Good day and welcome to the Getty Realty Corp Fourth Quarter and Year-Ended 2013 Earnings Conference Call. Today’s conference is being recorded. At this time, I would like to turn the conference over to Mr. Joshua Dicker, Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary. Sir you may begin.

Thank you. I would like to thank you all for joining us for Getty Realty’s quarterly earnings conference call. Yesterday evening, the company released its financial results for the quarter and year ended December 31, 2013. The Form 8-K and earnings release are available on the Investor Relations section of our website at gettyrealty.com. Certain statements made in the course of this call are not based on historical information and may constitute forward-looking statements. These statements are based on management’s current expectations and beliefs and are subject to trends, events and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements. Examples of forward-looking statements include those made by Mr. Driscoll regarding lease restructuring, future company operations, financial performance and the company’s acquisition or redevelopments opportunities. We caution you that such statements reflect our best judgment based on factors currently known to us and that actual events or results could differ materially. I refer you to the company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012 as well as our quarterly and other filings with the SEC and our Annual Report on Form 10-Ks for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013 which will be filed soon for a more detailed discussion of the risks and factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied in any forward-looking statements made today. You should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements, which reflect our view only as of the date hereof. The company undertakes no duty to update any forward-looking statements that maybe made in the course of this call. With that, let me turn the call over to Dave Driscoll, our Chief Executive Officer.

Thank you, Josh. Good morning everyone, welcome to our call for the fourth quarter of 2013 and the year end of 2013. The quarter and the year reflects steady progress and the objectives we set at the beginning of 2013, lease or sell or transitional properties reduce operating expenses, redeploy capital and accredibly grow our company. I will go through the highlights of the earnings shortly, but first I want to quickly comment on the results for the quarter and the year. We produced solid results for the fourth quarter that resulted in a 9% increase in adjusted funds from operations to $0.24 per share on revenues of approximately $26 million. Unlike the prior three quarters and our annual results our fourth quarter was as expected relatively straight forward. One item I should call attention to is that AFFO did benefit this quarter from approximately $0.02 per share of non-cash, non-recurring reversals of accruals. In the fourth quarter we continued executing on our transformation activities with 51 locations being sold and 15 locations moving into long term leases. The bottom line in progress is still being made and while we recognized that we still have work ahead finished the task at hand. The visibility into a core base line of revenue and earnings is finally emerging. We understand there are so big unknowns and that we are not yet finished, but we are much closer relative to the past few years. For the full year 2013, our results were still impacted by the ongoing transformation and resulted in AFFO of approximately $44 million on revenue slightly in excess of $100 million. The items that most affected our full year earnings with the disposition of 145 transitional locations and the settlement of the Lukoil losses. Dispositions resulted in sales proceeds of…

Yes, thank you. (Operator Instructions). And we will go ahead and take our first question from Tony Paolone with JP Morgan.

Thanks, good morning.

Good morning.

Dave, if you were to think about your portfolio ex the marketing assets, the more arm’s length assets that you have purchased over the years, where are cap rates for those types of properties today?

The opportunity that we are seeing right now Tony are in the sub 8% range for the high quality properties, for the highest quality brand new properties in fancy markets like Florida and California, you can even see sub 7 cap rate. And I think those are the ones in particular that we are not particularly interested right now in chasing. That’s a 1031 market phenomenon as much as anything else and not something that from an institutional perspective excites us very much.

Okay. Any $20 a share for stock price, you guys made a portfolio better than anybody. What do you think the implied cap rate is on those sort of non-marketing assets right now at 20 bucks a share?

Well, you know, it’s hard for me to speculate on that kind of question because I haven’t set down actually down numbers on that but I think it’s certainly above 7, it’s between 7 and 9, let me put it that way.

Okay. Just on G&A, what’s G&A going to be in 2014, just trying to understand because it’s bounced around a little bit, like what the run rate is?

Tony, it’s hard to say with any precision what that number is going to be, I think extrapolating from the fourth quarter is not a terrible place to start.

Okay. So, it’s closer to that $3 million to $4 million as opposed to $5 plus million range where it kind of seem to be running before?

Yes, I would say it’s probably closer to the $4 million range, [depended] it is the $3 million range but it’s certainly closer to that and it is the $5 million range.

Okay. In disc ops, it seemed to be a negative number; is that -- was there anything just as you unwind and sell those, that’s going to impact earnings, like is that really like it is going to be a negative FFO drag until those are gone?

Yes, I think you said it, it’s just going to be a negative FFO drag until they’re gone, redeveloped or repositioned in some way. It isn’t just disposal at this point. Some of those assets we think can be turned around, some of them to be fair just need to be gone.

Okay. And what was cash out the door in the fourth quarter for environmental?

It’s a little over $3 million I think.

And any sense as to what that number looks like if we were to just ignore kind of the accounting treatment of environmental related cost, or just think about cash over the next few quarters, is that…

It’s sort of like in a good trend where it is right now subject to the observation that cash spend on environmental is very much a seasonal number. So I think you could see some variation in the warmer seasons, in the warmer quarters. And this is -- we’re reporting, really reporting the fourth quarter which self start as warm. So, maybe you could call this an average quarter, you could see it come -- I guess the point I’m trying to make is in the first quarter you could see it come down, particularly this first quarter, because guys are not out digging holes in the ground in this particular winter. But, I think that this is a not a bad number to extrapolate from.

Okay. And any CapEx that was spent in the quarter?

Nothing meaningful from our standpoint.

Okay.

I want to be clear on that Tony that it does not mean that we didn’t spend -- that no money was spent on our portfolio. I think that our tenants, I can point to any number of examples, so our tenants spent a lot of money on the property, but we didn’t spend a whole lot.

Okay. And then just last question, on NECG, so are they paying anything enough, or they just stopped payments?

Right now, they have been paying a modified amount on their rent, so for the last say since July. And that continued and that’s the cash number that we’ve been reporting since July, since been in our AFFO number since July. And given where that portfolio fits right now, we’re pretty comfortable that there isn’t pretty much downside for NECG in that number. There could be some bumpy transitional things, but on a season’s basis, stabilized basis like, we’re comfortable with that number. Those are all decisions we made back in June when we took the cash reserves.

Okay, great. Thanks.

(Operator Instructions). And we’ll go next to Juan Sanabria with Bank of America.

Hi. Good morning guys. Just a quick question from a guidance perspective, I know you’ve put on something last year, what was thought process as to why you chose not to go that [round] this year given presumably you have a lot more clarity on the moving pieces?

Well, I think Juan you answered your own question. Last year if you recall there was so much confusion coming out of 2012 and frankly what 2013, we’re pretty sure the first two quarters were going to look like that we felt that some guidance was important to provide and this company historically had never provided guidance. And when we put the guidance out last year on this call, we said this is a one-time thing, we are not going to do it again, we’re not establishing a policy of doing guidance and that is our intention going forward. It is something that we constantly review and consider. But I think, like I said, I think you answered the question. Last year there was so much confusion we felt, thought that it was really important. This year we think that just certainly some issues and certainly unresolved things that aren’t nailed down, but it’s a lot closer. And we don’t think the urgency is there as much as it was.

Okay. From a balance sheet perspective, how much do you think you can get fund before you sort of get to the top-end where you feel comfortable of leverage sitting and can you just remind us of what that sort of feeling or where that comfort range lies?

Well, we currently have roughly $150 million available to us under our existing line, no questions asked; we’re on it right away. I think it’s fair to say that we could feel comfortable to go north of that and still feel comfortable because even with all of that drawn down we’re still very low leveraged in our opinion, we’re still less than 40% debt to market cap. But I think that as we started to get to sort of 50% on a theoretical basis then you’d see a start to maybe get a little uncomfortable. It also sort of kind of depends on what we’re funding with it and the nature of that. So you’ve got a -- there is a dynamism in that that it’s hard to be very much more precise in the answer.

Okay. So you’re sort of thinking I guess 45% debt to market cap would be a ceiling effect?

I would say I am starting to get nervous at 40% and I wouldn’t go over 50%.

Okay.

Because I don’t want to put an absolute out there, I am even more nervous at 50%.

Okay. And then could you talk a little bit about maybe opportunities to refinance some of the debt, I know you kind of [redid] it around this time last year. But giving your more solid footing is that something you’re working on and kind of how much margin compression could we see as a result?

I think there might be a little bit of spread compression in our pricing grid on the floating rate side of our debt right now. I think though that given the fact that we are pretty low leveraged, we are not sure that where we sit on the grid today that there is a whole lot of opportunity if we were to move out and take more of our availability. And hence as the pricing grid moves up, we think that maybe there is some pricing benefit to it. But I don’t think there is an immediate benefit sitting here to be taken based on where we are on our leverage grid right now. And of course the fixed rate piece, which we did now a year ago, 56%, is -- first of all it’s really not re-financeable given the way it is. But if we were to go out and do fixed rate money today because we do it at that price may be, may be not the tenure has moved up to 425 to 450 basis points depending on the day since we did this. But I am comfortable that that’s a competitively priced piece of paper within the margin.

Okay. And then just on the dispositions you guys have still left to do, it seems like there is a broader pool that you are looking at relative to should I guess maybe more of a pruning of the portfolio versus disposing of I guess more vacant properties. But I guess going forward how should we think of the dispositions that are there? Are actually losing NOI, is there sort of a ballpark cap rate we can think about or is it really just getting rid of properties where you’re losing money as to Tony’s previous question?

Yes. I think it’s at this point properties that are being disposed off I think it’s pretty easy to say with the blank of statement with disposition of that property even before the reinvestment of the proceeds that we realized is a cash flow positive event.

Okay. And just one quick follow-up, if I look at your AFFO sort of calculation in your 8-K, the charge on impairments of dividend what’s flowing through the P&L. What’s the difference and where is that difference accounted for on the income statement?

I am looking at Chris on this one.

I think what you’re referring to is the total impairment taken…

5.7?

Correct, versus what’s in the continuing operations and the difference would be impairment charges taken related to properties that account for as discontinued.

Okay. Thanks guys.

Thanks Juan.

And we will take our follow-up question from Tony Paolone with JP Morgan.

Thanks. Just on one balance sheet question, I just got a follow-up on the equity side. Do you guys have the ability to put an ATM program in place?

Yes.

That’s been something you’ve considered?

We consider everything all the time, but we have not put one in place. Obviously if we did, it would be publically announced. To be eligible for an ATM, Tony all you have to do to have a shelf in place and we do.

Okay. And then just last question, can you give us any sense as to where taxable income is kind of trending, just didn’t understanding as to what your dividend requirements are?

Well, they don’t perfectly track; I can say that for 2014 from what we see today, taxable income is going to be above AFFO or NOI mostly driven by the dispositions that are going to occur. But whether that affects our distribution requirement is a different question, because in the abstract it’s really easy to think of the chosen as writing together, but they really don't, there is enough a lot of legal room. And you can, I mean for example is that you can use distributions in subsequent years to cover under distributions in a prior year if that makes any sense. That creates sort of a push going forward, but it's not rigid that in a particular year, that you have to make all of the distributions required for the taxable income. Does that make any sense?

Yes, no I understand some of the rules around carrying over and so forth and the timing of those things. But if, I'm just trying to sense you're mentioning that your AFFO in the fourth quarter is $0.24 and so was just to annualize $0.02, about a buck and you're saying taxable might be north of that. It sounds like if that trend would recur overtime, the $0.80 run rate in your dividend just it sounds like it’s actually not enough, putting the timing and nuances to the payments aside?

No, you're right, I mean yes. But you also wouldn't necessarily want to move your overall dividend policy against something that was being that resulted from more like one time capital gains from disposition to properties. So, we don't want to move our basic dividend in a way to cover something that's really a temporary event.

But your, but the gain is more than the AFFO number right in the fourth quarter?

That's correct. The gains are not in the AFFO number.

Okay, great. Thank you.

And that concludes the questions-and-answer session today. Mr. Driscoll I'll turn it back over to you for any additional or closing remarks.

My closing remarks are thank you all for listening to the call and your continued interest in our company. And we certainly look forward to talking to you when hopefully the back of this winter has broken and it’s a lot warmer outside. Thank you.

And that does conclude today’s conference. We thank you for your participation.