Back to GetFilings.com

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

Commission file number 0-22039

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND IX, L.P.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

CLASS A UNITS

(Title of Class)

CLASS B UNITS

(Title of Class)

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 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  ¨

Aggregate market value of the voting stock held by non-affiliates:             Not Applicable            

PART I

ITEM 1.    BUSINESS

General

Wells Real Estate Fund IX, L.P. (the “Partnership”) is a Georgia public limited partnership with Leo F. Wells, III and Wells Partners, L.P. (“Wells Partners”), a Georgia nonpublic limited partnership, serving as the General Partners. The Partnership was formed on August 15, 1994 for the purpose of acquiring, developing, constructing, owning, operating, improving, leasing, and otherwise managing income-producing commercial properties for investment purposes. Upon subscription, limited partners elect to have their unites treat their units as Class A units or Class B units. Limited partners shall have the right to change their prior elections to have some or all of their units treated as Class A or Class B units one time during each quarterly accounting period. Limited partners may vote to, among other things, (a) amend the partnership agreement, subject to certain limitations, (b) change the business purpose or investment objectives of the Partnership, and (c) add or remove a general partner. A majority vote on any of the above described matters will bind the Partnership without the concurrence of the General Partners. Each limited partnership unit has equal voting rights regardless of class.

On January 5, 1996, the Partnership commenced a public offering of up to $35,000,000 of limited partnership units pursuant to a Registration Statement filed on Form S-11 filed under the Securities Act of 1933. The Partnership commenced active operations on February 12, 1996 upon receiving and accepting subscriptions for 125,000 units and collecting aggregate gross offering proceeds of $2,500,000, thus allowing for the admission of New York and Pennsylvania investors in the Partnership. The offer terminated on December 30, 1996 at which time approximately 2,935,931 Class A units and 564,069 Class B units had been sold to 1,841 and 257 Class A and Class B Limited Partners, respectively, for total limited partner capital contributions of $35,000,000. As of December 31, 2002, the Partnership had paid a total of $1,400,000 in acquisition and advisory fees and acquisition expenses, and $5,254,700 in selling commissions and organization and offering expenses, and invested $13,289,359 in Fund VIII-IX Associates and invested $15,030,434 in Fund IX-X-XI-REIT Associates. The Partnership held net offering proceeds of $25,507 as of December 31, 2002, which is available for investment in properties.

Employees

The Partnership has no direct employees. The employees of Wells Capital, Inc, the general partner of Wells Partners and Wells Management Company, Inc., an affiliate of the General Partners, perform a full range of real estate services including leasing and property management, accounting, asset management and investor relations for the Partnership. See item 11—“Compensation of General Partners and Affiliates” for a summary of the compensation and fees paid to the General Partners and their affiliates during the year ended December 31, 2002.

Insurance

Wells Management Company, Inc. carries comprehensive liability and extended coverage with respect to all the properties owned by the Partnership through investments in the joint ventures described in Item 2. In the opinion of management, all such properties are adequately insured.

Competition

The Partnership will experience competition for tenants from owners and managers of competing projects which may include the General Partners and their affiliates. As a result, the Partnership may be required to provide free rent, reduced charges for tenant improvements, and other inducements, all of which may have an adverse impact on results of operations. At the time the Partnership elects to dispose of its properties,

2

the Partnership will also be in competition with sellers of similar properties to locate suitable purchasers for its properties.

ITEM 2.    PROPERTIES

The Partnership owns interests in all of its real estate assets through joint ventures with other Wells Real Estate Funds. As of December 31, 2002, the Partnership owned interests in the following 9 properties through the affiliated joint ventures listed below:

* Wells Operating Partnership, L.P. (“Wells OP”) is a Delaware limited partnership with Wells Real Estate Investment Trust, Inc. serving as its general partner; Wells REIT is a Maryland corporation that qualifies as a real estate investment trust.

Each of the aforementioned properties was acquired on an all cash basis. The partnership does not control the operations of the foregoing joint ventures; however, it does exercise significant influence. Accordingly, investments in joint ventures are recorded using the equity method of accounting.

3

As of December 31, 2002, the lease expirations schedule during each of the following ten years for all properties owned by the joint ventures described above, assuming no exercise of renewal options or termination rights, are summarized below:

The properties and joint ventures in which the Partnership owns an interest as of December 31, 2002 are further described below:

Fund VIII-IX Associates

On June 10, 1996, the Partnership and Wells Real Estate Fund VIII, L.P. (“Wells Fund VIII”), a Georgia public limited partnership, affiliated with the Partnership through common general partners, entered into a joint venture agreement known as Fund VIII-IX Associates. The investment objectives of Wells Fund VIII are substantially identical to those of the Partnership. As of December 31, 2002, the Partnership had contributed $13,289,358 for an approximately 45% equity interest in Fund VIII-IX Associates and Fund VIII had contributed $15,987,323 for an approximately 55% equity interest.

US Cellular Building

On June 17, 1996, Fund VIII-IX Associates purchased a 7.09 acres tract of real property in Madison, Dane County, Wisconsin for a total cost of $859,255, including closing costs. Construction was completed on a four-story office building containing approximately 101,727 rentable square feet. The land purchase and construction costs have been funded by capital contributions of $3,912,444 from the Partnership and $6,573,342 from Wells Fund VIII for a total cost of approximately $10,500,000.

In June 1997, US Cellular, a subsidiary of BellSouth Corporation, took occupancy of 76,276 rentable square feet, comprising approximately 75% of the building. The initial term of this lease is 9 years and 11 months beginning in June 1997, with the option to extend the initial term of the lease for two consecutive five-year periods. The annual base rent payable during the initial term is $902,418 during the first five

4

years and $1,016,822 during the last four years and 11 months of the initial term. The annual base rent for each extended term will be at the currently prevailing market rental rates. US Cellular is required to pay additional rent equal to its share of operating expenses during the lease term.

Commencing November 1, 2001, US Cellular exercised its right of first refusal to lease an additional 25,451 square feet of space vacated by American Family in October 2001. This addition increased their rentable floor area from 76,276 square feet to 101,727 square feet. As a result, US Cellular now occupies 100% of the building, and pays rent on the same terms and conditions of their original lease.

The average effective annual rental per square foot at the US Cellular Building was $12.76 for 2002, $12.47 for 2001, and $12.60 for 2000, 1999 and 1998.

AT&T-TX Building

On October 10, 1996, Fund VIII-IX Associates purchased a one-story office building containing approximately 40,000 rentable square feet, located on 4.864 acres of land in Farmer’s Branch, Dallas County, Texas for a purchase price of $4,450,000, excluding acquisition costs.

The funds used by Fund VIII-IX Associates to acquire the AT&T-TX Building were derived from capital contributions made by the Partnership and Wells Fund VIII totaling $2,236,530 and $2,238,170, respectively, for total contributions to Fund VIII-IX Associates with respect to this building of $4,474,700, including acquisition costs.

The AT&T-TX Building is leased to AT&T Wireless Texas for a period of fifteen years, with options to extend the lease for three consecutive five-year periods. The annual base rent is $430,001 during the first five years, $454,001 during the next five years and $482,001 during the last five years. The AT&T lease commenced on July 19, 1996 and was assigned by the seller to Fund VIII-IX Associates on October 10, 1996. Under this lease, AT&T Wireless Texas is responsible for the operating expenses and real estate taxes.

The average effective annual rental per square foot at the AT&T-TX Building is $11.39 for 2002, $11.48 for 2001, $11.38 for 2000 and 1999, and $11.49 for 1998.

Cirrus Logic Building

On February 20, 1997, Fund VIII-IX Associates acquired a 4.26-acre tract of real property in Broomfield, Colorado, located in Broomfield County in the Denver/Boulder metropolitan area on which a two-story office building containing approximately 49,460 rentable square feet was constructed, as part of the Interlocken Business Park, a 963-acre business development for advanced technology and research/development oriented companies. The purchase price paid for the Cirrus Logic Building was $7,072,000, including acquisition and closing costs of approximately $43,000. Construction of the Cirrus Logic building was substantially completed in March 1997 with Cirrus Logic, Inc. taking occupancy of the entire building. The funds used by Fund VIII-IX Associates to acquire the land and construct the Cirrus Logic Building were derived entirely from capital contributions made by the Partnership and Wells Fund VIII of approximately $3,532,275 and $3,555,495, respectively, for total capital contributions to Fund VIII-IX Associates of approximately $7,087,770.

The lease, as well as Cirrus Logic’s obligation to pay rent, commenced on March 17, 1997 when Cirrus Logic took occupancy of the building. The lease with Cirrus Logic provides for a term of 15 years and annual initial base rent payable of $677,755. The base annual rent will be increased by 10% beginning the sixth year of the lease and will be increased another 10% beginning the eleventh year of the lease. Cirrus

5

Logic has the option to renew the lease for two consecutive five-year periods. The base rent payable during any such extended term would be 95% of the then currently prevailing market rental rate for comparable office buildings in the Boulder County area.

Under its lease, Cirrus Logic is responsible for all utilities, cleaning, taxes, other operating expenses, and for maintaining property and liability insurance on the Cirrus Logic Building. Fund VIII-IX Associates shall maintain, for its own benefit, liability insurance for the Cirrus Logic Building as well as insurance for fire and vandalism.

The average effective annual rental per square foot at the Cirrus Logic Building was $14.67 for 2002 and $14.92 for 2001, 2000, 1999 and 1998.

Fund VIII-IX-REIT Associates

Quest Building

On January 10, 1997, Fund VIII-IX Associates acquired a two story office building containing approximately 65,006 rentable square feet on a 4.4 acre tract of land located at 15253 Bake Parkway, in the Irvine Spectrum planned business community in metropolitan Orange County, California. The total consideration paid for the building was $7,465,170, including acquisition and closing costs of approximately $272,000. The funds used by Fund VIII-IX Associates to acquire the Quest Building were derived entirely from capital contributions made by the Partnership and Wells Fund VIII of approximately $3,620,316 and $3,608,109, respectively, for total capital contributions to Fund VIII-IX Associates of approximately $7,228,425.

On February 18, 1999, Wells OP entered into a Rental Income Guaranty Agreement with Fund VIII-IX Associates, whereby Wells OP guaranteed Fund VIII-IX Associates with rental income on the Quest Building, previously leased to Matsushita Avionics, equal to at least the rental revenues and building expenses reimbursements that Fund VIII-IX Associates would have received over the remaining term of the original lease with Matsushita Avionics. Wells OP paid approximately $543,000 in rental income guaranty payments to Fund VIII-IX Associates through December 31, 2000, however, ceased making such payments upon Quest Software, Inc. taking occupancy on August 1, 2000.

On June 15, 2000, Fund VIII-IX-REIT Associates was formed between Wells OP and Fund VIII- IX Associates. On July 1, 2000, Fund VIII-IX Associates contributed its interest in the Quest Building to Fund VIII-IX-REIT Associates. As of December 31, 2002, the Partnership held an equity interest in Fund VIII-IX-REIT Associates of 38%.

Quest Software, Inc. (“Quest”) entered into a 42-month lease for the entire Quest Building and took occupancy occurred on August 1, 2000. Quest is a publicly traded corporation that provides software database management and disaster recovery services for its clients. Construction of tenant improvements required under the Quest lease cost approximately $1,231,000 and was funded through capital contributions made by Wells OP.

The average effective annual rental per square foot at the Quest building is $18.58 for 2002, $18.58 for 2001, $13.72 for 2000, $10.11 for 1999, and $10.32 for 1998.

Fund IX-X-XI-REIT Associates

On June 11, 1998, Wells Real Estate Fund IX L.P. (“Wells Fund IX), and Wells Real Estate Fund X, L.P. (“Wells Fund X”), Georgia public limited partnerships affiliated with the Partnership through common

6

general partners, entered into a joint venture agreement known as Fund IX-X Associates, which was subsequently amended, restated and renamed as Fund IX-X-XI-REIT Associates in order to admit the Partnership and Wells OP as joint venture partners.

Prior to amending and restating the joint venture agreement, Fund IX-X Associates acquired and owned the following three properties: (i) the Alstom Power-Knoxville Building, (ii) the Ohmeda Building, and (iii) the 360 Interlocken Building. On June 24, 1998, Fund IX-X-XI-REIT Associates purchased the Avaya Building, a one-story office building. On July 1, 1998, the Partnership contributed the Iomega Building, a single-story warehouse and office building with 108,250 rentable square feet, to Fund IX-X-XI-REIT Associates, which was recorded as a capital contribution. All of these properties are further described below.

As of December 31, 2002, the Partnership, Wells Fund X, Wells Fund XI, and Wells OP held equity interests in Fund IX-X-XI-REIT Associates of approximately 39%, 49%, 9%, and 3%, respectively.

Alstom Power-Knoxville Building

On March 20, 1997, Fund IX-X Associates began construction of the Alstom Power-Knoxville Building, a three-story office building containing approximately 84,404 rentable square feet located on a 5.62 acre tract of real property in Knoxville, Knox County, Tennessee. Land purchase and construction costs totaling $8,137,994 were funded by capital contributions of $4,221,973 from the Partnership and $3,916,021 from Wells Fund X.

Alstom Power, Inc. (“Alstom Power”), took occupancy of 57,831 rentable square feet in December 1997. The initial term of the lease term of 9 years and 11 months commenced as Alstom Power took occupancy. Alstom Power has the option to extend the initial term of its lease for two consecutive five-year periods. The annual base rent payable during the initial term is $646,250 during the first five years and $728,750 during the last four years and 11 months of the initial term. The annual base rent for each extended term will be assessed at the then currently prevailing market rental rates. In addition to the base rent, Alstom Power is required to pay additional rent equal to its share of operating expenses during the lease term.

Commencing December 1, 1999, Alstom Power Environmental exercised its right of first refusal to lease an additional 23,992 square feet of space, and executed the third amendment to its lease on May 19, 2000 to lease the remaining 2,581 rentable square feet on the second floor of the building. Thus, Alstom Power currently occupies 100% of the building and pays rent thereon according to the terms and conditions of their original lease.

The average effective annual rental per square foot at the Alstom Power-Knoxville Building was $13.67 for 2002, $13.83 for 2001, $14.05 for 2000, $11.77 for 1999, and $9.97 for 1998.

Ohmeda Building

On February 13, 1998, Fund IX-X Associates acquired the Ohmeda Building, a two story office building with approximately 106,750 rentable square feet located on a 15-acre tract of land located in Louisville, Boulder County, Colorado, for a gross purchase price of $10,325,000, plus acquisition and closing costs of approximately $36,000. Wells Fund IX and Wells Fund X contributed $3,460,192 and $6,900,878 towards the purchase of the Ohmeda Building, respectively.

The entire 106,750 rentable square feet of the Ohmeda Building is currently under a net lease with

7

Ohmeda, Inc., which was assigned to the Fund IX-X Associates upon acquisition. The Ohmeda Lease currently expires in January 2005, subject to (i) Ohmeda’s right to effect an early termination of the lease under the terms and conditions described below, and (ii) Ohmeda’s right to extend the lease for two additional five year periods of time at the then current market rental rates.

The monthly base rental payable under the lease is $83,710 through January 31, 2003; $87,891 from February 1, 2003 through January 31, 2004; and $92,250 from February 1, 2004 through January 31, 2005. Under the lease, Ohmeda is responsible for all utilities, taxes, insurance, and other operating costs with respect to the Ohmeda Building during the term of the lease. In addition, Ohmeda shall pay a $21,000 per year management fee to Fund IX-X-XI-REIT Associates, as landlord, for maintenance and administrative services of the Ohmeda Building. Fund IX-X-XI-REIT Associates is responsible for maintenance of the roof, exterior and structural walls, foundation, other structural members and floor slab, provided that the landlord’s obligation to make repairs specifically excludes items of cosmetic and routine maintenance such as the painting of walls.

The average effective annual rental per square foot at the Ohmeda Building was $9.64 for 2002 and $9.62 for 2001, 2000 and 1999, the first year of ownership.

360 Interlocken Building

On March 20, 1998 Fund IX-X Associates acquired the 360 Interlocken Building, a three-story multi-tenant office building containing approximately 51,974 rentable square feet located on a 5.1 acre tract of land in Broomfield, Broomfield County, Colorado for a gross purchase price of $8,275,000, plus acquisition and closing costs of approximately $42,000. This acquisition was funded by capital contributions from Wells Fund IX and Wells Fund X of $6,642,466 and $1,674,271, respectively.

The second and third floors of the 360 Interlocken Building are currently occupied by two major tenants. On the first floor, 2910 square feet are occupied by one tenant with several suites available for releasing on that floor.

The initial term of the GAIAM lease expired on March 31, 2002 and was renewed and extended through May 31, 2005. In connection therewith, GAIAM’s space was increased to include 19,013 square feet on the third floor and 4,923 square feet on the second floor. The annual rent for the remaining term of the lease is $574,464 per year with a 2% increase each lease year beginning June 1, 2003. The lease for ODS Technologies, L.P. for 12,223 square feet on the second floor, expiring on September 30, 2003, is subject to a renewal option for three years. All tenants in the 360 Interlocken Building are responsible for paying a pro-rata share of the increases in taxes, utilities, insurance, and other operating costs over the respective base year as defined in their leases.

Currently, Wells Management Company is actively pursuing prospective tenants to lease the vacant space at the 360 Interlocken Building on the first floor, which encompasses approximately 25% of the premises. Rental revenue reductions associated with the vacant space approximately $400,000 annually.

The average effective annual rental rate per square foot at the 360 Interlocken Building was $18.49 for 2002, $16.12 for 2001, $16.23 for 2000 and, $15.97 for 1999 and 1998.

8

Avaya Building

On May 30, 1997, Fund IX-X Associates entered into a purchase and sale agreement with Wells Development Corporation (“Wells Development”), an affiliate of the General Partners, for the acquisition and development of the Avaya Building, a one-story office building containing 57,186 net rentable square feet on 5.3 acres of land. On June 24, 1998, Fund IX-X-XI-REIT Associates purchased this property for $5,504,276, plus acquisition and closing costs of approximately $8,000. The purchase price was funded by capital contributions of $2,482,810 from the Partnership, $657,804 from Wells Fund IX, $950,392 from Wells Fund X, and $1,421,466 from Wells OP.

Avaya, a worldwide leader in telecommunications technology producing a variety of communication products, occupies the entire Avaya Building. The initial term of the lease is ten years commencing January 5, 1998. Avaya has the option to extend the initial term of the lease for two additional five-year periods. The annual base rent payable during the initial term is $508,383 during the first five years and $594,152 during the second five years of the lease term. The annual base rent payable for each extended term will be assessed at the then currently prevailing market rental rates. In addition to base rent, Avaya will be required to reimburse the landlord for its pro rata share of operating expenses during the lease term.

The average effective annual rental per square foot at the Avaya Building was $10.31 for 2002 and $10.19 for 2001, 2000, 1999, and 1998.

Iomega Building

On July 1, 1998, Wells Fund X contributed the Iomega Building, a single story warehouse and office building with 108,250 rentable square feet and located in Ogden, Utah to Fund IX-X-XI-REIT Associates, a capital contribution of $5,050,425, which represents the purchase price of $5,025,000, plus acquisition and closing costs of approximately $25,000, was originally paid by Wells Fund X on April 1, 1998.

The building is 100% occupied by Iomega Corporation with a ten year lease term that expires on July 31, 2006. The monthly base rent payable under the lease is $40,000 through November 12, 1999. Beginning on the 40th and 80th months of the lease term, the monthly base rent payable under the lease will be increased to reflect an amount equal to 100% of the increase in the Consumer Price Index (as defined in the lease) during the preceding 40 months, provided, however, that in no event shall the base rent be increased with respect to any one year by more than 6% or by less than 3% per annum, compounded annually, on a cumulative basis from the beginning of the lease term. The lease is an economic triple net lease, whereby the terms require the tenant to reimburse Fund IX-X-XI-REIT Associates for certain operating expenses, as defined in the lease, related to the building.

On March 22, 1999, Fund IX-X-XI-REIT Associates purchased a four-acre tract of vacant land adjacent to the Iomega Building for a gross purchase price of $212,000. The Partnership funded this acquisition and related land improvement costs and, accordingly, was credited with a capital contribution to Fund IX-X-XI-REIT Associates of $874,625. This site was developed as additional parking and a loading-dock area, including 400 new parking stalls and new site work for truck maneuver, and was completed on July 31, 1999. Iomega Corporation has extended its lease term through April 30, 2009 and, in connection therewith, will pay additional base rent of $113,700.

9

The average effective annual rental per square foot at the Iomega Building was $6.36 for 2002, $6.22 for 2001 and 2000 and $5.18 for 1999, the first year of ownership.

ITEM 3.    LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

There were no material pending legal proceedings or proceedings known to be contemplated by governmental authorities involving the Partnership during the fourth quarter of 2002.

ITEM 4.    SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS.

No matters were submitted to a vote of the Limited Partners during the fourth quarter of 2002.

(THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)

10

PART II

ITEM 5.    MARKET FOR PARTNERSHIP’S UNITS AND RELATED SECURITY HOLDER MATTERS.

The offering for sale of Units in the Partnership terminated on December 30, 1996, at which time the Partnership had 2,935,931 outstanding Class A Units held by a total of 1,841 Limited Partners and 564,069 outstanding Class B Units held by a total of 257 Limited Partners. As of February 28, 2003, the Partnership had 3,165,583 outstanding Class A Units held by a total of 1,920 Limited Partners and 334,417 outstanding Class B Units held by a total of 199 Limited Partners. The capital contribution per unit is $10.00. There is no established public trading market for the Partnership’s limited partnership units, and it is not anticipated that a public trading market for the units will develop. Under the Partnership Agreement, the General Partners have the right to prohibit transfers of units.

Because fiduciaries of retirement plans subject to ERISA are required to determine the value of the assets of such retirement plans on an annual basis, the General Partners are required under the Partnership Agreement to report estimated Unit values to the Limited Partners each year in the Partnership’s annual Form 10-K. The methodology to be utilized for determining such estimated Unit values under the Partnership Agreement requires the General Partners to estimate the amount a Unit holder would receive if the Partnership’s properties were sold at their estimated fair market values as of the end of the Partnership’s fiscal year and the proceeds therefrom (without reduction for selling expenses) were distributed to the Limited Partners in liquidation of the Partnership. Utilizing this methodology, the General Partners have estimated Unit valuations, based upon their estimates of property values as of December 31, 2002, to be approximately $8.90 per Class A Unit and $13.74 per Class B Unit, based upon market conditions existing in early December 2002. In connection with these estimated valuations, the General Partners obtained an opinion from David L. Beal Company, an independent MAI appraiser, to the effect that such estimates of value were reasonable; however, due to the inordinate expense involved in obtaining appraisals for all of the Partnership’s properties, no actual appraisals were obtained. Accordingly, these estimates should not be viewed as an accurate reflection of the values of the Limited Partners’ Units, what a Limited Partner might be able to sell his Units for, or the fair market value of the Partnership’s properties, nor do they represent the amount of net proceeds Limited Partners would receive if the Partnership’s properties were sold and the proceeds distributed in a liquidation of the Partnership. The valuations performed by the General Partners are estimates only, and are based a number of assumptions which may not be accurate or complete. In addition, property values are subject to change and could decline in the future. Further, as set forth above, no appraisals have or will be obtained. For these reasons, the estimated Unit valuations set forth above should not be used by or relied upon by investors, other than fiduciaries of retirement plans for limited ERISA reporting purposes, as any indication of the fair market value of their Units.

Class A Limited Partners are entitled to a distribution from Net Cash From Operations, as defined in the Partnership Agreement to mean cash flow, less adequate cash reserves for other obligations of the Partnership for which there is no provision, on a per Unit basis until they have received distributions in each fiscal year of the Partnership equal to 10% of their adjusted capital contributions. After this preference is satisfied, the General Partners will receive an amount of Net Cash From Operations equal to 10% of the total amount of Net Cash From Operations distributed. Thereafter, the Limited Partners holding Class A Units will receive 90% of Net Cash From Operations and the General Partners will receive 10%. No Net Cash From Operations will be distributed to Limited Partners holding Class B Units. Holders of Class A Units will, except in limited circumstances, be allocated none of the Partnership’s net loss, depreciation, and amortization deductions. These deductions will be allocated to the Class B Units,

11

until their capital account balances have been reduced to zero. No distributions have been made to the General Partners as of December 31, 2002.

Cash available for distribution to the Limited Partners is distributed on a quarterly basis unless Limited Partners select to have their cash distributed monthly. Cash distributions made to Class A Limited Partners during 2002 and 2003 were as follows:

The partnership’s distributions to holders of Class A Units for the year ended December 31, 2002 were paid in February 2003 from investment income and a return of capital. No cash distributions were paid to holders of Class B Units in 2002.

ITEM 6.    SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA.

The following sets forth a summary of the selected financial data as of and for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2002, 2001, 2000, 1999 and 1998:

(THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)

12

(a) Forward–Looking Statements

This report contains forward-looking statements, within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, including discussion and analysis of the financial condition of the Partnership, anticipated capital expenditures required to complete certain projects, amounts of cash distributions anticipated to be distributed to limited partners in the future and certain other matters. Readers of this report should be aware that there are various factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from any forward-looking statements made in this report including lease-up risks, inability to obtain new tenants upon expiration of existing leases, and the potential need to fund tenant improvements, leasing commissions or other capital expenditures or lease-up costs out of operating cash flow

(b) Results of Operations

Gross Revenues

Gross revenues of the Partnership were $1,652,807, $1,874,290, and $1,836,768 for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2001, and 2000, respectively. The 2002 decrease from 2001, and the 2001 decrease from 2000, resulted primarily from the corresponding changes in equity in income of joint ventures described below.

Equity In Income of Joint Ventures—Operations

Gross Revenues of Joint Ventures

Gross revenues of the joint ventures in which the Partnership holds an interest decreased in 2002, as compared to 2001, primarily due to a decrease in operating cost reimbursement billings to tenants of Cirrus Logic, US Cellular, and 360 Interlocken. GAIAM, a tenant at the 360

13

Interlocken Building renewed its lease in April 2002. Pursuant to the terms of the lease, the first lease year will be considered a base year; accordingly, operating reimbursement billings to the GAIAM Group will begin in 2003. Gross revenues remained relatively stable for 2001, as compared to 2000.

Expenses of Joint Ventures

The expenses of the joint ventures in which the Partnership holds an interest remained relatively stable for 2002, as compared to 2001 and 2000.

Expenses

Total expenses of the Partnership were $117,675, $105,816, and $78,092 for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2001, and 2000. The increases in expenses for 2002 from 2001, and for 2001 from 2000 resulted primarily from an increase in administrative salaries during the respective periods.

As a result, net income of the Partnership was $1,535,132, $1,768,474 and $1,758,676 for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2001 and 2000, respectively.

(c) Liquidity and Capital Resources

Cash Flows Used In Operating Activities

Net cash flows used in operating activities was $100,755, $101,573, and $66,145 for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2001, and 2000, respectively. Net cash flows used in operating activities remained relatively stable in 2002, as compared to 2001; whereas, the 2001 increase from 2000 resulted primarily from an increase in Tennessee Partnership franchise and excise taxes, which were incurred for the first time in 2001, and an increase in administrative salaries.

Cash Flows From Investing Activities

Net cash flows provided by investing activities was $2,977,377, $2,978,785, and $2,786,972 for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2001, and 2000, respectively, which is reflective of the income generated by the Partnership from its investments in joint ventures during the corresponding accounting periods; the Partnership receives distributions from joint ventures based on the cash generated during each immediately preceding quarterly accounting period.

Cash Flows Used in Financing Activities

Net cash flows used in financing activities was $2,850,620, $2,897,286, and $2,707,684 for 2002, 2001, and 2000, respectively. The changes in net cash flows used in financing activities resulted from the corresponding changes in cash generated by joint ventures described above.

Distributions

The Partnership made distributions to the limited partners holding Class A units of $0.89 per unit, $0.94 per unit and $0.91 per unit for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2001 and 2000, respectively. Such distributions have been made from net cash from operations and distributions received from investments in joint ventures. No distributions have been made to the limited partners holding Class B units or to the General Partners.

The General Partners anticipate that distributions per unit to limited partners holding Class A Units will continue in 2003. Distributions accrued for the fourth quarter of 2002 to the limited partners holding Class A Units were paid in February 2003. No cash distributions were made to limited partners holding Class B Units.

14

Capital Resources

The Partnership is an investment vehicle formed for the purpose of acquiring, owning and operating income-producing real properties and has invested all of its funds available for investment. Accordingly, it is unlikely that the Partnership will acquire interests in any additional properties. Other than those mentioned above, the General Partners are unaware of any specific need requiring capital resources.

(d) Related-Party Transactions

Management and Leasing Fees

Wells Management Company, Inc., an affiliate of the General Partners, receives compensation for supervising the management of the Partnership’s properties owned through joint ventures equal to: (a) 3% of the gross revenues for management and 3% of the gross revenues for leasing (aggregate maximum of 6%) plus a separate fee for the one-time initial lease-up of newly constructed properties in an amount not to exceed the fee customarily charged in arm’s-length transactions by others rendering similar services in the same geographic area for similar properties or (b) in the case of commercial properties which are leased on a long-term net basis (ten or more years), 1% of the gross revenues except for initial leasing fees equal to 3% of the gross revenues over the first five years of the lease term.

The Partnership incurred management and leasing fees and lease acquisition costs, at the joint venture level, of $188,593, $209,345 and $212,225, for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2001, and 2000, respectively.

Administration Reimbursements

Wells Capital, Inc. performs certain administrative services for the Partnership, such as accounting and other partnership administration, and incurs the related expenses. Such expenses are allocated among the various Wells Real Estate Funds based on time spent on each fund by individual administrative personnel. During 2002, 2001, and 2000 the Partnership reimbursed $41,931, $40,866, and $27,750, respectively, to Wells Capital, Inc. and its affiliates for these services. See Note 7 to the financial statements included with this report for a summary of the Partnership’s administrative costs.

Conflicts of Interests

The general partners are also general partners of other Wells Real Estate Funds. As such, there may exist conflicts of interest where the general partners in their capacity as general partners of other Wells Real Estate Funds may be in competition with the Partnership for tenants in similar geographic markets.

(e) Inflation

The real estate market has not been affected significantly by inflation in the past three years due to the relatively low inflation rate. However, there are provisions in the majority of tenant leases, which would protect the Partnership from the impact of inflation. These provisions include reimbursement billings for operating expense pass-through charges, real estate tax and insurance reimbursements on a per square foot basis, or in some cases, annual reimbursement of operating expenses above a certain per square foot allowance. However, due to the long-term nature of the leases, the leases may not re-set frequently enough to cover inflation.

15

(f) Application of Critical Accounting Policies

The Partnership’s accounting policies have been established to conform with GAAP. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to use judgment in the application of accounting policies, including making estimates and assumptions. These judgments affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the dates of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reporting periods. If management’s judgment or interpretation of the facts and circumstances relating to various transactions had been different, it is possible that different accounting policies would have been applied; thus, resulting in a different presentation of the financial statements. Additionally, other companies may utilize different estimates that may impact comparability of the Partnership’s results of operations to those of companies in similar businesses.

Below is a discussion of the accounting policies that management considers to be critical in that they may require complex judgment in their application or require estimates about matters that are inherently uncertain. Additional discussion of accounting policies that management considers to be significant, including further discussion of the critical accounting policies described below, is presented in Note 1 to the Partnership’s financial statements included in this report.

Investment in Real Estate Assets

The Partnership’s management is required to make subjective assessments as to the useful lives of its depreciable assets. The Partnership considers the period of future benefit of the asset to determine the appropriate useful lives. These assessments have a direct impact on net income. The estimated useful lives of the Partnership’s assets by class are as follows:

In the event that management uses inappropriate useful lives or methods for depreciation, the Partnership’s net income would be misstated.

Valuation of Real Estate Assets

Management continually monitors events and changes in circumstances that could indicate that the carrying amounts of the real estate assets in which the Partnership has an ownership interest, either directly or through investments in joint ventures, may not be recoverable. When indicators of potential impairment are present which indicate that the carrying amounts of real estate assets may not be recoverable, management assesses the recoverability of the real estate assets by determining whether the carrying value of the real estate assets will be recovered through the undiscounted future operating cash flows expected from the use of the asset and its eventual disposition. In the event that such expected undiscounted future cash flows do not exceed the carrying value, management adjusts the real estate assets to the fair value and recognizes an impairment loss. Management has determined that there has been no impairment in the carrying value of real estate assets held by the Partnership at December 31, 2002 and 2001.

16

Projections of expected future cash flows requires management to estimate future market rental income amounts subsequent to the expiration of current lease agreements, property operating expenses, discount rates, the number of months it takes to re-lease the property, and the number of years the property is held for investment. The use of inappropriate assumptions in the future cash flow analysis would result in an incorrect assessment of the property’s future cash flows and fair value, and could result in the overstatement of the carrying value of real estate assets held by the joint ventures and net income of the Partnership.

ITEM 7A.    QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

Since the Partnership does not borrow any money or make any foreign investments, it is not subject to risks relating to interest rate or foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations.

(THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)

17

PART II—OTHER INFORMATION

ITEM 8    FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA.

The Financial Statements of the Registrant and supplementary data are detailed under Item 15 (a) and filed as part of the report on the pages indicated.

ITEM 9.    CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE.

There were no disagreements with the Partnership’s independent public accountants during the two years ended December 31, 2002.

On May 16, 2002, the general partners dismissed Arthur Andersen LLP (Andersen) as the Partnership’s independent public accountants effective immediately.

Andersen’s reports on the financial statements of the Partnership for the year ended December 31, 2001 and 2000 did not contain an adverse opinion or disclaimer of opinion, nor were they qualified or modified as to uncertainty, audit scope or accounting principles.

During the years ended December 31, 2001 and 2000 and through the date of Andersen’s dismissal, there were no disagreements with Andersen on any matter of accounting principle or practice, financial statement disclosure, or auditing scope or procedure which, if not resolved to Andersen’s satisfaction, would have caused Andersen to make reference to the subject matter in connection with its report on the financial statements of the Partnership for such year and there were no reportable events as set forth in Item 304(a)(1)(v) of Regulation S-K.

On July 3, 2002, the Partnership engaged Ernst & Young, LLP (Ernst & Young) to audit the financial statements of the Partnership, effective immediately. During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2001, and through the date of appointment of Ernst & Young as the Partnership’s independent public accountants, the Partnership did not consult Ernst & Young with respect to the application of accounting principles to a specified transaction, either completed or proposed, or the type of audit opinion that might be rendered on the financial statements of the Partnership, or any other matters or reportable events as set forth in Items 304(a)(2)(i) and (ii) of Regulation S-K.

18

PART III

Item 10.    General Partners of the Partnership

Wells Partners, L.P. The sole General Partner of Wells Partners, L.P. is Wells Capital, Inc., a Georgia corporation (“Wells Capital”). The executive offices of Wells Capital, Inc. are located 6200 The Corners Parkway, Norcross, Georgia 30092.

Leo F. Wells, III. Mr. Wells is a resident of Atlanta, Georgia, is 59 years of age and holds a Bachelor of Business Administration Degree in Economics from the University of Georgia. Mr. Wells is the President, sole Director and sole shareholder of Wells Real Estate Funds, Inc., which is the parent company of Wells Capital, Wells & Associates, Inc., Wells Management Company, Inc. and Wells Investment Securities, Inc. Mr. Wells is the President and sole Director of Wells Capital, Inc. Mr. Wells is the President of Wells & Associates, Inc., a real estate brokerage and investment company formed in 1976 and incorporated in 1978, for which he serves as the principal broker. Mr. Wells is also currently the sole Director and President of Wells Management Company, Inc., a property management company he founded in 1983. In addition, Mr. Wells is the President and Chairman of the Board of Wells Investment Securities, Inc., Wells & Associates, Inc., and Wells Management Company, Inc., all of which are affiliates of the General Partners. From 1980 to February 1985, Mr. Wells served as Vice-President of Hill-Johnson, Inc., a Georgia corporation engaged in the construction business. From 1973 to 1976, he was associated with Sax Gaskin Real Estate Company, and from 1970 to 1973, he was a real estate salesman and property manager for Roy D. Warren & Company, an Atlanta real estate company.

Item 11.    Compensation of General Partners and Affiliates.

The following table summarizes the compensation and fees paid to the General Partners and their affiliates during the year ended December 31, 2002:

19

ITEM 12.    SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT

No Limited Partner is known by the Partnership to own beneficially more than 5% of the outstanding units of the Partnership.

Set forth below is the security ownership of management as of February 28, 2002.

No arrangements exist which would, upon execution thereof, result in a change in control of the Partnership.

ITEM 13.    CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS

The compensation and fees paid or to be paid by the Partnership to the General Partners and their affiliates in connection with the operation of the Partnership are as follows:

Interest in Partnership Cash Flow and Net Sales Proceeds

The General Partners will receive a subordinated participation in net cash flow from operations equal to 10% of net cash flow after the Limited Partners holding Class A Units have received preferential distributions equal to 10% of their adjusted capital accounts in each fiscal year. The General Partners will also receive a subordinated participation in net sales proceeds and net financing proceeds equal to 20% of residual proceeds available for distribution after Limited Partners holding Class A Units have received a return of their adjusted capital contributions plus a 10% cumulative return on their adjusted capital contributions and Limited Partners holding Class B Units have received a return of their adjusted capital contributions plus a 15% cumulative return on their adjusted capital contributions; provided, however, that in no event shall the General Partners receive in the aggregate in excess of 15% of net sales proceeds and net financing proceeds remaining after payments to Limited Partners from such proceeds of amounts equal to the sum of their adjusted capital contributions plus a 6% cumulative return on their adjusted capital contributions. The General Partners did not receive any distributions from net cash flow from operations or net sales proceeds for the year ended December 31, 2002.

Property Management and Leasing Fees.

Wells Management Company, Inc., an affiliate of the General Partners, receives compensation for supervising the management of the Partnership’s properties owned through joint ventures equal to the lesser of (A) (i) 3% of the gross revenues for management and 3% of the gross revenues for leasing (aggregate maximum of 6%) plus a separate one-time fee for initial rent-up or leasing-up of newly constructed properties in an amount not to exceed the fee customarily charged in arm’s-length transactions by others rendering similar services in the same geographic area for similar properties; and (ii) in the case of industrial and commercial properties which are leased on a long-term (ten or more years) net basis, 1% of the gross revenues except for initial leasing fees equal to 3% of the gross revenues over the first five years of the lease term; or (B) the amounts charged by unaffiliated persons rendering comparable services in the same geographic area.

20

Wells Management Company, Inc. has received $188,593 in property management and leasing fee compensation for services rendered during the year ended December 31, 2002.

Real Estate Commissions

In connection with the sale of Partnership properties, the General Partners or their affiliates may receive commissions not exceeding the lesser of (A) 50% of the commissions customarily charged by other brokers in arm’s-length transactions involving comparable properties in the same geographic area or (B) 3% of the gross sales price of the property, and provided that payments of such commissions will be made only after Limited Partners have received prior distributions totaling 100% of their capital contributions plus a 6% cumulative return on their adjusted capital contributions. No real estate commissions were paid to the General Partners or affiliates for the year ended December 31, 2002.

Expense Reimbursement

See Note 7 to the Partnership’s financial statements included with this report for a description of the administrative costs and reimbursements made to the General Partners and their affiliates during the year ended December 31, 2002.

ITEM 14.    CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

Within the 90 days prior to the date of this report, the Partnership carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of management of Wells Capital, Inc., the corporate General Partner of the Partnership, including the Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of the Partnership’s disclosure controls and procedures pursuant to Rule 13a – 14 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Based upon that evaluation, the Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer concluded that the Partnership’s disclosure controls and procedures were effective.

There were no significant changes in the Partnership’s internal controls or other factors that could significantly affect such controls subsequent to the date of their evaluation

ITEM 15.    EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES, AND REPORTS ON FORM 8-K.

21

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.

22

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Leo F. Wells, III, certify that:

23

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Douglas P. Williams, certify that:

24

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION TO BE FURNISHED WITH REPORTS FILED PURSUANT TO SECTION 15(d) OF THE ACT BY REGISTRARS, WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12 OF THE ACT.

No annual report or proxy material relating to an annual or other meeting of security holders has been sent to security holders.

25

EXHIBIT INDEX

TO

2002 FORM 10-K

OF

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND IX, L.P.

        The following documents are filed as exhibits to this report. Those exhibits previously filed and incorporated herein by reference are identified below by an asterisk. For each such asterisked exhibit, there is shown below the description of the previous filing. Exhibits which are not required for this report are omitted.

26

27

28

29

30

INDEX TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

F-1

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

The Partners

Wells Real Estate Fund IX, L.P.

We have audited the accompanying balance sheet of Wells Real Estate Fund IX, L.P. (a Georgia public limited partnership) as of December 31, 2002 and the related statements of income, partners’ capital, and cash flows for the year then ended. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Partnership’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit. The financial statements of Wells Real Estate Fund IX, L.P. as of December 31, 2001, and for the years ended December 31, 2001 and 2000 were audited by other auditors who have ceased operations and whose report dated January 25, 2002 expressed an unqualified opinion on those financial statements before the restatement adjustments and disclosures described in Note 1.

We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the 2002 financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Wells Real Estate Fund IX, L.P. at December 31, 2002 and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the year then ended in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States.

As discussed above, the financial statements of Wells Real Estate Fund IX, L.P. as of December 31, 2001 and for the years ended December 31, 2001 and 2000 were audited by other auditors who have ceased operations. As described in Note 1, these financial statements have been restated. We audited the adjustments described in Note 1 that were applied to restate the 2001 and 2000 financial statements. Our procedures included (a) agreeing the restatement adjustment amounts to the corresponding accounts maintained in the underlying records of the Partnership, and (b) testing the application of the adjustments to the previously reported amounts. In our opinion, such adjustments are appropriate and have been properly applied. Additionally, as described in Note 1, these financial statements have been revised to include disclosure of the number of Class A weighted average limited partner units outstanding for the years ended December 31, 2001 and 2000 and the number of Class B weighted average limited partner units outstanding for the year ended December 31, 2000 on the statements of income. Our procedures with respect to this disclosure included (a) recalculating the number of Class A weighted average limited partner units outstanding for the years ended December 31, 2001 and 2000 by dividing the net income amount allocated to Class A limited partners, previously reported on the statements of income in 2001 and 2000, by the amount of net income per weighted average Class A limited partner unit, previously reported on the statements of income in 2001 and 2000 and (b) dividing the net loss amount allocated to Class B limited partners, previously reported on the statement of income in 2000 by the amount of net loss per weighted average Class B limited partner unit, previously reported on the statement of income in 2000. In our opinion, the disclosure of the number of Class A weighted average limited partner units outstanding on the statements of income for the years ended December 31, 2001 and 2000 and the number of Class B weighted average limited partner units outstanding on the statement of income for the year ended December 31, 2000 are appropriate. However, we were not engaged to audit, review, or apply any procedures to the 2001 and 2000 financial statements of Wells Real Estate Fund IX, L.P. other than with respect to such restatement adjustments and disclosures and, accordingly, we do not express an opinion or any other form of assurance on the 2001 and 2000 financial statements taken as a whole.

/s/    ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Atlanta, Georgia

January 24, 2003

F-2

(The following is a copy of the audit report previously issued by Arthur Andersen LLP in connection with the financial statements of Wells Real Estate Fund IX, L.P. for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2001 included in the previous year’s Form 10-K filing. This audit report has not been reissued by Arthur Andersen in connection with the filing of this form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2002.)

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

To Wells Real Estate Fund IX, L.P.:

We have audited the accompanying balance sheets of WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND IX, L.P. (a Georgia public limited partnership) as of December 31, 2001 and 2000 and the related statements of income, partners’ capital, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2001. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Partnership’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Wells Real Estate Fund IX, L.P. as of December 31, 2001 and 2000 and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2001 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States.

ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP

Atlanta, Georgia

January 25, 2002

F-3

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND IX, L.P.

(a Georgia Public Limited Partnership)

BALANCE SHEETS

DECEMBER 31, 2002 AND 2001

See accompanying notes.

F-4

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND IX, L.P.

(a Georgia Public Limited Partnership)

STATEMENTS OF INCOME

FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2002, 2001, AND 2000

See accompanying notes.

F-5

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND IX, L.P.

(A Georgia Public Limited Partnership)

STATEMENTS OF PARTNERS’ CAPITAL

FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2002, 2001, AND 2000

See accompanying notes.

F-6

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND IX, L.P.

(A Georgia Public Limited Partnership)

STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2002, 2001, AND 2000