UNITED STATES
                       SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                             Washington, D.C. 20549

                                   Form 10-QSB

(Mark One)
[X]   QUARTERLY REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE
      ACT OF 1934

                 For the quarterly period ended June 30, 2005


[ ]   TRANSITION REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE EXCHANGE ACT


             For the transition period from _________to _________

                         Commission file number 0-10273


                       CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL PROPERTIES III
        (Exact name of small business issuer as specified in its charter)



         California                                              94-2653686
(State or other jurisdiction of                               (I.R.S. Employer
 incorporation or organization)                              Identification No.)

                          55 Beattie Place, PO Box 1089
                        Greenville, South Carolina 29602
                    (Address of principal executive offices)

                                 (864) 239-1000
                           (Issuer's telephone number)

Check  whether the issuer (1) filed all reports  required to be filed by Section
13 or 15(d) of the  Exchange  Act during the past 12 months (or for such shorter
period that the  registrant  was required to file such reports) and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.
Yes  X   No ___

                         PART I - FINANCIAL INFORMATION


ITEM 1.     FINANCIAL STATEMENTS



                       CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL PROPERTIES III

                           CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
                                   (Unaudited)
                        (in thousands, except unit data)

                                  June 30, 2005

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>


Assets
<S>                                                                          <C>
   Cash and cash equivalents                                                 $ 99
   Receivables and deposits                                                      82
   Other assets                                                                 323
   Investment properties:
      Land                                                    $ 407
      Buildings and related personal property                 10,216
                                                              10,623
      Less accumulated depreciation                           (8,237)         2,386
                                                                            $ 2,890
Liabilities and Partners' Deficit
Liabilities
   Accounts payable                                                          $ 18
   Tenant security deposit liabilities                                           66
   Accrued property taxes                                                        91
   Other liabilities                                                            170
   Due to affiliates (Note B)                                                 1,096
   Mortgage notes payable                                                     7,035

Partners' Deficit
   General partners                                           $(1,892)
   Limited partners (158,582 units issued and
      outstanding)                                            (3,694)        (5,586)
                                                                            $ 2,890

         See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
</TABLE>


                       CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL PROPERTIES III

                      CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
                                   (Unaudited)
                      (in thousands, except per unit data)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                               Three Months              Six Months
                                              Ended June 30,           Ended June 30,
                                            2005         2004         2005        2004

Revenues:
<S>                                        <C>          <C>         <C>          <C>
  Rental income                            $ 630        $ 536       $ 1,256      $ 1,071
  Other income                                 41           51           87          109
  Casualty gain (Note C)                      106           --          106           --
      Total revenues                          777          587        1,449        1,180

Expenses:
  Operating                                   294          341          604          670
  General and administrative                   68           57          133          108
  Depreciation                                117          113          234          226
  Interest                                    159          146          316          291
  Property taxes                               46           44           91           88
      Total expenses                          684          701        1,378        1,383


Net income (loss)                           $ 93        $ (114)       $ 71       $ (203)

Net income (loss) allocated to
  general partners (4%)                     $ 4          $ (5)        $ 3         $ (8)
Net income (loss) allocated to
  limited partners (96%)                       89         (109)          68         (195)

                                            $ 93        $ (114)       $ 71       $ (203)
Net income (loss) per limited
 partnership unit                          $ 0.56      $ (0.69)      $ 0.43      $ (1.23)

         See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
</TABLE>



<PAGE>




                       CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL PROPERTIES III

            CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN PARTNERS' DEFICIT
                                   (Unaudited)
                        (in thousands, except unit data)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                       Limited
                                     Partnership     General      Limited
                                        Units        Partners    Partners      Total


<S>                                    <C>             <C>      <C>           <C>
Original capital contributions         158,945         $ 1      $  79,473     $ 79,474

Partners' deficit
   at December 31, 2004                158,582       $(1,895)   $  (3,762)    $ (5,657)

Net income for the six months
   ended June 30, 2005                     --              3           68           71

Partners' deficit
   at June 30, 2005                    158,582       $(1,892)   $  (3,694)    $ (5,586)



         See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
</TABLE>



<PAGE>



                       CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL PROPERTIES III

                      CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
                                   (Unaudited)
                                 (in thousands)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                                  Six Months Ended
                                                                        June 30,
                                                                  2005         2004
Cash flows from operating activities:
<S>                                                               <C>         <C>
  Net income (loss)                                               $ 71        $ (203)
  Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash
   provided by operating activities:
   Depreciation                                                      234          226
   Amortization of loan costs                                         12           13
   Casualty gain                                                    (111)          --
   Change in accounts:
      Receivables and deposits                                        21            7
      Other assets                                                   (15)         (33)
      Accounts payable                                               (76)         (56)
      Tenant security deposit liabilities                              1            3
      Due to affiliates                                              123           69
      Accrued property taxes                                          91           88
      Other liabilities                                              (64)          20

       Net cash provided by operating activities                     287          134

Cash flows from investing activities:
  Property improvements and replacements                            (441)         (91)
  Insurance proceeds received                                        108           --
       Net cash used in investing activities                        (333)         (91)

Cash flows from financing activities:
  Payments on mortgage notes payable                                (120)        (102)
  Advances from affiliate                                            182           51

       Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities            62          (51)

Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents                  16           (8)

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period                      83           52
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period                        $ 99         $ 44

Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information:
  Cash paid for interest                                          $ 292        $ 276

         See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
</TABLE>


                       CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL PROPERTIES III

                   NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
                                   (Unaudited)


Note A - Basis of Presentation

The accompanying  unaudited  consolidated  financial  statements of Consolidated
Capital Properties III (the "Partnership" or "Registrant") have been prepared in
accordance with generally accepted  accounting  principles for interim financial
information  and  with the  instructions  to Form  10-QSB  and  Item  310(b)  of
Regulation  S-B.  Accordingly,  they do not include all of the  information  and
footnotes  required by generally  accepted  accounting  principles  for complete
financial statements.  In the opinion of the general partner of the Partnership,
ConCap Equities,  Inc. (the "General Partner"),  all adjustments  (consisting of
normal recurring  accruals)  considered  necessary for a fair  presentation have
been included.  Operating results for the three and six month periods ended June
30, 2005 are not necessarily  indicative of the results that may be expected for
the fiscal year ending December 31, 2005. For further information,  refer to the
consolidated   financial  statements  and  footnotes  thereto  included  in  the
Partnership's  Annual  Report on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended  December
31,  2004.  The General  Partner is  wholly-owned  by Apartment  Investment  and
Management Company ("AIMCO"), a publicly traded real estate investment trust.

Note B - Transactions with Affiliated Parties

The  Partnership  has no  employees  and depends on the General  Partner and its
affiliates for the management and administration of all Partnership  activities.
The partnership  agreement  ("Partnership  Agreement")  provides for payments to
affiliates  for  services  and  reimbursement  of certain  expenses  incurred by
affiliates of the General Partner on behalf of the Partnership.

Affiliates of the General  Partner receive 5% of gross receipts from both of the
Partnership's  properties  as  compensation  for providing  property  management
services.  The  Partnership  paid to such affiliates  approximately  $67,000 and
$58,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004, respectively, which are
included in operating expenses.

Affiliates of the General Partner charged the Partnership for  reimbursement  of
accountable  administrative  expenses  amounting to  approximately  $134,000 and
$78,000  for the six months  ended June 30, 2005 and 2004,  respectively.  These
amounts are  included  in general and  administrative  expenses  and  investment
properties.   The  portion  of  these  reimbursements   included  in  investment
properties  for the  six  months  ended  June  30,  2005  are  fees  related  to
construction management services provided by an affiliate of the General Partner
of  approximately  $46,000.  No such fees were incurred for the six months ended
June 30, 2004. The construction  management service fees are calculated based on
a  percentage  of  additions  to  investment  properties.   At  June  30,  2005,
approximately $325,000 of such fees, including accrued interest of approximately
$16,000,  were owed to affiliates of the General Partner and are included in due
to affiliates.

The Partnership  Agreement  provides for a special management fee equal to 9% of
the  total  distributions  made to the  limited  partners  from  cash  flow from
operations to be paid to the General  Partner for  executive and  administrative
management  services.  During the six months  ended June 30,  2005 and 2004,  no
special  management  fees  were  paid as no  distributions  from  cash flow from
operations were made.

During the six months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004,  an affiliate of the General
Partner  advanced  the  Partnership  approximately  $182,000 and $51,000 to fund
operations and capital  improvements at Ventura  Landing  Apartments and certain
audit related liabilities.  Interest is accrued at the prime rate plus 2% (8.25%
at June 30, 2005). Interest expense was approximately $26,000 and $1,000 for the
six months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004,  respectively.  At June 30,  2005,  the
total amount of advances and accrued interest was approximately  $771,000 and is
included in due to affiliates.

The  Partnership  insures its properties up to certain  limits through  coverage
provided by AIMCO which is  generally  self-insured  for a portion of losses and
liabilities  related  to  workers  compensation,   property  casualty,   general
liability and vehicle  liability.  The Partnership  insures its properties above
the AIMCO limits  through  insurance  policies  obtained by AIMCO from  insurers
unaffiliated with the General Partner. During the six months ended June 30, 2005
and 2004, the Partnership was charged by AIMCO and its affiliates  approximately
$33,000 and $32,000,  respectively,  for insurance  coverage and fees associated
with policy claims administration.

Note C - Casualty Events

In August and September  2004,  Hurricanes  Charley,  Frances and Jeanne damaged
Ventura  Landing  Apartments.  The property  incurred  damages of  approximately
$266,000.  During  the three  and six  months  ended  June 30,  2005,  insurance
proceeds of  approximately  $94,000  have been  received to cover  damage to the
property. After writing off the fully depreciated cost of the damaged asset, the
Partnership  recognized a casualty gain of  approximately  $94,000 for the three
and six months ended June 30, 2005.

In September 2004,  Village Green Apartments  experienced  damage from Hurricane
Frances. During the six months ended June 30, 2005, the Partnership recognized a
casualty gain of approximately  $5,000 due to a change in the estimated building
damages at the property, which is reflected in operating expense.

In December 2004,  Village Green Apartments  experienced damage of approximately
$22,000 from a laundry room fire. During the three and six months ended June 30,
2005, the Partnership  received insurance  proceeds of approximately  $14,000 to
cover damage to the property.  After writing off the  undepreciated  cost of the
damaged  asset,  the  Partnership  recognized a casualty  gain of  approximately
$12,000 for the three and six months ended June 30, 2005.

Note D - Contingencies

In March 1998, several putative unit holders of limited partnership units of the
Partnership  commenced an action  entitled  Rosalie  Nuanes,  et al. v. Insignia
Financial Group, Inc., et al. (the "Nuanes action") in the Superior Court of the
State of  California  for the  County  of San  Mateo.  The  plaintiffs  named as
defendants,  among others,  the Partnership,  its General Partner and several of
their affiliated  partnerships and corporate  entities.  The action purported to
assert  claims on behalf of a class of  limited  partners  and  derivatively  on
behalf of a number of limited partnerships  (including the Partnership) that are
named as nominal defendants, challenging, among other things, the acquisition of
interests in certain General Partner entities by Insignia  Financial Group, Inc.
("Insignia") and entities that were, at one time,  affiliates of Insignia;  past
tender offers by the Insignia  affiliates to acquire limited  partnership units;
management of the  partnerships  by the Insignia  affiliates;  and the series of
transactions  which  closed on October 1, 1998 and  February  26,  1999  whereby
Insignia and Insignia  Properties Trust,  respectively,  were merged into AIMCO.
The plaintiffs sought monetary damages and equitable relief,  including judicial
dissolution of the Partnership. In addition, during the third quarter of 2001, a
complaint captioned Heller v. Insignia Financial Group (the "Heller action") was
filed against the same  defendants  that are named in the Nuanes  action.  On or
about August 6, 2001,  plaintiffs  filed a first amended  complaint.  The Heller
action was brought as a purported  derivative  action,  and asserted claims for,
among other things,  breach of fiduciary duty, unfair  competition,  conversion,
unjust  enrichment,  and judicial  dissolution.  On January 28, 2002,  the trial
court granted  defendants  motion to strike the  complaint.  Plaintiffs  took an
appeal from this order.

On January 8, 2003,  the parties filed a  Stipulation  of Settlement in proposed
settlement of the Nuanes  action and the Heller  action.  On June 13, 2003,  the
court granted final approval of the settlement and entered  judgment in both the
Nuanes and Heller actions. On August 12, 2003, an objector ("Objector") filed an
appeal (the "Appeal")  seeking to vacate and/or reverse the order  approving the
settlement and entering judgment  thereto.  On May 4, 2004, the Objector filed a
second appeal  challenging  the court's use of a referee and its order requiring
Objector to pay those fees.

On March 21, 2005, the Court of Appeals issued opinions in both pending appeals.
With regard to the settlement and judgment entered thereto, the Court of Appeals
vacated  the trial  court's  order and  remanded  to the trial court for further
findings  on the basis that the "state of the record is  insufficient  to permit
meaningful  appellate  review".  With regard to the second appeal,  the Court of
Appeals  reversed the order requiring the Objector to pay referee fees. On April
26, 2005,  the Court of Appeals  lifted the stay of a pending  appeal related to
the Heller action and the trial court's order striking the  complaint.  On April
28, 2005, the Objector  filed a Petition for Review with the California  Supreme
Court in connection with the opinion vacating the order approving settlement and
remanding for further findings.  On June 10, 2005, the California  Supreme Court
denied  Objector's  Petition for Review and the Court of Appeals sent the matter
back to the trial court on June 21,  2005.  The parties  intend to ask the trial
court to make further findings in connection with settlement consistent with the
Court of Appeal's  remand order.  With respect to the related Heller appeal,  on
July 28, 2005,  the Court of Appeals  reversed the trial court's order  striking
the first amended complaint.

The  General  Partner  does not  anticipate  that any costs to the  Partnership,
whether legal or settlement costs,  associated with these cases will be material
to the Partnership's overall operations.

As previously disclosed,  AIMCO Properties L.P. and NHP Management Company, both
affiliates of the General  Partner,  are  defendants in a lawsuit  alleging that
they willfully  violate the Fair Labor  Standards Act ("FLSA") by failing to pay
maintenance  workers  overtime for all hours worked in excess of forty per week.
The complaint  attempts to bring a collective action under the FLSA and seeks to
certify state subclasses in California,  Maryland, and the District of Columbia.
Specifically,  the  plaintiffs  contend  that  AIMCO  Properties  L.P.  and  NHP
Management Company failed to compensate  maintenance  workers for time that they
were  required  to be  "on-call".  Additionally,  the  complaint  alleges  AIMCO
Properties  L.P. and NHP  Management  Company  failed to comply with the FLSA in
compensating maintenance workers for time that they worked in excess of 40 hours
in a week. On June 23, 2005 the Court  conditionally  certified  the  collective
action  on both the  on-call  and  overtime  issues.  The  Court  ruling  allows
plaintiffs  to  provide  notice  of the  collective  action  to  all  non-exempt
maintenance  workers from August 7, 2000 through the  present.  Those  employees
will have the  opportunity to opt-in to the collective  action.  Defendants have
asked the Court to  reconsider  its  ruling or in the  alternative  certify  the
ruling for appeal on that issue. After the notice goes out, defendants will have
the  opportunity to move to decertify the collective  action.  The Court further
denied plaintiffs' Motion for Certification of the state subclass.  Although the
outcome of any litigation is uncertain, AIMCO Properties,  L.P. does not believe
that  the  ultimate   outcome  will  have  a  material  adverse  effect  on  its
consolidated  financial  condition  or results  of  operations.  Similarly,  the
General Partner does not believe that the ultimate  outcome will have a material
adverse effect on the Partnership's  consolidated financial condition or results
of operations.

The  Partnership  is unaware  of any other  pending  or  outstanding  litigation
matters  involving  it or its  investment  properties  that are not of a routine
nature arising in the ordinary course of business.

Environmental

Various  Federal,  state and local laws subject  property owners or operators to
liability for management,  and the costs of removal or  remediation,  of certain
hazardous  substances  present on a property.  Such laws often impose  liability
without regard to whether the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for,
the release or presence of the  hazardous  substances.  The  presence of, or the
failure to manage or remedy properly,  hazardous substances may adversely affect
occupancy at affected  apartment  communities and the ability to sell or finance
affected properties.  In addition to the costs associated with investigation and
remediation  actions  brought by government  agencies,  and  potential  fines or
penalties  imposed by such  agencies in  connection  therewith,  the presence of
hazardous  substances on a property could result in claims by private plaintiffs
for personal injury, disease, disability or other infirmities. Various laws also
impose  liability for the cost of removal,  remediation or disposal of hazardous
substances  through a  licensed  disposal  or  treatment  facility.  Anyone  who
arranges for the disposal or treatment of hazardous  substances  is  potentially
liable  under such laws.  These laws often impose  liability  whether or not the
person arranging for the disposal ever owned or operated the disposal  facility.
In connection  with the ownership,  operation and management of its  properties,
the Partnership  could  potentially be liable for  environmental  liabilities or
costs associated with its properties.

Mold

The Partnership is aware of lawsuits  against owners and managers of multifamily
properties asserting claims of personal injury and property damage caused by the
presence of mold, some of which have resulted in substantial  monetary judgments
or settlements. The Partnership has only limited insurance coverage for property
damage loss claims  arising from the  presence of mold and for  personal  injury
claims  related  to  mold  exposure.  Affiliates  of the  General  Partner  have
implemented a national  policy and  procedures to prevent or eliminate mold from
its  properties  and the  General  Partner  believes  that these  measures  will
minimize the effects that mold could have on residents. To date, the Partnership
has not incurred any material  costs or  liabilities  relating to claims of mold
exposure  or to  abate  mold  conditions.  Because  the  law  regarding  mold is
unsettled and subject to change the General  Partner can make no assurance  that
liabilities  resulting  from the presence of or exposure to mold will not have a
material adverse effect on the Partnership's consolidated financial condition or
results of operations.

SEC Investigation

The  Central  Regional  Office of the  United  States  Securities  and  Exchange
Commission (the "SEC")  continues its formal  investigation  relating to certain
matters.  Although  the staff of the SEC is not limited in the areas that it may
investigate,  AIMCO believes the areas of  investigation  have included  AIMCO's
miscalculated   monthly  net  rental  income  figures  in  third  quarter  2003,
forecasted  guidance,  accounts  payable,  rent  concessions,   vendor  rebates,
capitalization of payroll and certain other costs, tax credit transactions,  and
tender offers for limited  partnership  interests.  AIMCO is cooperating  fully.
AIMCO is not able to predict when the investigation will be resolved. AIMCO does
not believe that the ultimate outcome will have a material adverse effect on its
consolidated  financial  condition  or results  of  operations.  Similarly,  the
General Partner does not believe that the ultimate  outcome will have a material
adverse effect on the Partnership's  consolidated financial condition or results
of operations.

<PAGE>

ITEM 2.     MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OR PLAN OF OPERATION

The matters discussed in this report contain certain forward-looking statements,
including, without limitation, statements regarding future financial performance
and the effect of government  regulations.  Actual results may differ materially
from those described in the forward-looking statements and will be affected by a
variety of risks and factors including,  without limitation:  national and local
economic  conditions;  the terms of  governmental  regulations  that  affect the
Registrant and interpretations of those regulations; the competitive environment
in which the Registrant operates;  financing risks, including the risk that cash
flows from operations may be insufficient to meet required payments of principal
and interest;  real estate risks, including variations of real estate values and
the general  economic  climate in local markets and  competition  for tenants in
such markets;  litigation,  including  costs  associated  with  prosecuting  and
defending  claims  and  any  adverse   outcomes,   and  possible   environmental
liabilities.   Readers  should  carefully  review  the  Registrant's   financial
statements and the notes thereto,  as well as the risk factors  described in the
documents  the  Registrant  files  from  time to time  with the  Securities  and
Exchange Commission.

The Partnership's  investment properties consist of two apartment complexes. The
following  table sets forth the average  occupancy of the properties for each of
the six month periods ended June 30, 2005 and 2004:

                                                   Average Occupancy
      Property                                      2005       2004

      Ventura Landing Apartments (1)                96%        93%
        Orlando, Florida

      Village Green Apartments (2)                  97%        91%
        Altamonte Springs, Florida

(1)   The  General  Partner  attributes  the  increase in  occupancy  at Ventura
      Landing Apartments to improved economic conditions in the Orlando area.

(2)   The General Partner  attributes the increase in occupancy at Village Green
      Apartments to market growth in the Altamonte Springs area.

The  Partnership's  financial  results depend upon a number of factors including
the  ability to attract  and  maintain  tenants  at the  investment  properties,
interest  rates on mortgage  loans,  costs  incurred  to operate the  investment
properties,  general  economic  conditions  and weather.  As part of the ongoing
business plan of the Partnership, the General Partner monitors the rental market
environment of its investment properties to assess the feasibility of increasing
rents, maintaining or increasing occupancy levels and protecting the Partnership
from increases in expenses.  As part of this plan, the General Partner  attempts
to protect the  Partnership  from the burden of  inflation-related  increases in
expenses by increasing  rents and  maintaining a high overall  occupancy  level.
However,  the  General  Partner  may use  rental  concessions  and  rental  rate
reductions  to offset  softening  market  conditions;  accordingly,  there is no
guarantee that the General Partner will be able to sustain such a plan. Further,
a number of factors that are outside the control of the Partnership  such as the
local  economic  climate and  weather can  adversely  or  positively  affect the
Partnership's financial results.

Results of Operations

The  Partnership's  net income for the three and six months  ended June 30, 2005
was  approximately  $93,000 and $71,000,  respectively,  compared to net loss of
approximately  $114,000 and $203,000 for the three and six months ended June 30,
2004, respectively. The increase in net income for both the three and six months
ended June 30, 2005 is  primarily  due to an increase  in total  revenues  and a
decrease in total  expenses.  The increase in total  revenues for both the three
and six months  ended June 30,  2005 is due to  increases  in rental  income and
casualty  gain (see  below),  partially  offset by a decrease  in other  income.
Rental  income  increased  for both the three and six months ended June 30, 2005
due to  increases  in  occupancy  and average  rental rates and reduced bad debt
expense  at  both  of the  Partnership's  investment  properties.  Other  income
decreased for both the three and six months ended June 30, 2005 primarily due to
decreases  in lease  cancellation  fees  and late  charges  at  Ventura  Landing
Apartments and laundry income at both properties.

In August and September  2004,  Hurricanes  Charley,  Frances and Jeanne damaged
Ventura  Landing  Apartments.  The property  incurred  damages of  approximately
$266,000.  During  the three  and six  months  ended  June 30,  2005,  insurance
proceeds of  approximately  $94,000  have been  received to cover  damage to the
property. After writing off the fully depreciated cost of the damaged asset, the
Partnership  recognized a casualty gain of  approximately  $94,000 for the three
and six months ended June 30, 2005.

In December 2004,  Village Green Apartments  experienced damage of approximately
$22,000 from a laundry room fire. During the three and six months ended June 30,
2005, the Partnership  received insurance  proceeds of approximately  $14,000 to
cover damage to the property.  After writing off the  undepreciated  cost of the
damaged  asset,  the  Partnership  recognized a casualty  gain of  approximately
$12,000 for the three and six months ended June 30, 2005.

The  decrease in total  expenses for the three months ended June 30, 2005 is due
to a decrease in operating  expenses,  partially offset by increases in interest
and general and administrative expenses.  Depreciation and property tax expenses
remained  relatively  constant for the three  months ended June 30, 2005.  Total
expenses remained  relatively constant for the six months ended June 30, 2005 as
increases in depreciation,  interest,  and general and  administrative  expenses
were offset by a decrease in operating  expenses.  Property tax expense remained
relatively  constant  for the six months  ended June 30,  2005.  The decrease in
operating expenses for the three and six months ended June 30, 2005 is primarily
due to decreases in contract maintenance and advertising expenses at both of the
Partnership's  investment  properties,  partially offset by increases in payroll
related expenses at Village Green Apartments, telephone sales at Ventura Landing
Apartments, management fees as a result of the increase in rental income at both
properties, and clean up costs associated with the 2004 hurricane damage at both
properties.  The  increase  in  interest  expense  for  both  periods  is due to
increases in interest on advances  from an affiliate of the General  Partner and
interest on unpaid management  reimbursements to the General Partner,  partially
offset by scheduled  principal  payments made on the mortgages  encumbering  the
Partnership's  investment properties,  which reduced the carrying balance of the
loans.  The increase in  depreciation  expense for the six months ended June 30,
2005 is due to property  improvements  and  replacements  placed into service at
Ventura  Landing  Apartments  during the past  twelve  months.  The  increase in
general and administrative  expenses for the three months ended June 30, 2005 is
primarily  due to an  increase  in  professional  expenses  associated  with the
administration of the Partnership. General and administrative expenses increased
for the six months ended June 30, 2005  primarily due to increases in management
reimbursements to the General Partner as allowed under the Partnership Agreement
and professional expenses associated with the administration of the Partnership.
Also  included  in general  and  administrative  expenses  for the three and six
months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004 are costs  associated with the quarterly and
annual  communications  with  investors and  regulatory  agencies and the annual
audit required by the Partnership Agreement.

In September 2004,  Village Green Apartments  experienced  damage from Hurricane
Frances. During the six months ended June 30, 2005, the Partnership recognized a
casualty gain of approximately  $5,000 due to a change in the estimated building
damages at the property, which is reflected in operating expense.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

At June 30, 2005, the Partnership had cash and cash equivalents of approximately
$99,000,  compared to  approximately  $44,000 at June 30, 2004.  The increase in
cash and cash equivalents of approximately  $16,000,  from December 31, 2004, is
due to  approximately  $287,000 of cash  provided by  operating  activities  and
approximately  $62,000 of cash provided by financing activities partially offset
by  approximately  $333,000 of cash used in investing  activities.  Cash used in
investing  activities  consisted  of  property  improvements  and  replacements,
partially  offset by insurance  proceeds  received.  Cash  provided by financing
activities  consisted  of advances  received  from an  affiliate  of the General
Partner,  partially  offset  by  payments  of  principal  made on the  mortgages
encumbering the Partnership's investment properties. The Partnership invests its
working capital reserves in interest bearing accounts.

The sufficiency of existing  liquid assets to meet future  liquidity and capital
expenditure   requirements   is  directly   related  to  the  level  of  capital
expenditures  required at the  properties  to  adequately  maintain the physical
assets and other  operating needs of the Partnership and to comply with Federal,
state, and local legal and regulatory requirements. The General Partner monitors
developments in the area of legal and regulatory  compliance.  For example,  the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 mandates or suggests  additional  compliance measures
with regard to governance,  disclosure, audit and other areas. In light of these
changes,  the Partnership  expects that it will incur higher expenses related to
compliance.   Capital   improvements  planned  for  each  of  the  Partnership's
properties are detailed below.

Village Green Apartments

During  the  six  months  ended  June  30,  2005,  the   Partnership   completed
approximately  $94,000 of capital  improvements  at  Village  Green  Apartments,
consisting  primarily of furniture and air conditioning  unit upgrades and floor
covering  replacement.  These  improvements  were  funded  from  operations  and
insurance proceeds.  The Partnership regularly evaluates the capital improvement
needs of the property.  While the  Partnership  has no material  commitments for
property improvements and replacements, certain routine capital expenditures are
anticipated  during 2005. Such capital  expenditures will depend on the physical
condition  of the  property as well as  anticipated  cash flow  generated by the
property.

Ventura Landing Apartments

During  the  six  months  ended  June  30,  2005,  the   Partnership   completed
approximately  $347,000 of capital  improvements at Ventura Landing  Apartments,
consisting  primarily  of plumbing  upgrades,  sewer  upgrades,  floor  covering
replacement and construction related to the hurricane damage. These improvements
were  funded from  operations  and  advances  from an  affiliate  of the General
Partner.  The Partnership  regularly  evaluates the capital improvement needs of
the property.  While the  Partnership  has no material  commitments for property
improvements  and  replacements,   certain  routine  capital   expenditures  are
anticipated  during 2005. Such capital  expenditures will depend on the physical
condition  of the  property as well as  anticipated  cash flow  generated by the
property.

Capital expenditures will be incurred only if cash is available from operations,
Partnership reserves, or advances from affiliates of the General Partner. To the
extent that capital improvements are completed, the Partnership's  distributable
cash flow, if any, may be adversely affected at least in the short term.

The  Partnership's  assets are thought to be sufficient for any near-term  needs
(exclusive  of  capital   improvements)   of  the   Partnership.   The  mortgage
indebtedness    encumbering   the   Partnership's   investment   properties   of
approximately  $7,035,000  requires  monthly  payments of principal and interest
until the loans mature between July and August 2021, at which time the loans are
scheduled to be fully amortized.

There were no  distributions  made to the  partners  during the six months ended
June 30, 2005 or 2004.  Future cash  distributions  will depend on the levels of
net cash generated from  operations,  property  sales and/or  refinancings.  The
Partnership's cash available for distribution is reviewed on a monthly basis. In
light of the amounts accrued and payable to affiliates of the General Partner at
June 30, 2005,  there can be no assurance  that the  Partnership  will  generate
sufficient  funds  from  operations  after  capital  expenditures  to permit any
distributions to its partners during 2005 or subsequent periods.

Other

In addition to its indirect  ownership of the general  partner  interests in the
Partnership,  AIMCO and its affiliates owned 84,045.50 limited partnership units
(the "Units") in the Partnership representing 53.00% of the outstanding Units at
June 30, 2005. A number of these Units were  acquired  pursuant to tender offers
made by AIMCO or its  affiliates.  It is possible  that AIMCO or its  affiliates
will acquire  additional units in exchange for cash or a combination of cash and
units in AIMCO  Properties,  L.P., the operating  partnership  of AIMCO,  either
through  private  purchases  or  tender  offers.  Pursuant  to  the  Partnership
Agreement,  unitholders  holding a majority  of the Units are  entitled  to take
action with  respect to a variety of matters that  include,  but are not limited
to,  voting on certain  amendments  to the  Partnership  Agreement and voting to
remove  the  General  Partner.  As a result  of its  ownership  of 53.00% of the
outstanding  Units,  AIMCO is in a position to control all voting decisions with
respect to the  Partnership.  Although the General Partner owes fiduciary duties
to the  limited  partners of the  Partnership,  the  General  Partner  also owes
fiduciary duties to AIMCO as its sole  stockholder.  As a result,  the duties of
the General  Partner,  as general  partner,  to the  Partnership and its limited
partners may come into conflict with the duties of the General  Partner to AIMCO
as its sole stockholder.

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

The consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States which require the Partnership
to  make  estimates  and  assumptions.  The  Partnership  believes  that  of its
significant  accounting  policies,  the following may involve a higher degree of
judgment and complexity.

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets

Investment  properties  are  recorded at cost,  less  accumulated  depreciation,
unless  considered  impaired.  If  events  or  circumstances  indicate  that the
carrying  amount of a property may be  impaired,  the  Partnership  will make an
assessment of its  recoverability  by estimating  the  undiscounted  future cash
flows,  excluding  interest  charges,  of the property.  If the carrying  amount
exceeds the aggregate  future cash flows,  the  Partnership  would  recognize an
impairment  loss to the extent the carrying amount exceeds the fair value of the
property.

Real  property  investments  are  subject  to varying  degrees of risk.  Several
factors  may  adversely  affect  the  economic  performance  and  value  of  the
Partnership's investment properties.  These factors include, but are not limited
to,  changes  in the  national,  regional  and  local  economic  climate;  local
conditions,  such as an oversupply of multifamily  properties;  competition from
other available  multifamily property owners and changes in market rental rates.
Any adverse changes in these factors could cause impairment of the Partnership's
assets.

Revenue Recognition

The Partnership generally leases apartment units for twelve-month terms or less.
The Partnership will offer rental concessions during particularly slow months or
in response  to heavy  competition  from other  similar  complexes  in the area.
Rental income attributable to leases, net of any concessions, is recognized on a
straight-line  basis over the term of the lease.  The Partnership  evaluates all
accounts  receivable  from  residents and  establishes  an allowance,  after the
application of security deposits,  for accounts greater than 30 days past due on
current tenants and all receivables due from former tenants.

ITEM 3.     CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

(a) Disclosure Controls and Procedures.  The Partnership's management,  with the
participation of the principal executive officer and principal financial officer
of the General Partner,  who are the equivalent of the  Partnership's  principal
executive officer and principal financial officer,  respectively,  has evaluated
the  effectiveness of the Partnership's  disclosure  controls and procedures (as
such term is defined  in Rules  13a-15(e)  and  15d-15(e)  under the  Securities
Exchange  Act of 1934,  as amended  (the  "Exchange  Act")) as of the end of the
period covered by this report. Based on such evaluation, the principal executive
officer and  principal  financial  officer of the General  Partner,  who are the
equivalent  of the  Partnership's  principal  executive  officer  and  principal
financial  officer,  respectively,  have  concluded  that, as of the end of such
period, the Partnership's disclosure controls and procedures are effective.

(b) Internal Control Over Financial  Reporting.  There have not been any changes
in the Partnership's  internal control over financial reporting (as such term is
defined in Rules  13a-15(f)  and  15d-15(f)  under the Exchange  Act) during the
fiscal quarter to which this report relates that have  materially  affected,  or
are reasonably likely to materially affect,  the Partnership's  internal control
over financial reporting.


<PAGE>


                           PART II - OTHER INFORMATION


ITEM 1.     LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

In March 1998, several putative unit holders of limited partnership units of the
Partnership  commenced an action  entitled  Rosalie  Nuanes,  et al. v. Insignia
Financial Group, Inc., et al. (the "Nuanes action") in the Superior Court of the
State of  California  for the  County  of San  Mateo.  The  plaintiffs  named as
defendants,  among others,  the Partnership,  its General Partner and several of
their affiliated  partnerships and corporate  entities.  The action purported to
assert  claims on behalf of a class of  limited  partners  and  derivatively  on
behalf of a number of limited partnerships  (including the Partnership) that are
named as nominal defendants, challenging, among other things, the acquisition of
interests in certain General Partner entities by Insignia  Financial Group, Inc.
("Insignia") and entities that were, at one time,  affiliates of Insignia;  past
tender offers by the Insignia  affiliates to acquire limited  partnership units;
management of the  partnerships  by the Insignia  affiliates;  and the series of
transactions  which  closed on October 1, 1998 and  February  26,  1999  whereby
Insignia and Insignia  Properties Trust,  respectively,  were merged into AIMCO.
The plaintiffs sought monetary damages and equitable relief,  including judicial
dissolution of the Partnership. In addition, during the third quarter of 2001, a
complaint captioned Heller v. Insignia Financial Group (the "Heller action") was
filed against the same  defendants  that are named in the Nuanes  action.  On or
about August 6, 2001,  plaintiffs  filed a first amended  complaint.  The Heller
action was brought as a purported  derivative  action,  and asserted claims for,
among other things,  breach of fiduciary duty, unfair  competition,  conversion,
unjust  enrichment,  and judicial  dissolution.  On January 28, 2002,  the trial
court granted  defendants  motion to strike the  complaint.  Plaintiffs  took an
appeal from this order.

On January 8, 2003,  the parties filed a  Stipulation  of Settlement in proposed
settlement of the Nuanes  action and the Heller  action.  On June 13, 2003,  the
court granted final approval of the settlement and entered  judgment in both the
Nuanes and Heller actions. On August 12, 2003, an objector ("Objector") filed an
appeal (the "Appeal")  seeking to vacate and/or reverse the order  approving the
settlement and entering judgment  thereto.  On May 4, 2004, the Objector filed a
second appeal  challenging  the court's use of a referee and its order requiring
Objector to pay those fees.

On March 21, 2005, the Court of Appeals issued opinions in both pending appeals.
With regard to the settlement and judgment entered thereto, the Court of Appeals
vacated  the trial  court's  order and  remanded  to the trial court for further
findings  on the basis that the "state of the record is  insufficient  to permit
meaningful  appellate  review".  With regard to the second appeal,  the Court of
Appeals  reversed the order requiring the Objector to pay referee fees. On April
26, 2005,  the Court of Appeals  lifted the stay of a pending  appeal related to
the Heller action and the trial court's order striking the  complaint.  On April
28, 2005, the Objector  filed a Petition for Review with the California  Supreme
Court in connection with the opinion vacating the order approving settlement and
remanding for further findings.  On June 10, 2005, the California  Supreme Court
denied  Objector's  Petition for Review and the Court of Appeals sent the matter
back to the trial court on June 21,  2005.  The parties  intend to ask the trial
court to make further findings in connection with settlement consistent with the
Court of Appeal's  remand order.  With respect to the related Heller appeal,  on
July 28, 2005,  the Court of Appeals  reversed the trial court's order  striking
the first amended complaint.

The  General  Partner  does not  anticipate  that any costs to the  Partnership,
whether legal or settlement costs,  associated with these cases will be material
to the Partnership's overall operations.

As previously disclosed,  AIMCO Properties L.P. and NHP Management Company, both
affiliates of the General  Partner,  are  defendants in a lawsuit  alleging that
they willfully  violate the Fair Labor  Standards Act ("FLSA") by failing to pay
maintenance  workers  overtime for all hours worked in excess of forty per week.
The complaint  attempts to bring a collective action under the FLSA and seeks to
certify state subclasses in California,  Maryland, and the District of Columbia.
Specifically,  the  plaintiffs  contend  that  AIMCO  Properties  L.P.  and  NHP
Management Company failed to compensate  maintenance  workers for time that they
were  required  to be  "on-call".  Additionally,  the  complaint  alleges  AIMCO
Properties  L.P. and NHP  Management  Company  failed to comply with the FLSA in
compensating maintenance workers for time that they worked in excess of 40 hours
in a week. On June 23, 2005 the Court  conditionally  certified  the  collective
action  on both the  on-call  and  overtime  issues.  The  Court  ruling  allows
plaintiffs  to  provide  notice  of the  collective  action  to  all  non-exempt
maintenance  workers from August 7, 2000 through the  present.  Those  employees
will have the  opportunity to opt-in to the collective  action.  Defendants have
asked the Court to  reconsider  its  ruling or in the  alternative  certify  the
ruling for appeal on that issue. After the notice goes out, defendants will have
the  opportunity to move to decertify the collective  action.  The Court further
denied plaintiffs' Motion for Certification of the state subclass.  Although the
outcome of any litigation is uncertain, AIMCO Properties,  L.P. does not believe
that  the  ultimate   outcome  will  have  a  material  adverse  effect  on  its
consolidated  financial  condition  or results  of  operations.  Similarly,  the
General Partner does not believe that the ultimate  outcome will have a material
adverse effect on the Partnership's  consolidated financial condition or results
of operations.

ITEM 5.     OTHER INFORMATION

            None.

ITEM 6.     EXHIBITS

            See Exhibit Index.



<PAGE>


                                   SIGNATURES



In accordance with the  requirements of the Exchange Act, the Registrant  caused
this  report to be  signed on its  behalf  by the  undersigned,  thereunto  duly
authorized.


                                    CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL PROPERTIES III


                                    By:   CONCAP EQUITIES, INC.
                                          General Partner


                                    By:   /s/Martha L. Long
                                          Martha L. Long
                                          Senior Vice President


                                    By:   /s/Stephen B. Waters
                                           Stephen B. Waters
                                           Vice President


                                    Date: August 15, 2005


<PAGE>


                        CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL PARTNERS III

                                  EXHIBIT INDEX

Exhibit Number


3.1         Certificate of Limited Partnership, as amended to date (Exhibit 3 to
            the  Registrant's  Annual  Report  on Form  10-K for the year  ended
            December 31, 1991, is incorporated herein by reference).

3.2         Partnership   Agreement  dated  May  22,  1980  is  incorporated  by
            reference to Exhibit A to the Prospectus of the  Registration  dated
            August 17, 1981 as filed with the Commission pursuant to Rule 424(b)
            under the Act.

10.51       Multifamily  Note dated June 27, 2001 between  Consolidated  Capital
            Properties  III,  a  California   limited   partnership,   and  GMAC
            Commercial Mortgage  Corporation.  (Incorporated by reference to the
            Quarterly  Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly period ended June
            30, 2001).

10.52       Multifamily  Note dated July 23, 2001 between  ConCap  Village Green
            Associates,  Ltd., a Texas limited partnership,  and GMAC Commercial
            Mortgage  Corporation.  (Incorporated  by reference to the Quarterly
            Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2001).

31.1        Certification  of equivalent of Chief Executive  Officer pursuant to
            Securities  Exchange  Act  Rules  13a-14(a)/15d-14(a),   as  Adopted
            Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

31.2        Certification  of equivalent of Chief Financial  Officer pursuant to
            Securities  Exchange  Act  Rules  13a-14(a)/15d-14(a),   as  Adopted
            Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

32.1        Certification  of the equivalent of the Chief Executive  Officer and
            Chief  Financial  Officer  Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section  1350,  as
            Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.


<PAGE>



Exhibit 31.1


                                  CERTIFICATION


I, Martha L. Long, certify that:


1.    I have  reviewed  this  quarterly  report on Form  10-QSB of  Consolidated
      Capital Properties III;

2.    Based on my knowledge,  this report does not contain any untrue  statement
      of a material fact or omit to state a material fact  necessary to make the
      statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
      were made,  not  misleading  with  respect  to the period  covered by this
      report;

3.    Based on my  knowledge,  the  financial  statements,  and other  financial
      information  included  in this  report,  fairly  present  in all  material
      respects the financial condition,  results of operations and cash flows of
      the small  business  issuer as of, and for, the periods  presented in this
      report;

4.    The  small  business  issuer's  other  certifying  officer(s)  and  I  are
      responsible  for  establishing  and  maintaining  disclosure  controls and
      procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules  13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for
      the small business issuer and have:

      (a)   Designed such  disclosure  controls and  procedures,  or caused such
            disclosure   controls  and  procedures  to  be  designed  under  our
            supervision,  to ensure that  material  information  relating to the
            small business issuer, including its consolidated  subsidiaries,  is
            made  known to us by  others  within  those  entities,  particularly
            during the period in which this report is being prepared;

      (b)   Evaluated  the   effectiveness   of  the  small  business   issuer's
            disclosure  controls and procedures and presented in this report our
            conclusions about the  effectiveness of the disclosure  controls and
            procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based
            on such evaluation; and

      (c)   Disclosed in this report any change in the small  business  issuer's
            internal  control over financial  reporting that occurred during the
            small  business  issuer's  most  recent  fiscal  quarter  (the small
            business  issuer's  fourth  fiscal  quarter in the case of an annual
            report) that has  materially  affected,  or is reasonably  likely to
            materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over
            financial reporting; and

 5.   The  small  business  issuer's  other  certifying  officer(s)  and I  have
      disclosed,  based on our most recent  evaluation of internal  control over
      financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit
      committee of the small  business  issuer's  board of directors (or persons
      performing the equivalent functions):

      (a)   All significant  deficiencies and material  weaknesses in the design
            or operation of internal control over financial  reporting which are
            reasonably  likely to adversely  affect the small business  issuer's
            ability  to  record,   process,   summarize  and  report   financial
            information; and


      (b)   Any fraud,  whether or not  material,  that  involves  management or
            other  employees who have a significant  role in the small  business
            issuer's internal control over financial reporting.


Date: August 15, 2005

                                    /s/Martha L. Long
                                    Martha L. Long
                                    Senior Vice President of ConCap  Equities,
                                    Inc.,  equivalent  of the chief  executive
                                    officer of the Partnership


<PAGE>



Exhibit 31.2


                                  CERTIFICATION


I, Stephen B. Waters, certify that:


1.    I have  reviewed  this  quarterly  report on Form  10-QSB of  Consolidated
      Capital Properties III;

2.    Based on my knowledge,  this report does not contain any untrue  statement
      of a material fact or omit to state a material fact  necessary to make the
      statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
      were made,  not  misleading  with  respect  to the period  covered by this
      report;

3.    Based on my  knowledge,  the  financial  statements,  and other  financial
      information  included  in this  report,  fairly  present  in all  material
      respects the financial condition,  results of operations and cash flows of
      the small  business  issuer as of, and for, the periods  presented in this
      report;

4.    The  small  business  issuer's  other  certifying  officer(s)  and  I  are
      responsible  for  establishing  and  maintaining  disclosure  controls and
      procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules  13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for
      the small business issuer and have:

      (a)   Designed such  disclosure  controls and  procedures,  or caused such
            disclosure   controls  and  procedures  to  be  designed  under  our
            supervision,  to ensure that  material  information  relating to the
            small business issuer, including its consolidated  subsidiaries,  is
            made  known to us by  others  within  those  entities,  particularly
            during the period in which this report is being prepared;

      (b)   Evaluated  the   effectiveness   of  the  small  business   issuer's
            disclosure  controls and procedures and presented in this report our
            conclusions about the  effectiveness of the disclosure  controls and
            procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based
            on such evaluation; and

      (c)   Disclosed in this report any change in the small  business  issuer's
            internal  control over financial  reporting that occurred during the
            small  business  issuer's  most  recent  fiscal  quarter  (the small
            business  issuer's  fourth  fiscal  quarter in the case of an annual
            report) that has  materially  affected,  or is reasonably  likely to
            materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over
            financial reporting; and

5.    The  small  business  issuer's  other  certifying  officer(s)  and I  have
      disclosed,  based on our most recent  evaluation of internal  control over
      financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit
      committee of the small  business  issuer's  board of directors (or persons
      performing the equivalent functions):

      (a)   All significant  deficiencies and material  weaknesses in the design
            or operation of internal control over financial  reporting which are
            reasonably  likely to adversely  affect the small business  issuer's
            ability  to  record,   process,   summarize  and  report   financial
            information; and

      (b)   Any fraud,  whether or not  material,  that  involves  management or
            other  employees who have a significant  role in the small  business
            issuer's internal control over financial reporting.

Date: August 15, 2005

                                    /s/Stephen B. Waters
                                    Stephen B. Waters
                                    Vice President of ConCap Equities, Inc.,
                                    equivalent of the chief financial officer
                                    of the Partnership


<PAGE>


Exhibit 32.1


                          Certification of CEO and CFO
                       Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
                             As Adopted Pursuant to
                Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



In connection with the Quarterly  Report on Form 10-QSB of Consolidated  Capital
Properties III (the "Partnership"), for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2005
as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the
"Report"),  Martha L. Long, as the equivalent of the chief executive  officer of
the Partnership, and Stephen B. Waters, as the equivalent of the chief financial
officer of the Partnership, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350,  as adopted  pursuant  to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,
that, to the best of his knowledge:

      (1)   The Report fully complies with the  requirements of Section 13(a) or
            15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

      (2)   The  information  contained in the Report  fairly  presents,  in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Partnership.


                                           /s/Martha L. Long
                                    Name:  Martha L. Long
                                    Date:  August 15, 2005


                                           /s/Stephen B. Waters
                                    Name:  Stephen B. Waters
                                    Date:  August 15, 2005

This  certification is furnished with this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Partnership for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.