Back to GetFilings.com

Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-Q

(Mark One)

For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2005 or

For the transition period from                                  to                                 

Commission file number 0-22039

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND IX, L.P.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

(Former name, former address, and former fiscal year, if changed since last report)

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  ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).

Yes  ¨    No  x

Table of Contents

CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

Certain statements contained in this Form 10-Q of Wells Real Estate Fund IX, L.P. (the “Partnership”) other than historical facts may be considered forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Such statements include, in particular, statements about our plans, strategies, and prospects and are subject to certain risks and uncertainties, as well as known and unknown risks, which could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected or anticipated. Therefore, such statements are not intended to be a guarantee of our performance in future periods. Such forward-looking statements can generally be identified by our use of forward-looking terminology such as “may,” “will,” “expect,” “intend,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “believe,” “continue,” or other similar words. Specifically, among others, we consider statements concerning projections of future operating results and cash flows, our ability to meet future obligations, and the amount and timing of future distributions to limited partners to be forward-looking statements.

Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date that this report is filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Neither the Partnership nor the general partners make any representations or warranties (expressed or implied) about the accuracy of any such forward-looking statements. Actual results could differ materially from any forward-looking statements contained in this Form 10-Q, and we do not intend to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise.

Any such forward-looking statements are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors and are based on a number of assumptions involving judgments with respect to, among other things, future economic, competitive, and market conditions, all of which are difficult or impossible to predict accurately. To the extent that our assumptions differ from actual results, our ability to meet such forward-looking statements, including our ability to generate positive cash flow from operations; provide distributions to limited partners; and maintain the value of our real estate properties, may be significantly hindered. Some of the risks and uncertainties, although not all risks and uncertainties, which could cause actual results to differ materially from those presented in certain forward-looking statements follow:

General economic risks

Enterprise risks

Real estate risks

Page 2

Table of Contents

Other operational risks

Page 3

Table of Contents

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND IX, L.P.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page 4

Table of Contents

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND IX, L.P.

BALANCE SHEETS

ASSETS

See accompanying notes.

Page 5

Table of Contents

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND IX, L.P.

STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

(unaudited)

See accompanying notes.

Page 6

Table of Contents

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND IX, L.P.

STATEMENTS OF PARTNERS’ CAPITAL

FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2004

AND THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2005 (unaudited)

See accompanying notes.

Page 7

Table of Contents

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND IX, L.P.

STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

(unaudited)

See accompanying notes.

Page 8

Table of Contents

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND IX, L.P.

CONDENSED NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

MARCH 31, 2005 (unaudited)

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 its general partners (collectively, the “General Partners”). Wells Capital, Inc. (“Wells Capital”) serves as the corporate general partner of Wells Partners. Wells Capital is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Wells Real Estate Funds, Inc. Leo F. Wells, III is the president and sole director of Wells Capital and the sole owner of Wells Real Estate Funds, Inc. The Partnership was formed on August 15, 1994 for the purpose of acquiring, developing, constructing, owning, operating, improving, leasing, and managing income-producing commercial properties for investment purposes. Upon subscription, limited partners elect to have their units treated 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 its limited partnership units pursuant to a Registration Statement filed on Form S-11 under the Securities Act of 1933. The Partnership commenced active operations upon receiving and accepting subscriptions for 125,000 units on February 12, 1996. The offering was terminated on December 30, 1996, at which time the Partnership had sold approximately 2,935,931 Class A Units and 564,069 Class B Units representing capital contributions of $35,000,000.

The Partnership owns interests in all of its real estate assets through joint ventures with other entities affiliated with the General Partners. During the periods presented, the Partnership owned interests in the following joint ventures (the “Joint Ventures”) and properties:

Page 9

Table of Contents

Wells Real Estate Fund VIII, L.P., Wells Real Estate Fund X, L.P, and Wells Real Estate Fund XI, L.P. are affiliated with the Partnership through common general partners. Each of the properties described above was acquired on an all-cash basis. For further information regarding the Joint Ventures and foregoing properties, refer to the Partnership’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.

On December 2, 2004, Fund VIII-IX-REIT Associates sold 15253 Bake Parkway to an unrelated third party for a gross sales price of $12,400,000. As a result of the sale, the Partnership received net sale proceeds of approximately $4,527,000 and was allocated a gain of approximately $1,128,000.

On March 15, 2005, Fund IX-X-XI-REIT Associates sold the Alstom Power—Knoxville Building to an unrelated third party for a gross sales price of $12,000,000. As a result of the sale, the Partnership received net sale proceeds of approximately $4,562,000 and was allocated a gain of approximately $1,980,000.

Basis of Presentation

The financial statements of the Partnership have been prepared in accordance with rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission, including the instructions to Form 10-Q and Article 10 of Regulation S-X, and in accordance with such rules and regulations, do not include all of the information and footnotes required by U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) for complete financial statements. In the opinion of the General Partners, the statements for the unaudited interim periods presented include all adjustments that are of a normal and recurring nature and necessary to fairly present the results for these periods. Results for interim periods are not necessarily indicative of full-year results. For further information, refer to the financial statements and footnotes included in the Partnership’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.

Distributions of Net Cash from Operations

Net cash from operations, if available, is generally distributed to limited partners quarterly. In accordance with the partnership agreement, such distributions are paid first to the limited partners holding Class A Units until they have received a 10% per annum return on their respective net capital contributions, as defined. Then, such

Page 10

Table of Contents

distributions are paid to the General Partners until each has received 10% of the total amount distributed to date. Any remaining cash available for distribution is split between the limited partners holding Class A Units and the General Partners on a basis of 90% and 10%, respectively. No cash distributions will be made to the limited partners holding Class B Units.

Distribution of Sales Proceeds

Upon sales of properties, the net sale proceeds will be distributed in the following order:

Allocations of Net Income, Net Loss, and Gain on Sale

For the purpose of determining allocations per the partnership agreement, net income is defined as net income recognized by the Partnership, excluding deductions for depreciation and amortization and cost recovery and the gain on the sale of asset. Net income, as defined, of the Partnership will be allocated each year in the same proportions that net cash from operations is distributed to the partners holding Class A Units and the General Partners. To the extent the Partnership’s net income in any year exceeds net cash from operations, it will be allocated 99% to the limited partners holding Class A Units and 1% to the General Partners.

Net loss, depreciation, and amortization deductions for each fiscal year will be allocated as follows: (a) 99% to the limited partners holding Class B Units and 1% to the General Partners until their capital accounts are reduced to zero; (b) then to any partner having a positive balance in his capital account in an amount not to exceed such positive balance; and (c) thereafter to the General Partners.

Gain on the sale or exchange of the Partnership’s properties will be allocated generally in the same manner that the net proceeds from such sale are distributed to partners after the following allocations are made, if applicable: (i) allocations made pursuant to the qualified income offset provisions of the partnership agreement;

Page 11

Table of Contents

(ii) allocations to partners having negative capital accounts until all negative capital accounts have been restored to zero; and (iii) allocations to limited partners holding Class B Units in amounts equal to the deductions for depreciation and amortization previously allocated to them with respect to the specific partnership property sold, but not in excess of the amount of gain on sale recognized by the Partnership with respect to the sale of such property.

Reclassifications

Certain prior year amounts have been reclassified to conform with the current year financial statement presentation.

Management and Leasing Fees

The Partnership entered into a property management and leasing agreement with Wells Management Company, Inc. (“Wells Management”), an affiliate of the General Partners. In consideration for the management and leasing of the Partnership’s properties, the Joint Ventures pay Wells Management management and leasing fees equal to: (a) of the gross revenues collected monthly, 3% for management services and 3% for leasing services, 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. Management and leasing fees are paid by the Joint Ventures and, accordingly, included in equity in income of joint ventures in the accompanying statements of operations. The Partnership’s share of management and leasing fees and lease acquisition costs incurred through the Joint Ventures is $37,094 and $38,807 for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively.

Administration Reimbursements

Wells Capital, the general partner of Wells Partners, one of our general partners, and Wells Management perform certain administrative services for the Partnership, relating to accounting and other partnership administration, and incurs the related expenses. Such expenses are allocated among other entities affiliated with the General Partners based on estimates of the amount of time dedicated to each fund by individual administrative personnel. In the opinion of the General Partners, this allocation is a reasonable estimation of such expenses. The Partnership reimbursed Wells Capital and Wells Management for administrative expenses of $27,142 and $18,487 for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively. Administrative reimbursements of $8,671 and $7,451 are included in due to affiliates in the accompanying balance sheet as of March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004, respectively.

Basis of Presentation

The Partnership owned interests in nine properties during the periods presented through its ownership in the Joint Ventures. The Partnership does not have control over the operations of the Joint Ventures; however, it does exercise significant influence. Approval by the Partnership, as well as the other joint venture partners, is required for any major decision or any action that would materially affect the Joint Ventures, or their real property investments. Accordingly, the Partnership’s investments in the Joint Ventures are recorded using the equity method of accounting, whereby original investments are recorded at cost and subsequently adjusted for contributions, distributions, and net income (loss) attributable to the Partnership. For further information regarding investments in Joint Ventures, refer to the report filed for the Partnership on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.

Page 12

Table of Contents

Summary of Operations

Condensed financial information for the Joint Ventures in which the Partnership held ownership interests for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively, is presented below:

Condensed financial information for the joint venture in which the Partnership held an interest through its interest in Fund VIII-Fund IX Associates for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively, is presented below:

The following discussion and analysis should be read in conjunction with the accompanying financial statements and notes thereto. See also “Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements” preceding Part I, as well as the notes to our financial statements and Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations provided in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.

Overview

Management believes that the Partnership typically operates through the following five key life cycle phases. The duration of each phase is dependent upon various economic, industry, market, and other internal/external factors. Some overlap naturally exists in the transition from one phase to the next.

The period during which the Partnership is raising capital through the sale and issuance of limited partner units to the public;

The period during which the Partnership invests the capital raised during the fundraising phase, less upfront fees, into the acquisition of real estate assets;

Page 13

Table of Contents

The period during which real estate assets are owned and operated by the Partnership during the initial lease terms of the tenants. Strategic dispositions could occur during this phase in order to capitalize on market conditions;

The period during which the leases in place at the time of acquisition expire and, thus, the Partnership expends time, effort, and funds to re-lease such space to existing and/or new tenants. Following the holding phase, the Partnership continues to own and operate the real estate assets, evaluate various options for disposition, and market the real estate assets for sale; and

The period during which the Partnership sells its real estate investments, distributes net sale proceeds to the partners, liquidates, and terminates the Partnership.

Portfolio Overview

We are now in the holding phase of our life cycle. The Partnership now owns interests in seven assets, having sold 15253 Bake Parkway in the fourth quarter 2004 and the Alstom Power—Knoxville Building in March 2005. Our focus at this time involves maintaining the current high occupancy level within the portfolio and concentrating on re-leasing and marketing efforts that we believe will deliver the best operating performance for our investors. While ongoing operations are the primary focus during this phase, we could complete strategic asset sales if the sales capitalize on short-term market or property characteristics and meet the overall objectives of the Partnership.

The sale of the Alstom Power—Knoxville Building was a great start for 2005. The gross sale price of $12,000,000 was well above the original purchase price for this asset. We also announced the first distribution of net sale proceeds to the limited partners, scheduled for the second quarter 2005, totaling approximately $2,850,000 from the sale of 15253 Bake Parkway, as well as a portion of the early lease termination payment from Cirrus Logic, Inc., the sole tenant, at 305 Interlocken Parkway.

While the portfolio currently enjoys a relatively high occupancy level, we do face some near-term leasing issues that may negatively affect our operating performance. The 305 Interlocken Parkway property is currently vacant, and the lease of the sole tenant of the Ohmeda Building expires in April 2005. While these leasing challenges may impact performance, we are aggressively working with existing and potential tenants in these markets to minimize the negative effects as much as possible, as evidenced by our recent leasing successes.

The first quarter 2005 annualized operating distribution rate to the Class A unit holders was 5.0%, after reserving distributions in the prior quarter. The General Partners anticipate that future operating distributions may be reserved or remain low as the Partnership absorbs its pro-rata share of several additional capital needs, including leasing the remaining vacant space at 360 Interlocken Building and the re-leasing of the Ohmeda Building. As the outcome of the leasing efforts become known, we will evaluate if distributions of the remaining net sale proceeds from 15253 Bake Parkway and the Alstom Power—Knoxville Building sales are appropriate.

Property Summary

Information related to the properties owned by the Joint Ventures follows:

Page 14

Table of Contents

As we continue to operate in the holding phase, we will continue to focus on re-leasing vacant space and space that may become vacant upon the expiration of our current leases. In doing so, we will seek to maximize returns to the limited partners by negotiating long-term leases at market rental rates while attempting to minimize down time, re-leasing expenditures, ongoing property level costs, and portfolio costs. As we move into the positioning-for-sale and disposition-and-liquidation phases, our attention will shift to locating suitable buyers and negotiating purchase-sale contracts that will attempt to maximize the total return to the limited partners and minimize contingencies and our post-closing involvement with the buyer.

Industry Factors

Our results continue to be impacted by a number of factors influencing the real estate industry.

General Economic and Real Estate Market Commentary

Management reviews a number of economic forecasts and market commentaries in order to evaluate general economic conditions and formulate a view of the current environment’s effect on the real estate markets in which we operate.

Management believes that the U.S. economy is continuing on the path of slow, but steady recovery. Job growth is improving, with 2.2 million jobs created in 2004, and with another 2.4 to 2.8 million projected to be added in 2005. Gross Domestic Product growth and renewed business confidence are fueling the job growth. However, uncertainty still exists in the economy, primarily due to high oil prices, the war in Iraq, the trade deficit, and other global issues.

The U.S. office real estate market has begun to show modest improvement. The strength of the overall economy is having a positive impact on office real estate fundamentals. Positive absorption of office space combined with a decline in new construction has contributed to the increase in office occupancy rates for three consecutive quarters. Although occupancy rates have increased, management does not expect that they will rise by more than 200 basis points annually. As a result, management anticipates that it could be a minimum of two to three years before vacancy rates reach the equilibrium level of ten to twelve percent. Average asking rates stabilized in the second half of 2004. Management believes that renewed employment growth should benefit the office market; however, the uncertainty that still exists in the economy is causing many firms to continue to be more cautious with their investment and hiring decisions. Importantly, management believes the pace and strength of the recovery for office real estate will vary by market. Market conditions vary widely by geographical region, metropolitan area, submarket, and property.

Page 15

Table of Contents

The real estate capital transaction market continues to be very active. Capitalization rates (“cap rates”) have continued to decline in spite of the fact that the Federal Reserve (the “Fed”) increased the Federal Funds Rate five times in 2004. Management believes that the decline in cap rates is predominately driven by increased capital flows into real estate. The spread between average cap rates and 10-year U.S. Treasuries narrowed in 2004; however, this was primarily due to a drop in cap rates rather than a rise in 10-year U.S. Treasuries. In management’s opinion, absent a significant move in interest rates or a significant decrease in the number of parties interested in acquiring real estate, cap rates are not expected to significantly increase from their current levels in 2005.

Real Estate Funds with Current Vacancy or Near-term Rollover Exposure

Real estate funds, such as the Partnership, that own interests in properties with current vacancies or near-term tenant rollover may face a challenging leasing environment. The properties within these funds will generally face lower rents and higher concession packages to the tenants in order to re-lease vacant space.

From a valuation standpoint, it is generally preferable to either renew an existing tenant lease or re-lease the property prior to marketing it for sale. Generally, buyers will heavily discount their offering prices to compensate for existing or pending vacancies.

Results of Operations

Equity in Income of Joint Ventures

Equity in income of Joint Ventures was $2,385,008 and $439,727 for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively. The 2005 increase is primarily attributable to the gain recognized on the sale of the Alstom Power—Knoxville Building in the first quarter of 2005, partially offset by (i) a decrease in depreciation expense for all buildings owned through the Joint Ventures due to changing the estimated weighted-average composite useful life from 25 years to 40 years effective July 1, 2004, (ii) a decrease in operating income generated by Fund VIII-IX Associates as a result of the early lease termination at 305 Interlocken Parkway in August 2004, (iii) a decrease in operating income generated by Fund VIII-IX-REIT Associates as a result of the sale of 15253 Bake Parkway in December 2004, and (iv) a decrease in operating income generated by Fund IX-X-XI-REIT Associates as a result of entering into lease amendments in 2004 with the sole tenant of the Alstom Power—Knoxville Building and the majority tenant of 360 Interlocken Building to extend their lease terms at the respective current prevailing market rates, which were less than the rates previously charged.

We expect future equity in income of Joint Ventures to decrease as a result of (i) the sales of 15253 Bake Parkway and the Alstom Power—Knoxville Building, (ii) the vacancies at 305 Interlocken Parkway and 360 Interlocken Building, and (iii) the upcoming April lease expiration with the sole tenant of the Ohmeda Building.

Expenses of the Partnership

Our total expenses were $50,409 and $32,673 for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively. The 2005 increase is primarily attributable to the increase in Tennessee partnership franchise and excise taxes as well as increases in administrative salaries, accounting fees, legal fees, and printing costs, substantially all of which resulted from increased reporting and regulatory requirements. We anticipate additional increases related to implementing and adhering to such reporting and regulatory requirements going forward.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Our operating strategy entails funding expenses related to the recurring operations of the properties owned by the Joint Ventures with operating cash flows, and assessing the amount of remaining cash flows that will be required to fund portfolio expenses, known re-leasing costs, and other capital improvements. Any residual operating cash flows are distributed from the Joint Ventures to the Partnership, and are considered available for distribution to

Page 16

Table of Contents

the limited partners. Distributions are generally paid to the limited partners quarterly. As a result, the ongoing monitoring of our cash position is critical to ensuring that adequate liquidity and capital resources are available. Economic downturns in one or more of our core markets could adversely impact the ability of the Joint Ventures’ tenants to honor lease payments and our ability to assist the Joint Ventures in re-leasing space on favorable terms as leases expire or space otherwise becomes vacant. In the event of either situation, cash flows and, consequently, our ability to provide funding for capital needs would be adversely affected.

Short-Term Liquidity

During the three months ended March 31, 2005, we generated net operating cash flows, including operating distributions received from the Joint Ventures, of approximately $254,000, as compared to approximately $720,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2004. The 2005 decline in net operating cash flows is primarily attributable to the corresponding decline in operating distributions received from joint ventures further described below. Distributions from the Joint Ventures are generally representative of rental revenues and tenant reimbursements, less property operating expenses, management fees, general administrative expenses, and capital expenditures.

Operating distributions from the Joint Ventures have declined primarily as a result of (i) absorbing rent abatements for the Alstom Power—Knoxville Building beginning in the fourth quarter 2004, (ii) entering into leases with the sole tenant of the Alstom Power-Knoxville Building and the majority tenant at the 360 Interlocken Building in 2004 at the respective current prevailing market rates, which were less than the rates previously charged, and (iii) funding leasing costs and capital expenditures at the 360 Interlocken Building in 2005.

Future operating distributions are expected to remain low or be reserved in order to fund our pro-rata share of anticipated leasing costs for 360 Interlocken Building, the Ohmeda Building, and 305 Interlocken Parkway. At this time, we expect to continue to generate cash flows from operations, including distributions from the Joint Ventures, sufficient to cover our estimated future expenses. Future operating distributions paid to limited partners will be largely dependent upon the amount of cash generated from the Joint Ventures, our expectations of future cash flows, and determination of near-term cash needs for tenant re-leasing costs and other capital improvements for properties owned by the Joint Ventures.

We believe that the cash on hand and operating distributions due from the Joint Ventures are sufficient to cover our working capital needs, including liabilities of approximately $447,000 as of March 31, 2005. During the remainder of 2005, our General Partners anticipate that we will be able to fund our proportionate share of capital expenditures noted above.

Long-Term Liquidity

We expect that our future sources of capital will be primarily derived from operating cash flows generated from the Joint Ventures, and net proceeds generated from the selective and strategic sale of properties. Our future long-term liquidity requirements will include, but not be limited to, tenant improvements, renovations, expansions and other significant capital improvements necessary for properties owned through the Joint Ventures. We expect to continue to use substantially all future net cash flows from operations. Future cash flows from operating activities will be primarily affected by distributions received from the Joint Ventures, which are dependent upon net operating income generated by the Joint Ventures’ properties, less reserves, for known capital expenditures.

Capital Resources

The Partnership is an investment vehicle formed for the purpose of acquiring, owning, and operating income-producing real properties, or investing in joint ventures formed for the same purpose, and has invested all of the partners’ original capital contributions. Thus, it is unlikely that we will acquire interests in any additional properties or joint ventures. Historically, our investment strategy has generally involved acquiring properties that are pre-leased to creditworthy tenants on an all cash basis through joint ventures with affiliated partnerships.

Page 17

Table of Contents

The Joint Ventures fund capital expenditures primarily related to building improvements for the purpose of maintaining the quality of our properties, and tenant improvements for the purpose of readying its properties for re-leasing. As leases expire, we will work with the Joint Ventures to attempt to re-lease space to an existing tenant or market the space to prospective new tenants. Generally, tenant improvements funded in connection with lease renewals require less capital than those funded in connection with new leases. However, external conditions, such as the supply of and demand for comparable space available within a given market, drive capital costs as well as rental rates. Any capital or other expenditures not provided for by the operations of the Joint Ventures will be funded by the partnership and respective Joint Ventures partners on a pro-rata basis.

Operating cash flows, if available, are generally distributed from the Joint Ventures to the Partnership following each calendar quarter-end. Our cash management policy typically includes first utilizing current period operating cash flow until depleted, at which point operating reserves are utilized to fund capital and other required expenditures. In the event that current and prior period accumulated operating cash flows are insufficient to fund such costs, net property sale proceeds reserves, if available, would then be utilized.

As of March 31, 2005, we have received, used, and held net proceeds from the sale of properties as presented below:

Upon evaluating the capital needs of the existing properties in which we hold interests, our General Partners announced their intention to distribute net sale proceeds of approximately $2,850,000 in the second quarter of 2005 as discussed below and retain the residual balance of approximately $6,362,000 to help fund the Partnership’s pro-rata share of the anticipated costs in connection with capital improvements for the AT&T-Texas Building and 47320 Kato Road, and re-leasing 305 Interlocken Parkway and the Ohmeda Building as of March 31, 2005.

Contractual Obligations and Commitments

Distribution of Net Sale Proceeds

In December 2004, the General Partners announced their intention to distribute net sale proceeds of approximately $2,850,000 in the second quarter of 2005 to the limited partners of record as of March 31, 2005, which, under the terms of the partnership agreement, does not include limited partners acquiring units after December 31, 2004. From total net sale proceeds of approximately $9,450,000, we used approximately $238,000 to fund the Partnership’s share of re-leasing costs at 15253 Bake Parkway, intend to distribute approximately $2,850,000 to the limited partners in connection with the aforementioned distribution, and retain the residual balance of approximately $6,362,000 in reserve in order to fund future operating costs of the Partnership.

This distribution has not been formally declared by the General Partners. In accordance with the terms of the partnership agreement, the General Partners may elect to retain reserves deemed reasonably necessary for the

Page 18

Table of Contents

Partnership at the sole discretion of the General Partners. Thus, should a change in circumstances prior to the intended distribution date require the General Partners to reevaluate the Partnership’s reserve requirements, it is possible that this distribution may not occur, or distributions may be made at a lower amount.

Related-Party Transactions

Related-Party Fees and Reimbursements

We have entered into agreements with Wells Capital, Wells Management, an affiliate of our General Partners, and their affiliates, whereby we pay certain fees and expense reimbursements to Wells Capital, Wells Management, and their affiliates for asset management, the management and leasing of our properties; administrative services relating to accounting, property management, and other partnership administration; and incur the related expenses. See Note 3 to our financial statements included in this report for a description of these fees and expense reimbursements we have incurred.

Economic Dependency

We have engaged Wells Capital and its affiliates and Wells Management, to provide certain services that are essential to the Partnership, including asset management services, supervision of the management and leasing of properties owned through the Joint Ventures, asset acquisition and disposition services, as well as other administrative responsibilities for the Partnership including accounting services, shareholder communications, and investor relations. These agreements are terminable by either party on 60 days’ written notice. As a result of these relationships, the Partnership is dependent upon Wells Capital and Wells Management.

Wells Capital and Wells Management are all owned and controlled by Wells Real Estate Funds, Inc. (“WREF”). The operations of Wells Capital and Wells Management represent substantially all of the business of WREF. Accordingly, the Partnership focuses on the financial condition of WREF when assessing the financial condition of Wells Capital and Wells Management. In the event that WREF were to become unable to meet its obligations as they become due, the Partnership might be required to find alternative service providers.

WREF’s net income was approximately $5.5 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005. Future net income generated by WREF will be largely dependent upon the amount of fees earned by Wells Capital and Wells Management based on, among other things, the level of investor proceeds raised from the sale of common stock of Wells Real Estate Investment Trust II, Inc., an affiliated real estate investment trust for which Wells Capital serves as the advisor, and the volume of future acquisitions and dispositions of real estate assets by Wells-sponsored programs. As of March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004, WREF held cash balances of approximately $16.2 million and $6.3 million, respectively. WREF believes that it has adequate liquidity available in the form of cash on hand and current receivables necessary to meet its obligations as they become due.

Litigation Against Related Parties

During early 2004, a putative class action complaint was filed against, among others, Leo F. Wells, III, our General Partner, Wells Capital, the corporate general partner of our other General Partner, and Wells Management. The Court granted the plaintiffs’ motion to permit voluntary dismissal of this suit, and it was dismissed without prejudice. In November 2004, the same plaintiffs filed a second putative class action complaint against, among others, Mr. Wells, Wells Capital, and Wells Management. On January 28, 2005, the defendants filed motions to dismiss the plaintiffs’ claims. On March 31, 2005, the plaintiffs filed briefs in opposition to the defendants’ motions to dismiss. The Court has not yet ruled on these pending motions. The details of both complaints are outlined below.

As a matter of background, on or about March 12, 2004, a putative class action complaint (the “Original Complaint”) was filed by four individuals (the “plaintiffs”) against Wells Real Estate Fund I, and Wells Capital, and Leo F. Wells, III (collectively, “the General Partners of Wells Real Estate Fund I”), as well as Wells Management and Wells Investment Securities, Inc. (“WIS”) (Hendry et al. v. Leo F. Wells, III et al., Superior

Page 19

Table of Contents

Court of Gwinnett County, Georgia, Civil Action No. 04-A-2791 2). Wells Real Estate Fund I is a public limited partnership. The plaintiffs filed the Original Complaint purportedly on behalf of all limited partners holding B units of Wells Real Estate Fund I as of January 15, 2003. The Original Complaint alleged, among other things, that (a) the General Partners of Wells Real Estate Fund I, WIS, and Wells Real Estate Fund I negligently and fraudulently made false statements and material omissions in connection with the initial sale (September 6, 1984—September 5, 1986) of the B units to investors of Wells Real Estate Fund I by making false statements and omissions in sales literature relating to the distribution of net sale proceeds to holders of B units, among other things; (b) the General Partners of Wells Real Estate Fund I and Wells Real Estate Fund I negligently and fraudulently misrepresented and concealed disclosure of, among other things, alleged discrepancies between such statements and provisions in the partnership agreement for a period of time in order to delay such investors from taking any legal, equitable, or other action to protect their investments in Wells Real Estate Fund I, among other reasons; (c) Mr. Wells and Wells Management breached an alleged contract arising out of a June 2000 consent solicitation to the limited partners; and (d) the General Partners of Wells Real Estate Fund I and Wells Real Estate Fund I breached fiduciary duties to the limited partners. On June 3, 2004, the Court granted the plaintiffs’ motion to permit voluntary dismissal, and the Original Complaint was dismissed without prejudice.

On or about November 24, 2004, the plaintiffs filed a second putative class action complaint (the “Complaint”) against Mr. Wells, Wells Capital, Wells Management, and Wells Real Estate Fund I (Hendry et al. v Leo F. Wells, III et al., Superior Court of Gwinnett County, Georgia, Civil Action No. 04A-13051 6) (the “Hendry Action”). The plaintiffs filed the Complaint purportedly on behalf of all limited partners holding B units of Wells Real Estate Fund I as of January 9, 2002. The Complaint alleges, among other things, that the General Partners of Wells Real Estate Fund I breached their fiduciary duties to the limited partners by, among other things, (a) failing to timely disclose alleged inconsistencies between sales literature and the partnership agreement relating to the distribution of net sale proceeds; (b) engaging in a scheme to fraudulently conceal alleged inconsistencies between sales literature and the partnership agreement relating to the distribution of net sale proceeds; and (c) not accepting a settlement offer proposed by a holder of A units and a holder of A and B units in other litigation naming Wells Real Estate Fund I as a defendant, in which other litigation the court subsequently granted summary judgment in favor of Wells Real Estate Fund I. The Complaint also alleges that misrepresentations and omissions in an April 2002 consent solicitation to the limited partners caused that consent solicitation to be materially misleading. In addition, the Complaint alleges, among other things, that the General Partners of Wells Real Estate Fund I and Wells Management breached an alleged contract arising out of a June 2000 consent solicitation to the limited partners relating to an alleged waiver of deferred management fees.

The plaintiffs seek, among other remedies, the following: judgment against the General Partners of Wells Real Estate Fund I, jointly and severally, in an amount to be proven at trial; punitive damages; disgorgement of fees earned by the General Partners directly or through their affiliates; a declaration that the consent obtained as a result of an April 2002 consent solicitation is null and void; enforcement of an alleged contract arising out of the June 2000 consent solicitation to waive Wells Management’s deferred management fees; and an award to plaintiffs of their attorneys’ fees, costs and expenses. The Complaint states that Wells Real Estate Fund I is named only as a necessary party defendant and that the plaintiffs seek no money from or relief at the expense of Wells Real Estate Fund I. On January 28, 2005, the defendants filed motions to dismiss the plaintiffs’ claims. On March 31, 2005, the plaintiffs filed briefs in opposition to the defendants’ motions to dismiss. The Court has not yet ruled on these pending motions. Due to the uncertainties inherent in the litigation process, it is not possible to predict the ultimate outcome of this matter at this time. However, an adverse outcome could adversely affect the ability of Wells Capital, Wells Management, and Mr. Wells to fulfill their respective duties under the agreements and relationships they have with us.

The Hendry Action states that Wells Real Estate Fund I is named only as a necessary defendant and that the plaintiffs are seeking no money from or relief at the expense of Wells Real Estate Fund I. Since the partnership agreement of Wells Real Estate Fund I contains no provision for advancing defense costs to the General Partners of Wells Real Estate Fund I in connection with litigation involving the partnership in instances where the plaintiffs are seeking no monetary relief from the partnership, the General Partners of Wells Real Estate Fund I,

Page 20

Table of Contents

currently Wells Capital, are funding the legal fees, costs, and expenses relating to this litigation. As of March 31, 2005, Wells Capital had incurred approximately $215,000 in legal fees, costs, and expenses related to defending the Hendry Action. At this time, management is unable to determine whether the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome is either probable or remote.

Conflicts of Interest

Our General Partners are also general partners of other affiliated public limited partnerships (the “Wells Real Estate Funds”). In addition, Wells Capital sponsors and advises two affiliated real estate investment trusts (the “REITs”) in which it retains residual interests. As such, there may exist conflicts of interest whereby the General Partners, in their capacity as general partners of other Wells Real Estate Funds or as the advisor to the REITs, may be in competition with us with respect to, among other things, locating suitable replacement tenants or prospective acquirers for property dispositions.

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 should protect us 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. There is no assurance, however, that we would be able to replace existing leases with new leases at higher base rental rates.

Application of Critical Accounting Policies

Our 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 our results of operations to those of companies in similar businesses.

Below is a discussion of the accounting policies used by the partnership and the Joint Ventures, which are considered to be critical in that they may require complex judgment in their application or require estimates about matters that are inherently uncertain.

Investment in Real Estate Assets

We will be required to make subjective assessments as to the useful lives of its depreciable assets. Management considers the period of future benefit of the asset to determine the appropriate useful lives. These assessments have a direct impact on net income. We expect that the estimated useful lives of the Joint Ventures’ assets by class will be as follows:

Effective July 1, 2004, the Joint Ventures extended the weighted-average composite useful life for all building assets from 25 years to 40 years, which resulted in an increase to our net income for the three months ended March 31, 2005. We believe that this change more appropriately reflects the estimated useful lives of real estate

Page 21

Table of Contents

assets and is consistent with prevailing industry practice. In the event that the Joint Ventures utilize inappropriate useful lives or methods of depreciation, our net income would be misstated.

Valuation of Real Estate Assets

We continually monitor events and changes in circumstances that could indicate that the carrying amounts of the real estate assets in which we have an ownership interest, either directly or through investments in the 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. We have determined that there has been no impairment in the carrying value of real estate assets held as of March 31, 2005.

Projections of expected future cash flows require 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.

American Jobs Creation Act of 2004

The American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 (the “Act”) added Section 470 to the Internal Revenue Code, which provides certain limitations on the utilization of losses allocable to leased property owned by a partnership having both taxable and tax-exempt partners such as the Partnership. Currently, it is unclear as to how the transition rules and effective dates set forth in the Act will apply to entities such as the Partnership. However, on March 11, 2005, the Internal Revenue Service issued IRS Notice 2005-29 announcing that the IRS will not apply Section 470 to partnerships for taxable year 2004 based solely on the fact that a partnership had both taxable and tax-exempt partners. It is important to note that IRS Notice 2005-29 provides relief for partnerships for taxable year 2004 only. Accordingly, unless Congress passes corrective legislation which addresses this issue or some other form of relief from the provisions of Section 470 of the Act is granted, based on a strict reading of the Act, beginning in 2005 and thereafter, future passive losses allocable to Class B limited partners may only be used to offset passive income generated from the same property or within the same fund.

Since we do not borrow any money, make any foreign investments, or invest in any market risk-sensitive instruments, we are not subject to risks relating to interest rates, foreign current exchange rate fluctuations, or the other market risks contemplated by Item 305 of Regulation S-K.

The Partnership carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of management of Wells Capital, the corporate general partner of one of our General Partners, 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 as of the end of the period covered by this report pursuant to 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 control over financial reporting during the quarter ended March 31, 2005 that have materially affected, or are likely to materially affect, the Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting.

Page 22

Table of Contents

PART II—OTHER INFORMATION

We were not involved in any material legal proceedings during the quarter ended March 31, 2005 requiring disclosure under Item 103 of Regulation S-K.

We were not subject to any indebtedness, and therefore, we did not default respect to any indebtedness during the quarter ended March 31, 2005.

No matters were submitted to a vote of our limited partners during the quarter ended March 31, 2005.

Not applicable.

The Exhibits required to be filed with this report are set forth on the Exhibit Index to First Quarter Form 10-Q attached hereto.

Page 23

Table of Contents

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.

Page 24

Table of Contents

EXHIBIT INDEX

TO FIRST QUARTER FORM 10-Q

OF

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND IX, L.P.