scheme of America they are not that huge and they can be worked off over probably a twelve to eighteen month timeframe without much trouble. The question is when do you start working them off?

Right.

That's a psychological issue that I think have to be dealt within the next year or so.

Okay, that's very helpful. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

The next question comes from Jonathan Litt at Citigroup.

Hi, it's Craig Melcher here with Jon. The 2.4% same store revenue growth, does that include the cable in there?

That does not include cable.

Okay.

That is the net number. If you include the cable numbers it ends up in the 4% range.

Okay. So, looking, if you would.

Craig, that's not just cable. That's cable plus Valet Waste plus the pickup and billing of our utility or water rebilling. It's all three that we are netting out when we give you the two sets of guidance.

Okay. So, with the 2.4, that compares to the guidance of the 2% to 3% revenue growth ex the cable and the other Keith just mentioned.

That is correct, right.

And so basically assuming things do not get, the condition we see now say similar as we go in to '08. But it just seems like the gap of the markets spread does that kind of -- do you expect it to narrow like you expect the Florida's to not get be quite as bad and from your stronger markets the growth to come down in terms of the divergence in the markets this year versus in '07?

Well the divergence is pretty mark when you break it down in to the markets that are kind of on everybody's radar screen and certainly ours from the impact of single family homes. If you stratify our portfolio and you take, I’m going to take the five markets that everybody is most concerned about and that we've concerns about from the single family home perspective it would be Las Vegas, Phoenix, Orlando, Southeast Florida and Tampa. Just to put that in perspective Craig that represents about 36% of our NOI from those five markets. If you take our projected net effective rent growth in those markets that math works out to about 1%. So, yeah 36% projecting a 1% and then the balance of the portfolio and its distributed above that up to a top of Denver of roughly 4. But the divergence it's pretty clear in terms of our projection for '08 versus those markets that we know that have the bigger issues with single family supply. I think the other thing you've to look at too is that we are projecting these markets to be worse in 2008 than they were in 2007 and just taking example of Tampa in 2007 we had 2.6% rent growth, 1.5% expense growth for a total 3.4% same store NOI growth. What's going to happen this year is we're basically projecting it flat. So, what that means is that it's definitely not as good as '08 and it's definitely or as '07 and there is a divergence from the markets like Houston and Dallas and Austin and the markets that don't have the same kind of problems.

Okay. And on repurchase activities for this year, do you assume any additional activity in your guidance ranges?

We do not, the fundamental question of asset sales and buyback activity it's hard to project. The key is going to be if we depending on what the stock does and what we can sell assets forward are lead to be flat, creative or dilutive and I think most likely to be flat to accretive. But it's hard to project that kind of situation. I don't and we thought it was imprudent to try to improved guidance that related to things that we don't really have a lot of control over stock. It goes up dramatically, we won't have the opportunity to make the arbitrage and it's hard to pick that.

But if you at the midpoint of your disposition guidance and based on your development spending. Would you have any capital to do buybacks and then you mentioned you won't kind of go back to the capital market?

Yes, absolutely.

Thank you.

Our next question comes from Alex Goldfarb, UBS.

Good morning.

Good morning.

Good morning, Alex.

Just want to follow-up on the buying back of stock. I realized that it's not in your guidance, but is there any sense that while there is still a spread between where your stocks trading, what the assets are worth. And while there is still capital for people to finance departments that you are probably maybe inclined to get more aggressive, sell more earlier buyback stock more earlier as long as that arbitrage exists today?

Yes.

Or you comfortable sort of going over the year with your regular game plans?

I think the answer to your first question, is yes. We are going to continue to be aggressive acquirers of the stock, as we sell assets. So, that's why we've a broad range of asset sales in the guidance and if we exceed that, if the market continues to be favorable both from an asset sales perspective and a weak stock price, where, we can say the arbitrage, we will continue to do that aggressively.

And what are the implications, how many assets can you sell before having to deal with tax gains, and then also dealing with the rating agency concerns and then as far as, will you keep the balance sheet neutral or you may look to increase leverage?

We've always said in our buyback strategy that we would do it, leverage neutral and publish neutral, and we think it's important to do it that way as opposed to leverage up the company and put us in a position where we have to go raise capital or something. So for sure it's a leverage neutral type of transaction. So, the answer to the question of how can we sell from a gaining perspective? That number is around $300 million plus or minus, that depends on the assets that are sold and the gains related to those assets and what have you bet. But we don't look at that as a cap, because we would clearly look at, if the arbitrage made sense, we would clearly look at special dividends to expand that program.

Okay. And that's 300 million gross or 300 million of gains?

Gross.

Okay. Next question is on the guidance. First of all have you factored in and maybe you said the MD&A and I missed it, but have you factored in a recession into your guidance range? And then also, if you can just go back over the sort of step up from the first quarter to the rest of the year for FFO, and then whether or not there is any impairments for any like [med]-loans and then how that tax insurance through-ups that you mentioned in the fourth quarter how those work out?

Just in terms of the guidance we have not tried to include a recession scenario in here. Our numbers are predicated on 265,000 job growth in our markets, which is substantially less than last year. It's about half of what '07 was and it's about a third of what '06 was. So it's clearly very weak growth in those markets, but not a recession scenario. There has been a fair amount of discussion about what a recession would look like now and would it be worst than the last recession or the 2001 recession or the early 90's recession. I think it would be interesting to sort of talk about three different major factors that are different in terms of where we were in 2000 and 2001 versus where we are now. First, from a supply perspective, just pure multifamily supply, we are about 25% less supply coming to the market than we were in 2000, leading in to that recession. Second, housing affordability leading or multifamily affordability leading in to the 2001 recession was at its lowest level in about seven or eight years. Today we are at the highest affordability level in the last seven or eight year's. And then second the, obviously third the obvious issue in the last recession was we lost a lot of people to homes, I don't think that's going to happen this time around other than maybe rental homes, but clearly not buying homes. So, I think a fair number of people in the industry think that even in a recession scenario, it's not a very difficult time for multifamily because rental alternatives make a lot of sense in a recession scenario this time around. Dennis, you want to go through the.

Yeah I think I had a couple of your questions. First of all on impairment charges, no we do not anticipate any impairment charges for the balance of the year, as it relates to your progression across the quarters. I think what you will see is an increase in revenue scenario from the first sect to the second and third, and then it's always kind of moderating in the fourth. And on the expense side, you will just see slight increases in expenses, first to second and second to third as we normally have increases in operating expenses during those two quarters, and then trailing off in the fourth quarter as we normally do. Also as far as development dilution, the development dilution we have forecasted in the first quarter is going to probably be the highest quarter for the year, and it will tailing off toward the end of the year as we start to lease-up at a number of our large communities. I hope we've answered you questions, if you have anything more specific that you'd like me to address I will.

No, no, no, that's fine. Thank you.

Our next question comes from Lou Taylor, Deutsche Banc.

Thanks. Rick, sorry to come back to you on the share repurchase [program] just a little bit differently. In terms of your dispositions this year, how much do you need to set aside to repay debt versus buying back stock, or fund development?

To do that on a leverage neutral basis, basically you sell $2 for the real estate, pay down $1 worth of debt, and buyback $1 worth of stock. In this scenario here we probably have when you take out development funding, which is about $150 million to $200 million. We would have probably $100 million plus or minus. If we hit the high end of our guidance here in terms of dispositions, to expand that we will have to increase dispositions.

Okay, and if you were to theoretically expand dispositions, how far could you go before you would get into special dividend constraints?

Well we have a total of $300 million, we could do this year, okay. So if on that math if we had a $100 million after the 350 we would have to do a special dividend after the $300 million of disposition. So, that would sort of give us a $100 million to buy stock plus or minus and then we'd have to do a special dividend of some sort.

Okay. And then for Keith, in terms of the development leasing, I know you'd mentioned earlier it was going generally okay. But just, maybe to get some specific on a Camden Royal Oaks in Austin. The project's been done for a while, yet the leasing is still sub 80%. Is that leasing [going] by pace or is there anything unusual about that pace?

Yes, it's definitely slower than what one of our typical garden apartments would be and it really has to do with the demographic, that’s a 55 and older community Lou. And the experience of trying to close that particular demographic is kind of interesting. It turns into many times five, six property tours with children and parents and brothers and sisters, and just a very long sales cycle. At the end of the day, we're getting rents that are better than what we'd originally forecast, the lease-up is definitely taking longer, but on all in yield basis, we're in really good shape.

Great. Thank you.

You bet.

Our next question comes from Rich Anderson of BMO Capital Markets.

Hi, everybody, good afternoon, good morning. Keith have you ever rated market D or F?

Ever is a long time, I think I actually had a D, three years ago. I don’t think I've ever had it now. We exit F markets that's why we don’t have them. I am not sure, what an F market would probably be, down 15% NOI forecast for the year and fortunately we've never had to deal with that. I suspect that in other propriety types, you might get into an F from time-to-time, but multifamily is pretty tough to do that. And the year when we had total portfolio decline of 5% NOI which is kind of, its [bad, a year as we've seen in the last 20, there probably would have been two or three D markets in that crowd.

Okay. Clearly you guys are a great organization and congratulations on the ranking again, that's here. But I do have a sort of a cynical question about that, is there any sort of benefit that you have of getting in there one year and then sort of, having an advantage getting ranked, the second, third and subsequent years, sort of like, if you win the Gold Glove in baseball you sort of almost certainly get it the next year unless you really screw up?

First of all, Rich, you don't have to apologize for cynical questions or you'd have to get out of the business. But the answer is, because two-thirds of the score is based on a random survey of 400 of your employees that go out and get send directly to the organization that does all the scoring. Once you get to a point, where your internal surveys qualify you, which is that you're in pretty rarified air up there with the Microsofts and the Googles of the world, once you get into that or your surveys are that high, relative to all the other competitors, that gets back too as long as you continue to do what you did in the first place in terms of taking care of your people and your workplace. There is certainly an expectation that our surveys in '08 will look a lot our surveys in '07 did. The wildcard which is the one-third of the score that comes from all other components, benefits, diversity and a whole host of other very interesting qualitative factors that they look at. Once you have achieved a score on those that combine with your survey kind of get you in. There is an expectation that unless something dramatic changes within your workplace you would be in next year. So, this is our second year that we applied. It's a very detailed kind of process that you've to go through in the first year that we applied we did not get in. But you don't know where you finished, they don't tell you. You only find out if you've made the list. And we went from off the list to number 50 this year, primarily on the strength of our survey results. Our survey results were extraordinary compared to the other hundred companies that won this year.

I thought this was your third year. I guess I got that mixed.

Well, it's third in Texas. We were in the best top 50 in Texas for three years. But it’s the first year for a Fortune Magazine on a national basis.

Very well, congratulations to that. And then the last question is you mentioned you miss you same store number, your guidance at the beginning of 2007. You started off with 6.5 and you got 5. What is it you think about this year does that same type of miss won't happen this time around. Why do you feel like that you've got that covered?

Well, the interesting thing is Rich is that the miss if you think about last -- if you remember go back last year to this conference call we had and there was about a three month period where the only thing that, let's say the primary thing people were focused on as a risk to our numbers was condomania and we talked about that in length. And we thought that we had factored in what impact that was going to be. But at the same time, we always said that we thought that was going to be a very minor part of the story in '07 from the standpoint of performance and not only in our portfolio, but everybody else's. We just never believed that would be a headline number some at the end of the year 2007 But clearly the subprime melt down, which didn't happen even began happening or get on to anybody's radar screen until May June of '07 ended up being hugely more impeccable to our portfolio than the condominium issue otherwise. And I don't think that's any different in '08. I just don't, in South Florida there is still probably a lot of discussion about condos because there is so much being build down there. But the nature of that product and the price point is such that I still don't see it being a big issue in our portfolio. But the single family, the single family component and the difficulty of getting your arms around what that competition is where it comes from and when it goes away, I think that's certainly a risk to anyone's forecast that operates in the markets that have significant exposure. What gives me a little bit better feeling about our numbers going forward primarily is that we've very…

Sounds good, thank you.

You bet.

Our next question comes from Paula Poskon from Robert Baird.

Good afternoon. Can you comment a little bit on the trends that you might be seeing for reasons for moveouts other than the home ownership things like, are you seeing any changes for job lost or job transfer?

In the fourth quarter, our moveouts rate was dead flat with the fourth quarter of '06. So, year-over-year we saw no change at all in the turn overrate for I mean, quarter-over-quarter. So, I think we're back to kind of a more normal situation on our turn rate, '07 turnover was clearly higher than '06. And there is not other than the home purchases, there wasn’t anything that stood out that would be meaningful. It was just the difference in home purchases and clearly we're seeing a complete reversal of that trend and it will be interesting to see how that plays out over '08. We had I think I mentioned in my comments, we're at 15% moveouts to home purchases in the quarter and that's a historically low number for us.

Thanks. And just one last question, what's happening at Potomac Yard. Are you seeing a lot of the traffic there, what's the response from the people kind of coming in?

The response has been good. The initial sort of startup of the project was a little difficult because we had all of our amenities on the top floor, our pool, our club houses and clubhouse and gym. And because of the way the building was completed, we couldn’t get access to that early. And then we sort of had some issues with signage or the neighborhood and the city didn’t want us to put a forward lease, kind of big sign on the building. We've got that dealt with and its had a very good traffic since we've finished the [many] components and have got a little bit better signage.

Thanks very much.

Sure

Our last question comes from Michael Salinsky at RBC Capital Markets

Hi, Good morning guys, quick question with the fee income you are projecting for 2008, as it relates to the fund. Can you kind of let us out or kind of provide a description of how that plays out on a quarterly basis?

I am sorry I missed the first part of the question.

In terms of your fee income interest assuming in 2008, can you provide us a detail of how that plays out on a quarterly basis just because of the timing of the fund there?

Yeah I think our fee income related to joint venture activities this year will be about $4 million, and it's going to be pretty evenly weighted between all four quarters. We'll have some in each of the quarters and which should [average] about $1 million dollars.

There is no financing fee even with that that comes in it at one time during any other quarters?

There are some fees that are all lumpy but they actually average out to about $1 million a quarter.

Okay. And then can you touch on the January performance of some of the markets that are concerning, you mentioned may be, Phoenix, Tampa, Orlando and/or Las Vegas?

January results were a little bit better, slightly better than our plan across the board, but a big part of that was, it looked like we had a little bit better month on expenses than we forecast, so nothing so far in the quarter that would be alarming. Our current occupancy rate is 90 -- on the last report it was 93.7, which was about a 40 basis point move up over the prior week. So I think we are headed in the right direction and we're on track with the plan that we laid out.

Thanks guys

You bet

Our last question comes from Haendel St. Juste from Green Street Advisors

Good morning, guys

Good morning Haendel St. Juste - Green Street Advisors Most of my questions have been asked and answered. But I had two small ones here. The land that you have helped for sale on your, at your balance sheet what do you estimate the market value for that in [sterling].

We have not included gains on sales in our guidance on those. We do expect that the market value is probably $4 million to $5 million higher than that. Okay. Haendel St. Juste - Green Street Advisors And the two assets, the one in Denver and Austin?

The two assets that we have held for sale? Haendel St. Juste - Green Street Advisors Yeah.

Operating assets.

Operating assets.

Yeah. The two assets we have [Reggio] and [Pinnacle].

Right now as you can see on Page 25 our disposition volume is between $25 million and $30 million. Haendel St. Juste - Green Street Advisors So that probably [explains].

That would be, what we expect to get from any of the proceeds on those sales. Haendel St. Juste - Green Street Advisors And just one quick follow-up to that. You mentioned, I guess Keith in your outlook for the year that Austin and Denver are at the top of your expected performance list. Why sell those assets in those markets?

A great time to be selling those assets. Those markets have a great story and they are both the average age of those two assets is 22 years. So it's perfect timing. Haendel St. Juste - Green Street Advisors Got you. Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Great. Well we appreciate your time and we will talk to you on the next call. Thanks.

Thank you for attending today's conference. The presentation has ended. You may now disconnect.