Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by. Welcome to the Second Quarter 2025 Macerich Earnings Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] Please be advised that today's conference is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to Samantha Greening, Assistant Vice President, Director of Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

Thank you for joining us on our second quarter 2025 earnings call. During this call, we'll be making certain statements that may be deemed forward-looking within the meaning of the safe harbor of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, including statements regarding projections, plans and future expectations. Actual results may differ materially due to a variety of risks and uncertainties set forth in today's earnings results, supplemental and our SEC filings. Reconciliations of non-GAAP financial measures to the most directly comparable GAAP measures are included in the supplemental filed on Form 8-K with the SEC, which is posted in the Investors section on the company's website at macerich.com. Joining us today are Jack Hsieh, President and Chief Executive Officer; Dan Swanstrom, Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer; and Doug Healey, Senior Executive Vice President of Leasing. And with us in the room is Brad Miller, Senior Vice President of Portfolio Management. And with that, I'd like to turn the call over to Jack.

Thank you, Samantha, and good afternoon. I want to begin with where everything starts for us at Macerich, our people and their commitment to our mission and values. We are collectively a better informed, aligned and operationally focused company. Our second quarter results, the progress on our Path Forward plan and the acquisition of Crabtree Mall demonstrate how well we have put this mission and values to work together. Thank you all for your contributions that have brought us to this point. Now let's turn to our recent Path Forward plan. I want to let that update guide our discussion this afternoon. Recall that our Path Forward strategy is built on simplifying the business, operational performance improvement and leverage reduction. We are solving for strengthening the balance sheet, fortifying our core portfolio, driving operational excellence and positioning us for growth. We provided an update to our Path Forward plan in May, which included a comprehensive NOI bridge from year-end 2024 to 2028 for pro forma go-forward portfolio NOI. It also provided a road map for 2028 target FFO ranges and a path to our 2028 target leverage ranges. We also provided an update on the composition of our go-forward portfolio and identify which properties have been ranked as Fortress, Fortress Potential, Steady Eddies and Eddies. As Dan will discuss later, you will now see some of our supplemental KPIs broken down under the go-forward portfolio. A significant component of the plan is driving operational performance improvement. This all begins and ends with leasing. Leasing is the piece of the plan that best tracks the progress on hitting our 2028 targets. Recall that we are targeting an average of 4 million square feet of leasing in 2025 and 2026. Year-to-date, we've already signed 4.3 million square feet. I'm pleased to say…

Thanks, Jack. In my remarks this afternoon, I'll refer to total portfolio statistics and where applicable, I'll provide the go-forward portfolio statistics as well. Portfolio sales at the end of the second quarter were $849 per square foot, which is up $12 when compared to the first quarter of 2025. However, when you look at our go-forward portfolio, sales were actually $906 per square foot. Traffic through the second quarter for the portfolio was up 1.6% when compared to the same period in 2024. For the go-forward portfolio alone, traffic was up 2.1%. Occupancy at the end of the second quarter was 92%, down 60 basis points from the last quarter. As we signaled on our last call, this decline is primarily due to the liquidation and closing of our Forever 21 stores, all of which occurred in the second quarter. As I mentioned last quarter, Forever 21 had a lot of square footage, but did not pay a lot of rent. Recapturing these stores now allows us the opportunity to remerchandise the space with higher and better uses that will pay significantly more rent. To date, we have commitments on just over 50% of the closed square footage with another 30% in the letter of intent stage. We still expect to more than double the rent Forever 21 was paying us once we complete backfilling all of the space. The go-forward portfolio occupancy at the end of the second quarter was 92.8%. Trailing 12-month leasing spreads as of June 30, 2025, remained positive at 10.5%, which is relatively consistent with last quarter. This now represents 15 consecutive quarters of positive leasing spreads. In the second quarter, we opened 332,000 square feet of new stores for a total of 509,000 square feet year-to- date through June 30. Also in the…

Thanks, Doug, and good afternoon. I'll start with a review of our second quarter financial results. FFO, excluding financing expense in connection with Chandler Freehold accrued default interest expense and loss on non-real estate investments was approximately $87 million or $0.33 per share during the second quarter of 2025. I would like to highlight the following items included in our FFO adjusted for the quarter. Number one, $9 million of interest expense relates to the amortization of debt mark-to-market resulting from our various JV interest acquisitions, which compares to $3 million in the second quarter of 2024. As a reminder, this noncash expense is included in interest expense. Number two, $2 million of total combined expenses relating to legal claims expense at one of our properties and severance and staff transition expenses. Following the release of our Path Forward plan version 2.0, which included an update on the composition of our go-forward portfolio, we have now begun to include certain supplemental financial and operating information on the go-forward portfolio in our supplement. We will continue to evaluate additional enhancements or disclosures to our supplement in the coming quarters. Go- Forward Portfolio Centers NOI, excluding lease termination income increased 2.4% in the second quarter of 2025 compared to the second quarter of 2024. Year-to-date, the Go-Forward Portfolio Centers NOI has increased 2% compared to the same period in 2024. Turning to the balance sheet. We recently closed on a previously disclosed approximately $160 million 2-year term loan with 2 1- year extension options on Crabtree Mall at an interest rate of SOFR plus 250 bps. We used a portion of the net proceeds to fully repay borrowings on the revolving line of credit associated with the purchase of Crabtree. The term loan also allows for future additional borrowings up to approximately…

[Operator Instructions] And our first question will come from Ki Bin Kim with Truist.

Jack, can we first talk about Crabtree? It almost sounds too good to be true, all generating sales of $950 a square foot, trading at 11 cap. So maybe you could just give a little more background into it, how well marketed it was and how you thought about some of the risks with Belk, Macy's there as tenants?

Yes. Thanks, Ki Bin. Good to hear from you. Well, first of all, on the trade area, we'll start from there. We looked at that trade area and within that Raleigh-Durham MSA, there's approximately 10 centers that account for about 6.8 million square feet of GLA. So that's about 3.1 square feet per capita. One of those malls, Triangle is about 1.3 million, and we think that's kind of on the road to be repurposed. So overall, like the GLA per capita in the Raleigh-Durham area, we expect it to be around 2.4 million -- 2.4 square feet per capita. So that's obviously, in our opinion, like a good ratio. But specific to Crabtree, I think it was a unique situation for us. It had a value-add component, right? The NOI is going from $32 million to $36 million pro forma with the still north of $40 million. It did require some real leasing effort and capital to kind of reimagine some of the merchandising mix and drive more incremental traffic. The other thing that was unique to Crabtree was just the size. Because that NOI was ramping, I suspect it would be difficult to get a more permanent, highly leveraged loan on that asset with the NOI ramping like that. So more than likely, that required probably competitors to put in a fairly significant equity check north of $100 million. And we suspect that most of the people we were competing at were looking at opportunistic IRRs. So I think that was a unique asset. I mean, I'm not sure we're going to be able to replicate that kind of cap rate in the future, but we hope so. But we're elated on this asset. And as Doug talked about, the leasing interest and momentum that we have and the opportunity to kind of reconfigure without getting specific, some of the merchandising in that center is going to really be able to drive a lot of traffic, especially as I mentioned that we think one of the major malls in that area are probably going to potentially get repurposed.

Okay. And I believe that store -- that mall has the only Apple Store in Raleigh located in it. Does that inclusion of that very highly productive retailer move the sales per square foot productivity to a significant degree? I know it always [indiscernible] just curious, just from a unique situation.

Yes. I mean we look at -- when you look at sales, you look at them with Apple, without because Apple is really highly productive from the sales per square foot basis. Even if you excluded the Apple Store, I think we put in the materials, the sales per square foot is still very productive. And like I said, if you look at the permanent occupancy in that center, that's the thing that excited us so much, the ability to drive more market rent, more permanent occupancy. There is -- we've already done a merchandising mix analysis. There's a lot of brands that need to be represented in but are not. And I think that those brands know that we're committed long term to this trade area into this location. So I think that gives them a lot of confidence that they can be there and perform. If you get a chance to go down there, we're already repainting the interior of the center, and we've got capital plans for the parking lot railings that we'll start to push through later this year as real enhancements to the center.

And the next question will come from Linda Tsai with Jefferies.

The overall pace of your leasing is quite impressive with over [ 3 million ] opening between now and next year and over [ $100 ] million by year-end, you're hitting your goals and then some. What other benchmarks do you need to hit before you reinstate guidance?

I think, Linda, the asset sales are an important component as well because they -- that has a lot of disruption to earnings, especially the timing. So we unfortunately have 2 pedals that we've got to push at the same time. We're balancing asset sales and leasing and all are going well. But to try to predict timing on asset sales, some of these can kind of delay or move sooner than later. So we'd rather not try to put guidance -- be constrained by guidance numbers versus just keep pedal on the metal for asset sales and leasing.

Second question is it looks like your bad debt was down year-over-year. How is the watch list trending? We saw that [ Claire's has ] filed.

Yes. Linda, this is Dan. That's right. Bad debt through the first half of the year is about $2.8 million relative to about $5.6 million for 2024. So our watch list does continue to be at an all-time low. With respect to Claire's, we have about 33 locations in our go-forward portfolio, which represent about 50 basis points of rents. These spaces are roughly 1,300, 1,400 square feet, but are in good locations. We're confident we can re-lease those probably at least at the existing rents, but with healthier tenants that will improve the merchandising at our centers. And in fact, as part of the go-forward plan, we had already anticipated getting a number of those spaces back in our plan. So given the size and location of the spaces and the relatively small total rent they were paying, we don't see any impact to the 5-year plan. And as Doug alluded to in his remarks, I think importantly, and to your point about the bad debt being lower than last year, we don't think Claire's is indicative of the strong retailer environment that we're seeing today.

Has your bad debt guidance changed?

No.

And the next question will come from Michael Griffin with Evercore.

Curious if you could give some color on the TIs in the quarter. I noticed it jumped pretty notably compared to last quarter. It seems like you did more new leasing. So that probably drove a portion of it. But just give us a sense of maybe what the concessionary environment looks like currently?

Maybe I'll start with -- remember that we've got a very high number of anchor stores that are in play right now. Anchor stores, depending on how you decide to resolve them, whether it's you get a DICK'S House of Sport or you chop it up or you decide to put another use in there, all require different levels of CapEx, depending -- or tenant allowance. There's also landlord work involved in a lot of this when -- if you're reconfiguring an existing department store. I would say that when we talk about our new leasing, that momentum, a lot of it is in line. And generally, I would say our TA expense has not really changed today year-to-date or much at all, still in that 1 to 1.5x annual rent. Anchor stores are very different kind of question, and there's not one size that fits all. A deal at Tysons will look very different than a deal at Washington Square or a deal in a Steady Eddie asset. So I expect that you'll see TAs and landlord work go up and continue to move up as we've stated, we get after a lot of these vacant unproductive anchor stores because our goal is to drive traffic in those wings, as Doug talked about, the Sears wing at Washington Square, that's been kind of the funk for a long time. It's going to be extremely exciting when DICK'S is finally opened down there, and we're able to really remerchandise that wing. And so we're just going to replicate that almost 30x across our portfolio. There's about 28 opportunities in play right now. If you went out to see SCHEELS, same effect. You put a dominant great driver of traffic at the end of that wing, and you can really do a lot of things in line, leading up to that location. So our priority in terms of a strategy shift starting 1.5 years ago was to really get after these vacant anchors. And that really meant foregoing maybe some of the densification opportunities that prior leadership was looking at and really more what's going to drive traffic, traffic drives sales, sales drives our ability to raise rent and have tenants cover their cost of occupancy.

I appreciate the context there. And then maybe just switching over to sort of external growth activities. You clearly demonstrated finding attractive deals with the Crabtree acquisition. As you kind of play out that proof of concept on the go-forward path, whether it's being ahead of your leasing expectations, that SNO pipeline, what have you, does that give you maybe more confidence to turn that acquisition engine on? Are these deals more opportunistic? Just trying to wrap my head around how you're thinking about external growth activities in the context of the go-forward plan.

I mean I'd say like, I'd start with Crabtree made sense from a portfolio contribution configuration for Macerich. We candidly were looking at some other centers. I would say that not all centers are the same, not all going in cap rates are the same. We really look at that relationship of market rents, the ability to reignite leasing momentum, what the trade area and competition dynamic looks like. Crabtree is really set up perfectly for that. I can say there are other things out there that are also pretty interesting, whether or not we decide to move forward, whether or not it meets our, I call it, low to mid-teen IRR thresholds and is accretive to our portfolio. I mean, time will tell. But one of the things that gave the Board a lot of confidence in us as senior leaders is the momentum that we're seeing in our business from a leasing and dispose standpoint are very significant. I mean I know Doug talked about all the leasing and doing comparisons to last year. I mean the way I think about it is we have -- in our go-forward portfolio, we've got [ 3-point ] million square feet of signed leases. We've got 2 million square feet of leases out that typically has a very high 95% historical completion rate. And we've got 2.3 million square feet of LOIs where we're kind of trading paper with a tenant. Now that historical ratio might be 50%, 60%. But what that tells me is I see 8 million square feet of opportunity that's either signed, leases out or LOI. And like I said, we're only 70% through the year, and we've still got another year plus to finish our plan. So I think we're way ahead of plan, and we're just going to keep driving it. And we're at market rents, too, which -- and that's the same TA assumptions, tenant allowance assumptions that we had pro forma in our 5-year plan.

And the next question comes from Jeff Spector with Bank of America.

Just coming back to Crabtree. Again, I understand the strategy. Thanks for laying all that out, the market positioning, leasing opportunity. I guess can you just weigh the decision, again, buying Crabtree, the CapEx required versus, let's say, using that cash on hand to just pay down debt? And obviously, with Crabtree, your leasing team now focusing on a new market, I guess can you just talk through that decision?

Jeff. Yes. I mean we had a lot of cash on hand. It was very ideal or opportunistic for us. I suppose when we thought about the idea of paying down debt versus pursuing an acquisition like Crabtree, we think that just the implied growth rate of Crabtree's NOI, what that does? Actually, the growth rate is higher than our core growth rate. So on the one hand, we think it's going to be accretive from just a pure standing start NOI growth rate versus our core portfolio. So that was a big plus. The second was that point about where we are in the leasing evolution of what we need to accomplish. We just have a high degree of confidence that we're going to get this done ahead of schedule on market rent and within the TA ranges that we've outlined. One of the stats that I'd share with you is of that remaining go-forward bucket of LOIs and prospects that we talked -- that I talked to you about last question, 90% of that space, that new remaining space are A, B and C graded space in our portfolio. Another way to look at it is 66% of that new incremental rent that we're looking for the LOIs and our prospecting bucket are at our Fortress and Fortress Potential assets. So if you just step away, you'd say they've got remaining space at some of their best centers in their best quadrant of spaces that are remaining. So if I were at a much lower percentage where I didn't have that visibility, we might not pursue a Crabtree. We might pay down debt. But we feel like we've really flexed over that point of where -- like I think we're really in a different position than where we were at the beginning of the year.

The only thing I would add to Jack's comments is that we are still expected to keep the company within our previously stated deleveraging targets under the Path Forward plan. So even with this acquisition, we remain in our target leverage range as part of the plan.

And maybe, Jack, this ties to in your initial comments, you talked about the team being better aligned. I know we've talked to you in the past about your leasing systems. I guess, how does that -- how has that all come together? And maybe just tie it to your comment, I think you said you may look at other potential acquisitions.

Yes. It's interesting. I'll tell you, Jeff, like we did kind of case study internally like lessons learned in the Crabtree process. And I think it really works quite amazingly well given how we do our business today, the technology and the systems and the process that we put in place. It's -- I mean, hard to describe how well the company is actually working right now. Like we didn't just magically go lease all the space. I mean, we had a plan. It was built on a 5-year plan. There was a lot of realignment with the operating teams. There's very specific criteria that are met for spaces in our portfolio with market rents and TA assumptions that flow into that 5-year model. So we're able to just make decisions very rapidly. It frees up the team to go forward. And we've unburdened a lot of our sales team, leasing team with things that -- so they can do their jobs more efficiently. So just across the board, it's helped us achieve the leasing goals that we need. And when we evaluate Crabtree and actually are integrating it, it's -- I can't really compare it because I wasn't here that long ago. But for what people tell me they've been around for a while, it's been a pretty seamless process so far. So we hope to get maybe another opportunity or 2 to try out to put into the business.

The next question comes from Floris Van Dijkum with Ladenburg.

Just maybe talking about the SNO pipeline. It's a large number, $85 million. Obviously, you had some leases commenced during the quarter. Curious what commenced during the quarter, how much was added? And as a percentage of your going forward NOI, what is this -- I mean, this is approximately 10% of your EBITDA as you say it is today. But as a percentage of your going forward, it's going to be bigger. Maybe if you can give us a little bit more detail on that. And also maybe talk about the composition of that SNO pipeline because presumably, if your average ABR is $73 a square foot right now in your going-forward portfolio, how much of that SNO pipeline is in the A bucket and B bucket versus C bucket? And what is the rent difference between those?

Floris, I'll start and then Brad and Jack can chime in. If you think about your first point on the SNO as a percentage of NOI, in the Path Forward presentation that we put out, we gave the go-forward pro forma portfolio NOI was about $720 million. So if you kind of look at the $87 million as SNO, as a percentage of that, it's 12%. And obviously, the ultimate opportunity of $130 million of SNO is significantly higher over that $720 million. In terms of SNO, I think the second part of your question was SNO contribution to date. Again, in the Path Forward plan, we had outlined, and this is on the $80 million as of May that we expected about $25 million contribution in 2025. So about $10 million of that has been realized to date. In terms of the last piece, the composition?

Yes. So if we're at -- it's Brad. We're at $87 million today on the SNO and with an ultimate goal to get it to $130 million. So of that additional $43 million, 90% of it is anticipated to come from our A, B and C rated spaces. So we feel really good about that.

And as you think about those A-rated spaces or B-rated spaces, what kind of premium rents do you get relative to the rest of the portfolio?

Yes, certainly, we get a higher rent on our A and B spaces. I think one of the keys here is that we have -- in our 5-year plan, there's a specific market rent assigned to every single space. So whether it's A, B or C, we know what the target rent is that we need to hit for each space.

And then maybe my second question -- sorry, and I know I sort of cheated on my first question because it was multipart. But could you talk a little bit about the temp tenancy opportunity? I think you mentioned, obviously, at Crabtree Valley, 74% is permanent and -- or there's a huge temp opportunity there. Presumably, that also is incremental SNO potential in the portfolio. But maybe talk about what the temp tenancy percentage is today in your core portfolio? And where do you think that will be at the end of '26?

Floris, we kind of gave wide end ranges for 2028. I don't want to try to give incremental because answer, we're not putting out quarterly guidance. And if I give you a number, you'll probably try to do it. And so I think what I would tell you is that our goal is to really drive unproductive or temp tenants out of the center because there's demand for really high-quality tenants at this point, and we're showing that through our leasing momentum. And I would rather not constrain ourselves to give you a target for '26. We might exceed it. We might not exceed it. I don't want to be constrained that way. So you can rest assured we're growing as quickly as we possibly can to make the right decision to put the right tenant where we think it's going to, a, drive the most rent; but b, actually drive the most traffic as part of the merchandising plan in each of these centers. And then at Crabtree, we think there's an amazing opportunity to really tighten up permanent occupancy in that center. I would say that the prior owner did not probably commit the kind of capital that was necessary over the last few years coming out of COVID. There's clearly demand. We're seeing it, and we're going to get after it. It does cost money, and it does take time. And I also think that a lot of those same tenants really want to see capital going into the center, which we've committed to do. And so they've seen it. They know what we're doing. And in kind, you'll see updates from us maybe at the end of the year where we show progress before and after, and it will be quite significant.

Jack, the only thing I would add to that, and you've done a great job sort of explaining Crabtree and everything that we're doing. But from a retailer standpoint, we're talking to them all the time. They are elated that Macerich bought this property. They know exactly what a Macerich property looks like, feels like and how it's leased. So already, and I think I said this in my opening remarks, in the short time that we've had this, I can't tell you how many retailers proactively reached out to us and said, "Hey, we want to expand our store. We want to rightsize our store. We want to invest capital. We haven't because we didn't know who was going to own this thing." So those are the ones that are currently in the mall. Then the ones that [ aren't ] in the mall that want to be in the mall has been nothing short of extraordinary. So I think, as I said, we're going to have a lot of real quick meaningful updates in the very near future.

And Floris, finally, you talked about this inflection point in mid-2026. That's when you're going to really start to see the impact of all this leasing that's really going to be coming through the P&L. You'll start to really see it.

And our next question will come from Vince Tibone with Green Street.

Could you discuss the rationale in keeping South Plains Mall as part of the go-forward portfolio? When you consolidated the center last year, I recall you saying there was really likely no equity remaining at that property after the $200 million mortgage. So curious kind of what changed, what made you presumably want to contribute more equity into that center to get it refinanced versus just handing the keys back.

Vince, what I'd say on that, look, this list of properties still could change a little bit. This is the go-forward list at this moment in time. Specifically to South Plains, we are in discussions with the lender at this moment, seeking an extension. We think that with the demand in the trade area with the right terms of an extension, we think we can kind of create NOI lift that will sort of be at the point where at the end of 3 years from now, that loan and NOI will be more in balance. So I would just leave it to say that it's on the list now. It may come off the list, right? So it's going to be very dependent on the discussion that's happening right now with the lender. I mean you've done the math. So the debt yields are in the high single digits. So you're right, you compare it to putting equity somewhere else, like in a Crabtree, it's a lot more attractive. So -- but with the right loan structure, we think there might -- it could be an interesting opportunity.

No, that makes sense. And I figured you're in negotiations with the lender there. And then could you -- just given the portfolio list could be fluid, are you able to share any insight into the performance for the remaining non-go-forward assets in terms of how much NOI growing or declining for those assets? I mean, I might be able to some back of the envelope math to get to first quarter results, but I'm not sure if there's any noise there. So I was hoping you can just share kind of ballpark where -- how NOI has trended year-to- date for the current non-go-forward property same store.

Yes. I would say like high level, Vince, like we're not putting capital into those properties. The leasing that's happening there, it's being handled differently. The asset management teams that are operating those assets are treating them differently. So I would just say they're not growing at the same rate as our go-forward portfolio, not even close, actually. We're really just trying to maintain occupancy as a priority in those centers. And some -- as we kind of move through the portfolio and look, other people have different ideas. There are other -- we're clearly selling other properties where there are other buyers that may have a different angle or a different focus that can create value for that asset. I mean for us, it's really just a prioritization concept like where we only have a certain amount of capital, certain amount of bandwidth, certain amount of leasing effort. So we're really trying to concentrate that effort into that go-forward portfolio.

No, that makes sense. Is it fair to assume, [ too, any of ] those malls are effectively on the market given the release in May?

Yes. I mean I think that's for sure. I mean they -- I would say they're on the market or they -- the thing that's interesting about those properties, they generate cash flow, in some cases, FFO, some of them are unlevered. So they're additive to what we're trying to do right now, which is the capital is good for the company, and we can use that capital to reinvest. But in the end, we are operating and leasing and managing those properties differently now.

The next question will come from Ronald Kamdem with Morgan Stanley.

A couple of quick ones or just one. On the go-forward portfolio, that sort of NOI growth, maybe can you talk about what are some of the factors that are holding that back sort of this year, whether it's Forever 21, whether it's transition from temp to permanent? And just some updated thoughts on once you get that inflection point you talked about next year, how does that -- what sort of a normalized growth rate we should be thinking about for the go forward?

Ronald, this is Dan. I think you've hit a few of the points with Forever 21 this year. Also all the leasing efforts and repositioning effort as it relates to 2025 specifically. I think if you look at our -- step back and look at our Path Forward presentation, we put out for the go-forward portfolio over the next 4 years, a midpoint CAGR go-forward portfolio of 5.2%. I think we've been pretty clear that, that really ramps up to Jack's point in kind of a mid-'26 inflection point. So we've said for 2026, we can see that being 3% to 4%, but it significantly ramps from there. But the important point is, over the next 4 years, it's north of a 5% NOI growth rate for the go-forward portfolio.

Helpful. And then if I could sneak a quick follow-up on just Crabtree. The CapEx budget that you have for the asset, maybe high level, what is that going towards? I mean, there were some articles about sort of the parking lots and flooding and different things. Is that -- just maybe details on what the CapEx plan is going towards.

Yes. So it's over a couple of different items. It's obviously some of the re-leasing activity that's going to be there. But big picture, as Doug alluded to, we're going to reimagine the center through a more dynamic tenant mix, modern environments, refreshed experiences. We're doing 200,000 square feet of common area that will be reimagined, painting, lighting redesign, handrails, a new furniture package. We're doing some interior signage and wayfinding, some greenery. We're doing a food court that's going to be revitalized, new vertical transportation, the parking deck, as you alluded to. So I think that gives you a mix of what we're looking to do at the asset. We've outlined about $60 million in total over the next couple of years.

And also, the prior seller, they had already initiated a storm drain reassessment -- redesign that will alleviate some of that flooding that's historically happened at that center. So that work is already in place. The parking stuff that we're working on is just make it more visually enhancing, some of the sealant needs to be redone. So I would say a lot of it is going to be more cosmetic oriented and sort of client-facing, which I think will be good at because that center really hasn't seen capital go in, in that way for quite some time.

And our next question will come from Omotayo Okusanya with Deutsche Bank.

Over this earnings season, you've had a couple of the multifamily REIT kind of talk about L.A. still struggling. A couple of the industrial guys have talked about it. Again, you guys are not necessarily an L.A. story. But just curious if you could talk a little bit about how your portfolio is performing kind of across all your different California locations, whether it's L.A., Orange County or Northern California?

Yes, I would say, like our California exposures you need -- obviously, we have the Bay Area. We've got Corte Madera, Broadway Plaza. Those are doing quite well given some of the, I call it, more headline news in downtown San Francisco, although I believe the mayor is doing an excellent job up there in terms of trying to address some of the perception issues in that city. If you go to Central California, Modesto and Fresno, those centers are doing well. They're within sort of defined trade areas. Southern California for us, the portfolio is kind of -- in a kind of a reshape, right? We've decided -- we sold The Oaks. Santa Monica Place is in transition with the lender. Lakewood is under contract. So if you look at what we have left in the go forward, Los Cerritos, that is a -- that mall is doing gangbusters right now. Lots of traffic, lots of sales, lots of tenant demand. The area that we're most focused on right now, which is an opportunity, is the former Sears location. We are looking at an anchor option there that we believe -- I can't really talk about it right now, but that will bring a lot of traffic, a lot of demand into that wing of the center. We've got a very, very unique tenant that's we're in negotiation on in the former Forever 21 location, which is in that same Sears wing. So we're super excited about the potential for Los Cerritos. Victor Valley is a very solid center. It's in a very captive trade area. I wouldn't call it L.A. It's in that Southern California Beltway, but it's a very -- it's the only mall in town up in Victor Valley. We have Inland Center. Inland has got more competition, right, with Victoria Gardens and Ontario Mills that surround it and some of the power centers. But if you look at the -- in terms of our L.A. exposure, I would say Southern Cal, we feel really good about Los Cerritos, which is our most important asset down there at this point and Victor Valley. So -- and then the others are part of the Eddie package.

We are over our allotted time today. We have time for one more question, and that question will come from Ravi Vaidya with Mizuho.

I wanted to ask about the opportunity with Forever 21. You mentioned that a good number of the backfills have been signed and a bunch are under LOI as well. How many of these are straight up single backfills? And how many require a split of the box, which would require more CapEx?

I think -- yes, Ravi, it's Doug. I would say -- and Brad, back check me. I would say the majority of the Forever 21 boxes are straight backfills with the exception being a few that we may need to demise 1 or 2 or 3 ways. And as I said in my remarks, we're about 50% committed and another 30% in the LOI stage. So not only are we going to basically double the rent that Forever 21 was paying, but you're going to see some uses come in that far exceed what Forever 21 was doing in the shopping center. So we're super excited to get those spaces back, to be very honest with you.

Got it. That's helpful. And maybe just the impact of the DICK'S Sporting Goods and the Foot Locker merger have, what's the potential store closure impact there? And what's the backfill opportunity?

Yes. I mean we're not aware of any kind of closure list or anything like that. But if anything, I think that having a DICK'S credit become our #1 tenant. If you look at it with the combined Foot Locker-DICK'S contribution, I mean, I think that's going to be a real positive for us. And I think that the Foot Locker stores that we have in our go-forward portfolio are quite productive. And so we'll patiently wait to see how that DICK'S potential transaction moves forward and react from there.

I would now like to turn the conference back over to Jack Hsieh for closing remarks.

Well, I want to thank everyone here, especially all the colleagues that work here at Macerich. I mean they've been doing yeoman's work across the platform and couldn't do this without them. And we look forward to more updates and continued momentum on achieving our Path Forward plan. Thank you.

This concludes today's conference call. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.