Good morning, and thank you for joining Kimco's quarterly earnings call. The Kimco management team participating on the call today include, Conor Flynn, Kimco's CEO; Ross Cooper, President and Chief Investment Officer; Glenn Cohen, our CFO; Dave Jamieson, Kimco's Chief Operating Officer, as well as other members of our executive team that are also available to answer questions during the call. As a reminder, statements made during the course of this call may be deemed forward-looking, and it is important to note that the company's actual results could differ materially from those projected in such forward-looking statements due to a variety of risks, uncertainties, and other factors. Please refer to the company's SEC filings that address such factors. During this presentation, management may make reference to certain non-GAAP financial measures that we believe help investors better understand Kimco's operating results. Reconciliations of these non-GAAP financial measures can be found in our quarterly supplemental financial information on the Kimco Investor Relations website. Also, in the event our call incurs technical difficulties, we'll try to resolve it as quickly as possible, and if the need arises, we'll post additional information to our IR website. And with that, I'll turn the call over to Conor.

Good morning, and thank you for joining us today. I will begin with an overview of the leasing environment and share how we are strategically well-positioned for long-term growth. Ross will then cover the transaction market, and Glenn will close with our key performance metrics and updated guidance. We are off to a great start to the year with solid first quarter results, including over 4.5 million square feet of leasing as we benefited from our combination of high-quality grocery-anchored assets emphasizing off-price retail and everyday essentials in first-ring suburbs, which makes us uniquely positioned to benefit from what we believe to be longer-term trends relating to consumers and retail strategies. We accomplished this leasing in the face of high interest rates, bank failures, signs of a weakening economy, and troubled retailers. Our dedicated team and resilient portfolio not only withstood these pressures but outperformed. First, the consumer. While inflation remains stubborn, the Kimco shopper remains sturdy, as we continue to see healthy traffic reported across our portfolio. According to our large national retailers, the demand for essential goods, services, and groceries continues to be strong. In addition, the flexible hybrid work environment is creating more opportunity for shoppers to frequent our centers. Finally, omnichannel shopping continues to outperform pure online shopping, as optionality is the winning formula by providing consumers the convenience of shopping online and picking up or returning at the local store. Requests to expand our nationally recognized curbside pickup program continue to grow from our entire stable of national, regional, and small-shop tenants. In addition to the resilient consumer, leasing demand and the ability to push rents continues at a robust pace due to the lack of new supply and high barriers to entry at our highly desirable locations. The demand for new space is well diversified, with the mix of new deals this quarter spread among off-price, grocery, sporting goods, fitness, health and wellness, medical, and fast casual dining. As part of our focus on obtaining the highest and best use of our properties, we also secured two new entrants to the Kimco portfolio this quarter: a Tesla dealership in Austin, Texas, and a market by Macy's in San Diego. Strong leasing supported by this robust, well-rounded demand is reflected in our new leasing spreads of 44%, a five-year high. Occupancy bucked the seasonality trend of dipping after the holidays and gained 10 basis points, thanks to our team's stellar efforts and our small shop leasing initiatives. During the first quarter, we anticipated some space coming back from underperforming retailers, including Bed Bath & Beyond, which just filed for bankruptcy this past week. This has been widely expected, and we've been well-prepared for this outcome, as we have actively marketed all of our Bed Bath spaces for some time. To highlight our successful efforts, we started the year with 30 Bed Bath leases. During the first quarter, we sold one location and released three boxes, including two we recaptured, with a mark-to-market spread of 24%. Regarding the remaining 26 Bed Bath leases, we are either in lease or LOI negotiations on 22 locations with the mark-to-market spreads similar to what we have executed to date, which exemplifies the strong activity from a diverse pool of retailers looking to expand. The remaining four locations are either being marketed for lease or potential redevelopment candidates. The lack of supply and inability to meet new store targets is a constant refrain from our retailers during our portfolio reviews and remains key catalysts for the lease-up of these locations. It is also why our retention rates for the portfolio continue to remain well above historical levels, at 90% this quarter. With this pace of retention and the strong leasing demand, we believe that over the long-term, we should see an improved underlying growth rate for our business. Further enhancing the value of our first-ring suburbs locations, is the increased demand for industrial and residential assets. This competition for land or conversions makes the cost of new retail development even more prohibitive, which will further reduce supply for potential new retail. And when you combine the rising rents in the residential sectors with the competitive redevelopment advantages at our existing locations in the first-ring suburbs, the opportunity to add more mixed-use density provides us the long-term opportunity to drive further growth and value creation. In the end, strategically, we are well-positioned for what could be a choppy second half of the year and beyond. With our open-air high-quality grocery-anchored portfolio producing record results, our leverage metrics at all-time lows, along with our significant cash position, we are positioned for growth and we'll look to be opportunistic when others cannot in our quest to outperform on a sustained basis.

Thank you, Conor, and good morning. I'll begin with the market for transactions, which remains restrained given the volatility in the capital markets and elevated borrowing costs. Transaction volume was down across the board in the first quarter. However, what has remained constant is the significant demand from both institutional and private investors for high quality open-air retail. A healthy level of equity capital remains patiently waiting on the sidelines for opportunities to acquire our product type as the property fundamentals continue to improve within this retail sector. Notwithstanding the improving operating fundamentals, investors are seeking higher cap rates to offset higher costs of capital. At the same time, however, supply remains limited with sellers holding out for higher pricing unless they face refinancing or other pressure to sell. How long this stalemate lasts is the ultimate question. Despite these broader market conditions, we have found ways to selectively and accretively put capital to work. On the last earnings call, we mentioned the two Southern California grocery assets we acquired from one of our JV partners. Subsequent to the call, we were successful in buying out a third grocery-anchored site in Southern California from the same partner. This property is a dual grocery-anchored site with a Smart and Final traditional grocer in addition to a Trader Joe's. We are excited to add these three strong performing grocery assets to our wholly-owned portfolio despite the market conditions I described. We also added a new structured investment into our program in the first quarter: an $11.2 million subordinated loan on a Sprouts-anchored shopping center outside of Orlando, Florida. As with all of our structured investments, we retain the right to acquire the asset in the future in the event the sponsor looks to sell. This property is another great addition to the structured portfolio with a very attractive return at a very appealing basis on our investment. As it relates to dispositions, we previously mentioned the two power centers in Savannah, Georgia, we sold back in January. Prior to quarter-end, we sold a third power center in Gresham, Oregon. To my point earlier that it is taking longer to transact, we've been working on this since the fourth quarter of last year and successfully closed at the end of March. While we don't anticipate a significant number of dispositions in 2023, the sale of these three centers reflects our efforts to ultimately own a portfolio consisting primarily of grocery-anchored retail centers and mixed-use destinations in our top major metro markets. All in all, we are in a great position to continue to be opportunistic, should current owners start to feel more pressure to transact. Our strong liquidity allows us to move quickly and aggressively on the right acquisitions or joint venture buyouts and to be financially helpful to owners that need an infusion of capital for debt pay-downs or asset repositioning, utilizing our structured investment program. I will now pass it off to Glenn for an update on our financials and outlook.

Thanks, Ross, and good morning. Our solid first quarter results demonstrate the strength of our high-quality operating portfolio, evidenced by increased occupancy, robust leasing spreads, and positive same-site NOI growth. Furthermore, we bolstered our sector-leading liquidity position and improved our leverage metrics with additional proceeds received from our Albertsons investment. Now for some details on our first quarter results. FFO was $238.1 million or $0.39 per diluted share as compared to last year's first quarter results of $240.6 million or $0.39 per diluted share. Notably, last year's figures include a charge of $7.2 million or $0.01 per diluted share for early repayment of debt. Our first quarter results were driven by strong NOI growth, largely due to higher consolidated minimum rent of $14.5 million. This increase was offset by higher bad debt expense of $7.1 million as the current period had a more normalized credit loss level as compared to last year, which benefited from credit loss income due to reversals of reserves. In addition, pro-rata NOI from our joint ventures was lower by $3 million, mostly attributable to asset sales and higher bad debt expense. Other factors related to the change in first quarter results were higher G&A expense of $4.8 million and pro-rata interest expense of $6.6 million. Although interest expense was higher in the current period, last year included a $7.2 million charge for early repayment of debt. The uptick in G&A expenses was largely driven by higher staffing levels following the Weingarten merger, as well as greater expenses related to the value of restricted stock and performance units awarded. The increase in interest expense stem from lower fair market value amortization linked to the previously repaid above market Weingarten bonds, as well as higher interest rates associated with floating-rate debt in our joint ventures. Turning to the operating portfolio, which continues to produce positive metrics fueled by the increase in occupancy and strong leasing spreads mentioned earlier. Same-site NOI growth was positive 1.4% for the first quarter. However, it's worth noting that this figure would have been even stronger at 4.2% if we excluded the impact of $4.6 million of credit loss income from the previous year, compared to $4.3 million of credit loss expense for the current period. Nonetheless, we are encouraged by the composition of the same-site NOI growth, which reflects a 430 basis point increase from minimum rents and reduced abatements, as well as a 100 basis point boost from higher percentage rent and other rental property income, offset by lower recoveries of operating expenses of 110 basis points. Overall, these results demonstrate our continued focus on driving strong revenue growth across our portfolio. As it relates to our Albertsons investment, during the first quarter, we received a special dividend of $194.1 million, which is included in net income, but not FFO. The Albertsons' special dividend is considered ordinary income for tax purposes, thus we are evaluating the need to make a special dividend to our stockholders at some point this year to maintain our compliance with REIT distribution requirements. In addition, we sold 7.1 million shares of Albertsons stock, generating net proceeds of $137.4 million. It is our intention to pay the tax on the capital gain from the sale and have recorded a $30 million tax provision, which is also excluded from FFO. This strategic move will allow us to retain approximately $107 million for debt reduction and/or accretive investments. Subsequent to quarter-end, we sold an additional 7 million shares of Albertsons stock and received net proceeds of $144.9 million. In the second quarter, we recorded a tax provision of approximately $32.7 million for the capital gain component. While it's great that we have significantly monetized this investment, it's worth noting that we also benefited by approximately $0.01 per share of FFO per quarter from the ACI common dividends paid. Going forward, we will no longer benefit from the same amount each quarter, given the significant monetization today. Currently, we hold 14.2 million shares of Albertsons, which has a value of approximately $300 million. We ended the first quarter with over $2.3 billion of immediate liquidity, comprised of over $300 million in cash and full availability of our recently renewed $2 billion revolving credit facility. Our leverage metrics continue to improve with consolidated net debt to EBITDA of 5.8x, and 6.2x on a look-through basis, including our pro-rata share of joint venture debt and perpetual preferred stock outstanding. The look-through metric of 6.2x represents the best level since we began reporting this metric in 2009. As I just touched on, during the first quarter, we renewed our $2 billion revolving credit facility with 20 banks. The facility now has an initial maturity date in March 2027, with two six-month extension options, bringing the final maturity date to 2028. This is a green facility, initially priced at adjusted SOFR plus 77.5 basis points. The borrowing spreads can increase or decrease up to 4 basis points based upon our success in reducing Scope 1 and Scope 2 greenhouse gas emissions. Based on our current progress, the borrowing spread has already been reduced by 2 basis points to 75.5 basis points. Turning to our outlook. Based on our first quarter results, the monetization of Albertsons shares, and expectations for the balance of the year, we are tightening our FFO per share range to $1.54 to $1.57 from the previous range of $1.53 to $1.57. We are lowering our lease termination income assumption by $10 million to a range of $4 million to $6 million with more than half already received in the first quarter. Initially, we believed the transaction in the first quarter would result in lease termination income. However, when we reviewed it in more detail, given the complex accounting treatment, we arrived at a different conclusion. Our previous assumptions remain intact regarding same-site NOI growth of 1% to 2%, which includes credit loss of 75 to 125 basis points. And now we are ready to take your questions.

Our first question comes from Michael Goldsmith with UBS.

Good morning, thanks for taking my question. My first question is on Bed Bath & Beyond and just kind of the shape of how these closures and then potentially coming back online will affect the financials? So this does mean that we should expect kind of 60 basis points of rent coming off and 100 basis points of occupancy coming off and then over-time, we get that back kind of next year and the $8.5 million of rent kind of comes back and they are kind of $10.5 million, say like, does that and what would be the timing of when that would kind of comeback online?

Yes, good question. What you described could be considered the worst-case scenario, implying that nothing was acquired at auction for a side that is yet to happen. We expect this to occur between June and the end of July, which could positively impact the situation given the competitive landscape is a genuine possibility. Regarding our activity, as Conor mentioned, three of the boxes we’ve already leased remain, and seven were rejected in the initial motion. We have leases for over half of them and letters of intent on the rest, all of which are single-tenant backfills, aiding in minimizing conversion time and downtime to reopen a tenant. This is a positive aspect. Most of the remaining boxes also present single-tenant backfill opportunities, and we are either in lease negotiations or have letters of intent for these. For the few mentioned by Conor, we are evaluating real redevelopment opportunities or considering single-tenant backfills. Overall, we are in an excellent position given the lack of significant supply and the absence of retail development plans in the upcoming years. Retailers are viewing this as a chance to capture market share and expand their portfolios in these key markets.

Yes, Michael, we are slightly ahead of our expectations. As you noticed, we increased the lower end of our guidance even without the anticipated termination income, which is largely due to the current favorable environment for high-quality locations such as Bed Bath & Beyond. The demand diversity is quite strong. By June, we will better understand which stores are returning to us. However, we are not waiting for that and are actively preparing replacements with very favorable leasing spreads.

Thank you. And the next question comes from Craig Mailman with Citi.

Hi, good morning, everyone. Conor or Glenn, maybe, I want to follow up on that last point you guys effectively raised guidance a half penny at the midpoint despite having a drag in lease termination fees. It looks like effectively a $0.02 raise. Can you just walk through exactly what's driving that, because the operating assumptions didn't look like they changed all that much?

Yes, sure. Again, it's really driven by the rent commencements. So we are a little bit ahead of plan. What's driving it? Also the timing of investment activity and then the impact of what we get in terms of the bankruptcy situation. So we are a little bit ahead of schedule what we had budgeted. So we are comfortable with raising that lower end of the range.

Yes. And I think one of the big drivers for us to get comfortable with raising the bottom-end is the retention rate. As I mentioned earlier, that's really driving a significant amount of cash-flow growth for us. And when you look at where we thought we'd be versus where we are today, we are ahead of schedule there.

Thank you. And the next question comes from Floris van Dijkum with Compass Point.

I have a question in two parts. First, could you explain the lower NOI margin and expense recovery for the quarter? What factors contributed to that, and how does it influence your perspective on fixed CAM or your recoveries on an inflation-adjusted basis? Secondly, I've noticed that your Philadelphia portfolio is lagging significantly, around 480 basis points in occupancy compared to the rest of the portfolio. Can you provide more details about this? Is it related to potential redevelopments or other opportunities, or is it simply that the market condition is not as favorable as in other areas?

All right. I'll take the second one first and then I'll kick it over to the rest of the team to address the margin. As it relates to Philadelphia, it's just related to the Kohl's transaction, where we took back two of the Kohl's leases as part of that transaction in Q1, which we knew were already vacant. So that was the add there.

The rest of the Philadelphia portfolio is quite strong and actually trending at or above when you look at it from the whole portfolio.

Floris, just on your NOI margin question and your expense recovery question. You look at the NOI margins and you actually take a look at the credit loss that's in there and you pull that out from both periods, your margins are more in-line. So that's really the driver on that decrease that you're seeing on the page. And then when it comes to recovery, there were some expenses that we front-loaded for the quarter. But when you look at where we're going to land for the year, we're still comfortable with that same-site NOI of 1% to 2%. So it will level out on the recovery side as the year goes on.

Thank you. And the next question comes from Juan Sanabria with BMO Capital Markets.

Hi, good morning. Just hoping you could talk a little bit about the investment market, what asset values or cap rates you're seeing or what's being transacted at a couple of deals both on the buy and the sell side in the first quarter? And how that compares to the mezz lending opportunity that seems to be a growing opportunity set for you?

Sure, as I mentioned in the remarks I made, it is a little bit of a stalemate right now. So the transaction volumes are way down. You are seeing certain deals get done in the first quarter. We did see some transactions occur in the 5's, similar to pricing from last year, but they are fewer and farther between. When you look at sort of the bid-ask spread, it's very deal specific. So as I mentioned, there are buyers that are still looking for higher cap rates and sellers that are holding firm because there's really not any sort of forced situation with lenders who are cash flow situation or challenges. So from that perspective, we were successful in acquiring three shopping centers from our joint venture partner that was looking for some liquidity. So it's really just about staying opportunistic and ready with the capital which we have. As it relates to the mezz financing and our structured investment program, that is also something that we're obviously very focused on, hitting one transaction in the first quarter, but again because there really hasn't been any forced sales or distress situation as it relates to the lending community, they are a little bit more challenging in terms of sourcing right now. But having lots of conversations is planning around the group and we're ready to move as soon as those opportunities present themselves.

So the only thing, I would add is that we are seeing pretty significant capital formation for our product. I think for a period of time, certain folks were on the sidelines, looking at open-air, specifically grocery-anchored shopping centers. We're having a lot of inbound requests for dialogue to potentially have new capital at our call for investment purposes. Obviously, we're sitting with a tremendous amount of cash today. So we're looking at the opportunity set internally, but it is nice to see a significant amount of capital formation for our product.

Thank you. And the next question comes from Alexander Goldfarb with Piper Sandler.

Hi, good morning. I have a question about the demand across your portfolio. Is it fairly balanced among anchor, junior anchor, small-shop, and outparcel categories, or is there one area that stands out with deeper demand? Additionally, which areas are experiencing the most recent backfill demand, and how do you determine which spots you might expand or subdivide? I'm trying to understand where the least demand exists in the portfolio.

Sure. Good question, Alex. I would say we're seeing consistent demand across our square footage at this time. Historically, the 68,000 to 69,000 square feet category has been somewhat weaker compared to the smaller shops, which are around 1,000 to 5,000 square feet, and the anchor boxes of over 10,000 square feet. However, we have seen strong demand in that category as well. Many retailers, like Sephora and others, are looking to fill those specific sizes, which has been beneficial for us. We will continue to capitalize on that. Regarding anchor activity, if we consider the impact of Kohl's on anchor boxes this quarter, we would have seen an increase of another 20 basis points from the last quarter. Instead of being at 98, we would have been at 98.2. This ties back to the point that there is no new development supply expected in the coming years. Therefore, when opportunities arise in good locations, we need to act quickly and be prepared to invest a little more to secure them, as we do not anticipate any new options on the horizon. Plus, our growth profile depends on it.

The only thing I would add is that the retailers are getting less rigid on their square footage requirements. So when you look at the typical prototype, whether it's a small shop, mid-size box, or an anchor box, typically, it's now opportunistic where they're looking at the space available versus their prototype and making it work, which obviously lends itself to our business because if you can backfill the entire space with one tenant, the CapEx load goes down dramatically and that's what we're experiencing on the Bed Bath boxes.

Thank you. And the next question comes from Samir Khanal with Evercore.

Hi, good morning, everyone. Conor, can you talk about the shop leasing environment and how you think that will fare in this sort of this cycle? We've seen the bank failures here and that impacts the smaller tenants. So how are you thinking about the credit environment for the shops that they go into a potential slowdown here? Thanks.

The shop space, with our occupancy growth, continues to be a bright spot. It's interesting to consider the diversity of demand driving this growth, which is quite remarkable. We are at a stage in retail evolution where local retail destinations are embracing a hybrid environment that includes medical services, essential goods, groceries, and health and wellness offerings. This diversity in demand enhances our small shop growth opportunities. Given the current demand drivers, we are confident we can achieve a higher small-shop occupancy rate than ever before, thanks to this variety. However, if the economy worsens and there is a downturn, we are still in a good position, as we are filling locations that struggled during COVID with higher credit, better operators. Overall, we believe we are beginning with a higher-quality, higher credit portfolio of small shops today.

Thank you. And the next question comes from Haendel St. Juste with Mizuho.

Hi, good morning. So, Conor, I guess, we understand the timing of bad debt is one of the factors that can play a key role, a swing factor in how core growth plays out here in the next year or two. But I was hoping you guys could talk a little bit about the cadence for same-store NOI growth this year? And then, as you look ahead, given the snow-related occupancy visibility and the demand that you're seeing, what type of ballpark the same-store NOI growth, could that get you to for next year? I think most of us see this as a long-term 2% to 2.5% same-store NOI business. Curious if you think you can tap the long-term average next year. Thanks.

Sure, thanks for the question. And I think when you look at, again, the fundamentals of our business, now there's going to be some lumpiness obviously quarter-to-quarter with the Bed Bath and maybe some of the other retailers that we're watching, and how the auction process plays out, because that will really determine the lumpiness of how much NOI comes offline. But, I do believe, as I said earlier that the fundamentals of our business are quite strong and with virtually no new supply and very high retention rates, we should see, I think, a longer-term growth rate that's above the historical average. And we're also pushing for higher annual increases. When you look at the bumps we're getting on our small shops, they are higher today than they were at the trailing four quarters. The same goes with our anchors. They are higher today than they were in the trailing four quarters. And if you look back multiple years, they've been trending higher. So that bodes well for obviously a fundamental re-rating of our growth rate going forward. But there's a lot of things that may or may not occur for that to happen. So it's hard to extrapolate what the future is going to hold, but where we stand today, we're very confident about the strategy we put in place and executing on that strategy is showing up in the internal growth rate, the pricing power that we have today. In terms of the cadence of the same-site, I'll turn it over to Glenn.

Yes. I mean, I think, if you look at the bad debt component to it, again, we're comping against bad debt income from last year for the current year. So when you look forward, we really have a more normalized what we expect to be a more normalized bad debt level. So I think that that part at least should keep us in good shape to be able to grow the same-site NOI growth, really organically from the rent bumps that Conor was saying.

Thank you. And the next question comes from Anthony Powell with Barclays.

Hi, good morning. I guess, question on percentage rent. I saw that ticked up to close to $6 million in the quarter. Can I get a run-rate, and what's really driving the growth in that segment?

It's a great question but some of it is timing. We've been very proactive on getting sales reports out to tenants and the collections in the first quarter were higher than what we had originally budgeted, but some of those collections that came in, were from tenants that we had budgeted to be in the second quarter. So you'll see it start to dip down as we go through the year. So the first quarter is a little bit ahead of where the budget was.

Thank you. And the next question comes from Caitlin Burrows with Goldman Sachs.

Hi, good morning, everyone. Maybe just a follow-up on the small-shop side. I know there's a concern that small-shop tenants may be more negatively impacted by tighter lending standards. So what are you hearing from them? Has there been any change in their ability to run their business? And then at the same time, do you have a breakdown of what portion of the small-shop tenants are actually small businesses versus larger national businesses that happen to operate in the small space?

Yes, it's an important question and we are closely monitoring the situation. We expect that small businesses will be most affected by the pullback of local and regional banks and their lending capabilities. So far, we haven't observed any significant impact on deal velocity, which is reflected in our Q1 numbers, nor on the operational capabilities of those businesses. However, we will continue to watch and assess the situation throughout the year for any signs of trouble. At this moment, everything seems to be holding up well.

And we do have a breakout at our Investor presentation of the small shops that are really more local versus really the national and regional players and we are heavily weighted towards the national and regional players. The only thing I would add is, we have a better communication than we've ever had with all of our retailers, primarily because of what the pandemic really forced a lot of us to do, which was again, have constant dialogue with our retailer partners. And handling the PPP program as we did, gaining access to our small shops and the way we have, given them the opportunity to access capital in times of need. I think we have very close ties now with our partners and our retailers that we believe will hopefully be able to weather this next storm.

And our next question comes from Ki Bin Kim with Truist.

Thanks, good morning. I have two questions. First, I noticed that you have started development on Coulter Place, which seems to be a preferred equity investment with the Bozzuto Group. Can you provide more details on the structured pricing and clarify if the income from that investment is based on the amount they invested or if it's received all upfront? My second question pertains to Bed Bath & Beyond. What are you considering in your budget regarding them? Are you operating under the assumption that they will eventually close and then you will reclaim that space, or how does this impact your budget?

Yes, I'll take the first one on Coulter. So yes, the Coulter project is our first multifamily activation in our preferred equity structure. As for this up, you'll see that the gross cost yield for that investment will be approximately 5% to 6%, which is consistent with what you'd see historically as multifamily projects developing towards. As a result of our preferred equity structure though, we are able to contribute the land as well as our pursue cost in a preferred yield. And blended together with some additional contributions to common equity, we're able to achieve a yield that exceeds our current cost of capital, which makes it accretive to us and hit that low-double-digit return that we're looking for. So right now we're excited. Bozzuto is one of our partners, a very-very qualified and established player in the business. And it's a great property. So it's a good first effort on this structure.

On the Bed Bath question, we are anticipating getting them all back. I think that’s the better way to budget as to just not anticipate anything being sold in the auction process and having the associated downtime and leasing costs with these boxes. So I think that again is incorporated in our budget and in our guidance.

Thank you. And our next question comes from Greg McGinniss with Scotiabank.

Thanks. Two-parter here as well. First, Ross, apologies if I missed this, but could you discuss the cap rates achieved on the acquisitions and dispositions this quarter? And then for the follow-up on cost of capital, are you willing to use the low-cost Albertsons cash to offer lower cap rates to sellers and potentially get them off the sidelines, or how are you thinking about your cost of capital and targeted investment yields?

Sure, I didn't mention that, but I'm happy to address that. The acquisition cap rate on the grocery-anchored centers that we acquired in Southern California were lending right to around 6%. And when you look at the spread on the dispositions, it was about a 150 basis point spread. So that's really the year one cap rate. What we're most focused on is what the growth profile of those assets are. You find them up compared to each other. So we see outsized growth from the grocery-anchored center that we acquired, whereas the power centers that we sold would either be flat or even potentially moving negative. So that's really the focus, thinking about recycling into high-quality grocery-anchored centers versus the power centers that we sold. In terms of the low-cost capital from the Albertsons, I mean, it's a great position to be in. Obviously, the hurdles are a little bit lower from the Albertsons capital that was achieving around a 2% dividend yield. Now that being said, it really is a balance for us between trying to move aggressively and put the capital to work and being patient for opportunities that we expect will present themselves here in the back half of the year. So we're not looking to necessarily overpay or set the market just to get people off the sidelines. But we can move very aggressively and quickly if opportunities present themselves that we would really like. So it gives us a lot of flexibility with the liquidity position that we have.

Thank you. And the next question comes from Ronald Kamdem with Morgan Stanley.

Hi, just one quick question and a follow-up. So the first is just on capital allocation priorities. Can you just remind me how you guys are thinking about stack ranking? Is it sort of acquisitions in the fixed range? Is that some of the structured investments given tightening lending conditions? What sort of makes the most sense right now? If you could sort of flip it on, what would you ramp up on? And then the follow-up question is sort of a related Bed Bath & Beyond question, but it seems like you guys are sort of ahead of that 15% and 20% mark-to-market, really interesting. But as we think about sort of what's coming down the line, what's coming next, Party City and things like that, you just compare contrast how you guys are thinking about that box size, mark-to-market demand, anything would be sort of helpful, so we can get a sense what that potentially could look like?

Sure, so on capital allocation priorities, one, two, and three, we always say are leasing, leasing, leasing. So you start there and obviously, the fundamentals of our business continue to shine. Followed by that the highest return for us for these smaller redevelopments where we can activate parking lots and create a pad parcel or expand in existing shopping center, that typically yield in the double-digit range, and so we like to activate those as many as possible. We typically run the range of $80 million to $90 million a year for those projects, and we're looking through the portfolio to try and generate more of those unique opportunities. After that, typically as a blend, the structured investment program as well as core opportunities, as well as the preferred equity and then the mixed-use redevelopment, put essentially. You look at the suite of opportunities there and you try and make sure you blend to a cost of capital that obviously reflects where we are today. We are in a unique position, where we have a lot of Albertsons capital to deploy. But as Ross mentioned, we're continuing to be patient there and look for those flat pitch that unique opportunity to really take advantage of dislocation and we've done it before and we'll do it again and we continue to think we're well-positioned to be opportunistic there.

Thank you.

Sorry, Repeat the question of the Bed Bath.

Sure, Party City has box sizes ranging from 12,000 to 14,000 square feet. Currently, we don't expect any rejections, so we are in a good position. Tuesday Morning has a similar size, while David's Bridal is smaller, typically under 10,000 square feet.

Thank you. And the next question comes from Linda Tsai with Jefferies.

Yes, hi, sorry, if I missed it earlier. How much of your full year credit-loss expectation of 75 to a 125 basis points was realized in 1Q?

So the credit loss for the first quarter was around 95 basis points. Again, in-line with where guidance is. And it accounts for the impact of the bad debts that we had from Party City and some of David's Bridal.

Thank you. And the next question comes from Craig Schmidt with Bank of America.

Thank you. Looking at the operating goals for mixed-use, I guess I was surprised that wasn't going to grow a little bit more from the 13% to 15%, given the added multifamily resi units you're projecting. And then as you get past that 2025 goal, may you accelerate the mixed-use redevelopment? I mean, you have a pretty extensive list of things you have that you're pursuing entitlements and future projects.

Yes, it is a good question, Craig. Obviously, we've ramped our program from virtually zero to where it is today in the last three to four years. So we have seen continued growth in the mixed-use platform and we like the fundamentals of really how they drive value to each other. The retail really drives value to the residential and the apartments because of the amenity base that it provides. And the apartments drive a lot of value to the retail because you have a built-in shopper base and the traffic patterns continue to uptick there. So it is one that will continue to monitor. We did activate a project this quarter as you saw. We like the opportunity to activate our CapEx light structure. So again, it doesn't weigh down our growth opportunities. We have a select few that are still active right now on-the-ground lease that are stabilizing later this year. The same goes for Milton at Pentagon, which is about to open, and we're excited about suburban square having a mixed-use component with the residential there. We think we can really hopefully drive a lot of value there. Going forward, we'll continue to obviously hopefully crush that goal of 15% from mixed-use and then reevaluate the next really the master plan for each asset and how much we can ramp that again using a CapEx light structure where we can showcase the growth of the underlying portfolio and still create value for our shareholders longer-term.

Thank you. And the next question comes from Alex Barron with Baird.

Hello, thank you for taking my question. So, quick question on the plans to use the pretty big cash position that has been built up. Should we expect that large cash position and balance be there throughout the year or at least until the potential special dividends? What's the plan there?

Yes, so the plan is really to be opportunistic. And again, we're going to be patient if the opportunity doesn't present itself and we're very comfortable maintaining the cash position until it does, but in the interim, we're having lots of conversations with all of our JV partners, talking to a lot of brokers and owners that may need capital as the year progresses. So to the extent that we can utilize that capital accretively, we're very comfortable doing so. Otherwise, we're just waiting for the right opportunities.

Thank you. And the next question comes from Mike Mueller with JPMorgan.

Yes, hi, two quick ones here. First, how diversified is the pool of tenants that you're talking to for the Bed Bath releases, and then is it safe to say that you're largely finished with the Albertsons monetization this year?

Yes. I'll do the Albertsons first. With both transactions that we did one in March, one in April, we are done for the year. So those proceeds and the gains from them are about as much as we can do, including the special dividend that we received relative to our gross income. So we will hold onto the shares for the remainder of the year and then look for further monetization in 2024.

Yes, in terms of the diversity, it is a healthy and diverse pool. You have your usual suspects, obviously in the off-price category, furniture, fitness, entertainment uses. And then within each of those categories, you're getting a variety of names as well. So it's nice to see that type of diversity for these boxes.

Mike, it's important to consider that with the ongoing off-price competition and increased demand for new spaces, some competitors may become very competitive in the auction process due to the specific characteristics of the Bed Bath leases. These leases might enable them to enter locations that they couldn't access before because of usage restrictions. It will be interesting to see how this unfolds.

Thank you. And the next question is a follow-up from Linda Tsai with Jefferies.

I just a follow-up on the off-price wars. Are you seeing rental rate increases result from the off-pricers competing with each other?

Yes. I mean, when you have more than one bidder at the table, that creates a competitive environment. So obviously - and as a result of that, you can see some price increases on rent for boxes.

Yes, thank you. That was all the time we have for today's question-and-answer session. I would like to turn the floor back over to management for closing comments.

Thank you very much for joining the call today. Enjoy the rest of your day.

Thank you, and thank you for attending today's presentation. You may now disconnect your lines.