UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND
EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C.
20549
FORM 10-K
|
|
|
þ
|
|
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
|
|
For the fiscal year ended
December 31,
2009
|
or
|
o
|
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
|
|
For the transition period
from to
|
Commission File Number 1-10709
PS BUSINESS PARKS,
INC.
(Exact name of registrant as
specified in its charter)
|
|
|
California
|
|
95-4300881
|
(State or other jurisdiction
of
incorporation or organization)
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer Identification
No.)
|
701 Western Avenue,
Glendale, California
91201-2397
(Address of principal executive
offices) (Zip Code)
818-244-8080
(Registrants telephone
number, including area code)
Securities registered pursuant
to Section 12(b) of the Act:
|
|
|
|
|
Title of Each Class
|
|
Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered
|
|
Common Stock, $0.01 par value per share
|
|
|
New York Stock Exchange
|
|
Depositary Shares Each Representing 1/1,000 of a Share
of
7.000% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series H, $0.01 par
value per share
|
|
|
New York Stock Exchange
|
|
Depositary Shares Each Representing 1/1,000 of a Share
of
6.875% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series I, $0.01 par
value per share
|
|
|
New York Stock Exchange
|
|
Depositary Shares Each Representing 1/1,000 of a Share
of
7.950% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series K, $0.01 par
value per share
|
|
|
New York Stock Exchange
|
|
Depositary Shares Each Representing 1/1,000 of a Share
of
7.600% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series L, $0.01 par
value per share
|
|
|
New York Stock Exchange
|
|
Depositary Shares Each Representing 1/1,000 of a Share
of
7.200% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series M, $0.01 par
value per share
|
|
|
New York Stock Exchange
|
|
Depositary Shares Each Representing 1/1,000 of a Share
of
7.375% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series O, $0.01 par
value per share
|
|
|
New York Stock Exchange
|
|
Depositary Shares Each Representing 1/1,000 of a Share
of
6.700% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series P, $0.01 par
value per share
|
|
|
New York Stock Exchange
|
|
Securities registered pursuant
to Section 12(g) of the Act:
None
(Title of class)
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known
seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities
Act. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file
reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the
Exchange
Act. Yes o No þ
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 þ No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted
electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any,
every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted
pursuant to Rule 405 of
Regulation S-T
(§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding
12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant
was required to submit and post such
files). Yes o No o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers
pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K
is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best
of the registrants knowledge, in definitive proxy or
information statements incorporated by reference in
Part III of this
Form 10-K
or any amendment to this
Form 10-K. þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large
accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated
filer, or a smaller reporting company. See definitions of
large accelerated filer, accelerated
filer, and smaller reporting company in
Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
|
|
|
Large accelerated filer
þ
|
|
Accelerated filer
o
|
Non-accelerated filer
o
|
|
Smaller reporting company
o
|
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
|
|
|
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company
(as defined in
Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange
Act). Yes o No þ
As of June 30, 2009, the aggregate market value of the
registrants common stock held by non-affiliates of the
registrant was $726,163,459 based on the closing price as
reported on that date.
Number of shares of the registrants common stock, par
value $0.01 per share, outstanding as of February 22, 2010
(the latest practicable date): 24,399,509.
DOCUMENTS
INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Portions of the definitive proxy statement to be filed in
connection with the Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be held in
2010 are incorporated by reference into Part III of this
Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
PART I.
The
Company
PS Business Parks, Inc. (PSB) is a fully-integrated,
self-advised and self-managed real estate investment trust
(REIT) that acquires, owns, operates and develops
commercial properties, primarily multi-tenant flex, office and
industrial space. As of December 31, 2009, PSB owned 77.0%
of the common partnership units of PS Business Parks, L.P. (the
Operating Partnership). The remaining common
partnership units were owned by Public Storage (PS).
PSB, as the sole general partner of the Operating Partnership,
has full, exclusive and complete responsibility and discretion
in managing and controlling the Operating Partnership. Unless
otherwise indicated or unless the context requires otherwise,
all references to the Company, we,
us, our, and similar references mean PS
Business Parks, Inc. and its subsidiaries, including the
Operating Partnership.
As of December 31, 2009, the Company owned and operated
approximately 19.6 million rentable square feet of
commercial space located in eight states: Arizona, California,
Florida, Maryland, Oregon, Texas, Virginia and Washington. The
Company also manages approximately 1.4 million rentable
square feet on behalf of PS and its affiliated entities.
History of the Company: The Company was formed in
1990 as a California corporation under the name Public Storage
Properties XI, Inc. In a March 17, 1998 merger with
American Office Park Properties, Inc. (AOPP) (the
Merger), the Company acquired the commercial
property business previously operated by AOPP and was renamed
PS Business Parks, Inc. Prior to the Merger in
January, 1997, AOPP was reorganized to succeed to the commercial
property business of PS, becoming a fully integrated, self
advised and self managed REIT.
From 1998 through 2001, the Company added 9.7 million
square feet in Virginia, Maryland, Texas, Oregon, California and
Arizona, acquiring 9.2 million square feet of commercial
space and developing an additional 500,000 square feet.
In 2002, the economy and real estate fundamentals softened. This
resulted in an environment in which the Company was unable to
identify acquisitions at prices that met its investment
criteria. In 2002, the Company disposed of four properties
totaling 386,000 square feet that no longer met its
investment criteria.
In 2003, the Company acquired 4.1 million square feet of
commercial space, including a 3.4 million square foot
property located in Miami, Florida, which represented a new
market for the Company. The Miami property represented
approximately 18% of the Companys aggregate rentable
square footage at December 31, 2003. The cost of the 2003
acquisitions was $282.4 million. The Company also disposed
of four properties totaling 226,000 square feet as well as
a one acre plot of land that no longer met its investment
criteria.
In 2004, the Company made one acquisition, a 165,000 square
foot asset in Fairfax, Virginia, for $24.1 million. During
2004, the Company sold two significant assets, comprising
400,000 square feet in Maryland resulting in a gain of
$15.2 million. Additionally in 2004, the Company sold an
aggregate of 91,000 square feet in Texas, Oregon and Miami.
In 2005, the Company acquired one asset, a 233,000 square
foot multi-tenant flex space in San Diego, California. The
asset, which was 94.6% leased at the time of acquisition, was
purchased for $35.1 million. In connection with the
acquisition, the Company assumed a $15.0 million mortgage
which bears interest at a fixed rate of 5.73%. During 2005, the
Company sold Woodside Corporate Park, a 574,000 square foot
flex and office park in Beaverton, Oregon, for
$64.5 million resulting in a gain of $12.5 million.
The park was 76.8% leased at the time of the sale. Additionally
in 2005, the Company sold 100,000 square feet and some
parcels of land in Miami and Oregon.
In 2006, the Company acquired 1.2 million square feet for
an aggregate cost of $180.3 million. The Company acquired
WesTech Business Park, a 366,000 square foot office and
flex park in Silver Spring, Maryland, for $69.3 million;
88,800 square feet multi-tenant flex buildings in Signal
Hill, California, for $10.7 million; a 107,300 square
foot multi-tenant flex park in Chantilly, Virginia, for
$15.8 million; Meadows Corporate Park, a
165,000 square foot multi-tenant office park in Silver
Spring, Maryland, for $29.9 million; Rogers Avenue, a
66,500 square foot multi-tenant industrial and flex park in
San Jose, California, for $8.4 million; and Boca
2
Commerce Park and Wellington Commerce Park, two multi-tenant
industrial, flex and storage parks, aggregating
398,000 square feet, located in Palm Beach County, Florida,
for $46.2 million. In connection with the Meadows Corporate
Park purchase, the Company assumed a $16.8 million mortgage
with a fixed interest rate of 7.20% through November, 2011, at
which time it can be prepaid without penalty. In addition, in
connection with the Palm Beach County purchases, the Company
assumed three mortgages with a combined total of
$23.8 million with a weighted average fixed interest rate
of 5.84%. During 2006, the Company sold a 30,500 square
foot building located in Beaverton, Oregon, for
$4.4 million resulting in a gain of $1.5 million.
Additionally in 2006, the Company sold 32,400 square feet
in Miami for a combined total of $3.7 million, resulting in
a gain of $865,000.
In 2007, the Company acquired 870,000 square feet for an
aggregate cost of $140.6 million. The Company acquired
Overlake Business Center, a 493,000 square foot
multi-tenant office and flex business park located in Redmond,
Washington, for $76.0 million; Commerce Campus, a
252,000 square foot multi-tenant office and flex business
park located in Santa Clara, California, for
$39.2 million; and Fair Oaks Corporate Center, a
125,000 square foot multi-tenant office park located in
Fairfax, Virginia, for $25.4 million.
As of December 31, 2009, the Company had commenced
development on a parcel within its Miami International Commerce
Center (MICC) in Miami, Florida, which upon
completion is expected to comprise 75,000 square feet of
leasable small-bay industrial space. The construction is
scheduled to be completed in the third quarter of 2010.
In 2009, the Company sold 3.4 acres of land held for
development in Portland, Oregon, for a gross sales price of
$2.7 million, resulting in a net gain of $1.5 million.
The Company made no acquisitions during the years ended
December 31, 2009 and 2008.
On January 14, 2010, the Company completed the sale of a
131,000 square foot office building located in Houston,
Texas. The sales price was $10.0 million, resulting in a
net gain of $5.2 million.
The Company has elected to be taxed as a REIT under the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the Code),
commencing with its taxable year ended December 31, 1990.
To the extent that the Company continues to qualify as a REIT,
it will not be taxed, with certain limited exceptions, on the
net income that is currently distributed to its shareholders.
The Companys principal executive offices are located at
701 Western Avenue, Glendale, California
91201-2397.
The Companys telephone number is
(818) 244-8080.
The Company maintains a website with the address
www.psbusinessparks.com. The information contained on the
Companys website is not a part of, or incorporated by
reference into, this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
The Company makes available free of charge through its website
its Annual Report on
Form 10-K,
Quarterly Reports on
Form 10-Q
and Current Reports on
Form 8-K,
and amendments to these reports, as soon as reasonably
practicable after the Company electronically files such material
with, or furnishes such material to, the Securities and Exchange
Commission.
Business of the Company: The Company is in the
commercial property business, with properties consisting of
multi-tenant flex, industrial and office space. The Company owns
approximately 12.2 million square feet of flex space. The
Company defines flex space as buildings that are
configured with a combination of warehouse and office space and
can be designed to fit a wide variety of uses. The warehouse
component of the flex space has a number of uses including light
manufacturing and assembly, storage and warehousing, showroom,
laboratory, distribution and research and development
activities. The office component of flex space is complementary
to the warehouse component by enabling businesses to accommodate
management and production staff in the same facility. The
Company owns approximately 3.9 million square feet of
industrial space that has characteristics similar to the
warehouse component of the flex space. In addition, the Company
owns approximately 3.4 million square feet of low-rise
office space, generally either in business parks that combine
office and flex space or in submarkets where the economics of
the market demand an office build-out.
The Companys commercial properties typically consist of
low-rise buildings, ranging from one to 46 buildings per
property, located on parcels of various sizes and comprising
from approximately 12,000 to 3.2 million aggregate square
feet of rentable space. Facilities are managed through either
on-site
management or area offices central to the facilities. Parking is
generally open but in some instances is covered. The ratio of
parking spaces to rentable square feet ranges from two to six
per thousand square feet depending upon the use of the property
and its location. Office
3
space generally requires a greater parking ratio than most
industrial uses. The Company may acquire properties that do not
have these characteristics.
The tenant base for the Companys facilities is diverse.
The portfolio can be bifurcated into those facilities that
service small to medium-sized businesses and those that service
larger businesses. Approximately 40.5% of in-place rents from
the portfolio are derived from facilities that serve small to
medium-sized businesses. A property in this facility type is
typically divided into units ranging in size from 500 to
4,999 square feet and leases generally range from one to
three years. The remaining 59.5% of in-place rents from the
portfolio are derived from facilities that serve larger
businesses, with units greater than or equal to
5,000 square feet. The Company also has several tenants
that lease space in multiple buildings and locations. The
U.S. Government is the largest tenant with multiple leases
encompassing approximately 507,000 square feet or
approximately 4.6% of the Companys annualized rental
income.
The Company intends to continue acquiring commercial properties
located in desired markets within the United States. The
Companys policy of acquiring commercial properties may be
changed by its Board of Directors without shareholder approval.
However, the Board of Directors has no intention of changing
this policy at this time. Although the Company currently owns
properties in eight states, it may expand its operations to
other states or reduce the number of states in which it
operates. Properties are acquired for both income and potential
capital appreciation; there is no limitation on the amount that
can be invested in any specific property. Although there are no
restrictions on our ability to expand our operations into
foreign markets, we currently operate solely within the United
States and have no foreign operations.
The Company owns land which may be used for the development of
commercial properties. The Company owns approximately
6.4 acres of land in Northern Virginia, 11.5 acres in
Portland, Oregon and 10.0 acres in Dallas, Texas as of
December 31, 2009.
Operating
Partnership
The properties in which the Company has an equity interest will
generally be owned by the Operating Partnership. The Company has
the ability to acquire interests in additional properties in
transactions that could defer the contributors tax
consequences by causing the Operating Partnership to issue
equity interests in return for interests in properties.
As the general partner of the Operating Partnership, the Company
has the exclusive responsibility under the Operating Partnership
Agreement to manage and conduct the business of the Operating
Partnership. The Board of Directors directs the affairs of the
Operating Partnership by managing the Companys affairs.
The Operating Partnership will be responsible for, and pay when
due, its share of all administrative and operating expenses of
the properties it owns.
The Companys interest in the Operating Partnership
entitles it to share in cash distributions from, and the profits
and losses of, the Operating Partnership in proportion to the
Companys economic interest in the Operating Partnership
(apart from tax allocations of profits and losses to take into
account pre-contribution property appreciation or depreciation).
Summary
of the Operating Partnership Agreement
The following summary of the Operating Partnership Agreement is
qualified in its entirety by reference to the Operating
Partnership Agreement as amended, which is incorporated by
reference as an exhibit to this report.
Issuance of Additional Partnership Interests: As the
general partner of the Operating Partnership, the Company is
authorized to cause the Operating Partnership from time to time
to issue to partners of the Operating Partnership or to other
persons additional partnership units in one or more classes, and
in one or more series of any of such classes, with such
designations, preferences and relative, participating, optional,
or other special rights, powers and duties (which may be senior
to the existing partnership units), as will be determined by the
Company, in its sole and absolute discretion, without the
approval of any limited partners, except to the extent
specifically provided in the agreement. No such additional
partnership units, however, will be issued to the Company unless
(i) the agreement to issue the additional partnership
interests arises in connection with the issuance of shares of
the Company, which
4
shares have designations, preferences and other rights, such
that the economic interests are substantially similar to the
designations, preferences and other rights of the additional
partnership units that would be issued to the Company and
(ii) the Company agrees to make a capital contribution to
the Operating Partnership in an amount equal to the proceeds
raised in connection with the issuance of such shares of the
Company.
Capital Contributions: No partner is required to
make additional capital contributions to the Operating
Partnership, except that the Company as the general partner is
required to contribute the proceeds of the sale of equity
interests in the Company to the Operating Partnership in return
for additional partnership units. A limited partner may be
required to pay to the Operating Partnership any taxes paid by
the Operating Partnership on behalf of that limited partner. No
partner is required to pay to the Operating Partnership any
deficit or negative balance which may exist in its capital
account.
Distributions: The Company, as general partner, is
required to make quarterly distributions in compliance with the
Operating Partnership Agreement. Distributions are to be made
(i) first, with respect to any class of partnership
interests having a preference over other classes of partnership
interests; and (ii) second, in accordance with the
partners respective percentage interests on the
partnership record date (as defined in the Operating
Partnership Agreement). Commencing in 1998, the Operating
Partnerships policy has been to make distributions per
unit (other than preferred units) that are equal to the per
share distributions made by the Company with respect to its
common stock.
Preferred Units: As of December 31, 2009, the
Operating Partnership had an aggregate of 2.9 million
preferred units owned by third parties with distribution rates
ranging from 6.550% to 7.950% (per annum) with an aggregate
redemption value of $73.4 million. The Operating
Partnership has the right to redeem each series of preferred
units on or after the fifth anniversary of the issuance date of
the series at the original capital contribution plus the
cumulative priority return, as defined, to the redemption date
to the extent not previously distributed. Each series of
preferred units is exchangeable for Cumulative Redeemable
Preferred Stock of the respective series of PS Business Parks,
Inc. on or after the tenth anniversary of the date of issuance
at the option of the Operating Partnership or a majority of the
holders of the applicable series of preferred units.
As of December 31, 2009, in connection with the
Companys issuance of publicly traded Cumulative Preferred
Stock, the Company owned 25.0 million preferred units of
various series with an aggregate redemption value of
$626.0 million with terms substantially identical to the
terms of the publicly traded depositary shares each representing
1/1,000 of a share of 6.700% to 7.950% Cumulative Preferred
Stock of the Company. The holders of all series of Preferred
Stock may combine to elect two additional directors if the
Company fails to make dividend payments for six quarterly
dividend payment periods, whether or not consecutive.
Redemption of Partnership Interests: Subject to
certain limitations described below, each limited partner (other
than the Company and holders of preferred units) has the right
to require the redemption of such limited partners units.
This right may be exercised on at least 10 days notice at
any time or from time to time, beginning on the date that is one
year after the date on which such limited partner is admitted to
the Operating Partnership (unless otherwise contractually agreed
by the general partner).
Unless the Company, as general partner, elects to assume and
perform the Operating Partnerships obligation with respect
to a redemption right, as described below, a limited partner
that exercises its redemption right will receive cash from the
Operating Partnership in an amount equal to the redemption
amount (as defined in the Operating Partnership Agreement
generally to reflect the average trading price of the common
stock of the Company over a specified 10 day trading
period) for the units redeemed. In lieu of the Operating
Partnership redeeming the units for cash, the Company, as the
general partner, has the right to elect to acquire the units
directly from a limited partner exercising its redemption right,
in exchange for cash in the amount specified above as the
redemption amount or by issuance of the shares
amount (as defined in the Operating Partnership Agreement,
generally to mean the issuance of one share of the
Companys common stock for each unit of limited partnership
interest redeemed).
A limited partner cannot exercise its redemption right if
delivery of shares of common stock would be prohibited under the
articles of incorporation of the Company or if in the opinion of
counsel to the general partner there is a significant risk that
delivery of shares of common stock would cause the general
partner to no longer qualify as a
5
REIT, would cause a violation of the applicable securities or
certain antitrust laws, or would result in the Operating
Partnership no longer being treated as a partnership for federal
income tax purposes.
Limited Partner Transfer Restrictions: Limited
partners generally may not transfer partnership interests (other
than to their estates, immediate family or certain affiliates)
without the prior written consent of the Company as general
partner, which consent may be given or withheld in its sole and
absolute discretion. The Company, as general partner, has a
right of first refusal to purchase partnership interests
proposed to be sold by the limited partners. Transfers must
comply with applicable securities laws and regulations.
Transfers of partnership interests generally are not permitted
if the transfer would be made through certain trading markets or
adversely affect the Companys ability to qualify as a REIT
or could subject the Company to any additional taxes under
Section 857 or Section 4981 of the Code.
Management: The Operating Partnership is organized
as a California limited partnership. The Company, as the sole
general partner of the Operating Partnership, has full,
exclusive and complete responsibility and discretion in managing
and controlling the Operating Partnership, except as provided in
the Operating Partnership Agreement and by applicable law. The
limited partners of the Operating Partnership have no authority
to transact business for, or participate in the management
activities or decisions of, the Operating Partnership except as
provided in the Operating Partnership Agreement and as permitted
by applicable law. The Operating Partnership Agreement provides
that the general partner may not be removed by the limited
partners. In exercising its authority under the agreement, the
general partner may take into account (but is not required to do
so) the tax consequences to any partner of actions or inaction
and is under no obligation to consider the separate interests of
the limited partners.
However, the consent of the limited partners holding a majority
of the interests of the limited partners (including limited
partnership interests held by the Company) generally will be
required to amend the Operating Partnership Agreement. Further,
the Operating Partnership Agreement cannot be amended without
the consent of each partner adversely affected if, among other
things, the amendment would alter the partners rights to
distributions from the Operating Partnership (except as
specifically permitted in the Operating Partnership Agreement),
alter the redemption right, or impose on the limited partners an
obligation to make additional capital contributions.
The consent of all limited partners will be required to
(i) take any action that would make it impossible to carry
on the ordinary business of the Operating Partnership, except as
otherwise provided in the Operating Partnership Agreement; or
(ii) possess Operating Partnership property, or assign any
rights in specific Operating Partnership property, for other
than an Operating Partnership purpose, except as otherwise
provided in the Operating Partnership Agreement. In addition,
without the consent of any adversely affected limited partner,
the general partner may not perform any act that would subject a
limited partner to liability as a general partner in any
jurisdiction or any other liability except as provided in the
Operating Partnership Agreement or under California law.
Extraordinary Transactions: The Operating
Partnership Agreement provides that the Company may not engage
in any business combination, defined to mean any merger,
consolidation or other combination with or into another person
or sale of all or substantially all of its assets, any
reclassification, any recapitalization (other than certain stock
splits or stock dividends) or change of outstanding shares of
common stock, unless (i) the limited partners of the
Operating Partnership will receive, or have the opportunity to
receive, the same proportionate consideration per unit in the
transaction as shareholders of the Company (without regard to
tax considerations); or (ii) limited partners of the
Operating Partnership (other than the general partner) holding
at least 60% of the interests in the Operating Partnership held
by limited partners (other than the general partner) vote to
approve the business combination. In addition, the Company, as
general partner of the Operating Partnership, has agreed in the
Operating Partnership Agreement with the limited partners of the
Operating Partnership that it will not consummate a business
combination in which the Company conducted a vote of
shareholders unless the matter is also submitted to a vote of
the partners.
The foregoing provision of the Operating Partnership Agreement
would under no circumstances enable or require the Company to
engage in a business combination which required the approval of
shareholders if the shareholders of the Company did not in fact
give the requisite approval. Rather, if the shareholders did
approve a business combination, the Company would not consummate
the transaction unless the Company as general partner first
conducts a vote of partners of the Operating Partnership on the
matter. For purposes of the Operating Partnership vote, the
Company shall be deemed to vote its partnership interest in the
same proportion as the
6
shareholders of the Company voted on the matter (disregarding
shareholders who do not vote). The Operating Partnership vote
will be deemed approved if the votes recorded are such that if
the Operating Partnership vote had been a vote of shareholders,
the business combination would have been approved by the
shareholders. As a result of these provisions of the Operating
Partnership, a third party may be inhibited from making an
acquisition proposal for the Company that it would otherwise
make, or the Company, despite having the requisite authority
under its articles of incorporation, may not be authorized to
engage in a proposed business combination.
Indemnification: The Operating Partnership Agreement
generally provides that the Company and its officers and
directors and the limited partners of the Operating Partnership
will be indemnified and held harmless by the Operating
Partnership for matters that relate to the operations of the
Operating Partnership unless it is established that (i) the
act or omission of the indemnified person was material to the
matter giving rise to the proceeding and either was committed in
bad faith or was the result of active and deliberate dishonesty;
(ii) the indemnified person actually received an improper
personal benefit in money, property or services; or
(iii) in the case of any criminal proceeding, the
indemnified person had reasonable cause to believe that the act
or omission was unlawful. The termination of any proceeding by
judgment, order or settlement does not create a presumption that
the indemnified person did not meet the requisite standards of
conduct set forth above. The termination of any proceeding by
conviction or upon a plea of nolo contendere or its equivalent,
or an entry of an order of probation prior to judgment, creates
a rebuttable presumption that the indemnified person did not
meet the requisite standard of conduct set forth above. Any
indemnification so made shall be made only out of the assets of
the Operating Partnership or through insurance obtained by the
Operating Partnership. The general partner shall not be liable
for monetary damages to the partnership, any partners or any
assignees for losses sustained, liabilities incurred or benefits
not derived as a result of errors in judgment or of any act or
omissions if the general partner acted in good faith.
Duties and Conflicts: The Operating Agreement allows
the Company to operate the Operating Partnership in a manner
that will enable the Company to satisfy the requirements for
being classified as a REIT. The Company intends to conduct all
of its business activities, including all activities pertaining
to the acquisition, management and operation of properties,
through the Operating Partnership. However, the Company may own,
directly or through subsidiaries, interests in Operating
Partnership properties that do not exceed 1% of the economic
interest of any property, and if appropriate for regulatory, tax
or other purposes, the Company also may own, directly or through
subsidiaries, interests in assets that the Operating Partnership
otherwise could acquire, if the Company grants to the Operating
Partnership the option to acquire the assets within a period not
to exceed three years in exchange for the number of partnership
units that would be issued if the Operating Partnership had
acquired the assets at the time of acquisition by the Company.
Term: The Operating Partnership will continue in
full force and effect until December 31, 2096 or until
sooner dissolved upon the withdrawal of the general partner
(unless the limited partners elect to continue the Operating
Partnership), or by the election of the general partner (with
the consent of the holders of a majority of the partnerships
interests if such vote is held before January 1, 2056), in
connection with a merger or the sale or other disposition of all
or substantially all of the assets of the Operating Partnership,
or by judicial decree.
Other Provisions: The Operating Partnership
Agreement contains other provisions affecting its operations and
management, limited partner access to certain business records,
responsibility for expenses and reimbursements, tax allocations,
distribution of certain reports,
winding-up
and liquidation, the granting by the limited partners of powers
of attorney to the general partner, the rights of holders of
particular series of preferred units, and other matters.
Cost
Allocation and Administrative Services
Pursuant to a cost sharing and administrative services
agreement, the Company shares costs with PS and affiliated
entities for certain administrative services. These services
include investor relations, legal, corporate tax, information
systems and office services. Under this agreement, costs are
allocated to the Company in accordance with its proportionate
share of these costs. These allocated costs totaled $372,000,
$390,000 and $303,000 for the years ended December 31,
2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively.
7
Common
Officers and Directors with PS
Ronald L. Havner, Jr., Chairman of the Company, is the
Chief Executive Officer and President of PS. Harvey Lenkin,
retired president of PS, is a Director of both the Company and
PS. The Company engages additional executive personnel who
render services exclusively for the Company. However, it is
expected that certain officers of PS will continue to render
services for the Company as requested pursuant to the cost
sharing and administrative services agreement.
Property
Management
The Company continues to manage commercial properties owned by
PS and its affiliates, which are generally adjacent to
mini-warehouses, for a fee of 5% of the gross revenues of such
properties in addition to reimbursement of direct costs. The
property management contract with PS is for a seven-year term
with the agreement automatically extending for an additional
one-year period upon each one-year anniversary of its
commencement (unless cancelled by either party). Either party
can give notice of its intent to cancel the agreement upon
expiration of its current term. Management fee revenue derived
from these management contracts with PS and its affiliates
totaled $698,000, $728,000 and $724,000 for the years ended
December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively.
In December, 2006, PS began providing property management
services for the mini storage component of two assets owned by
the Company. These mini storage facilities, located in Palm
Beach County, Florida, operate under the Public
Storage name. Either the Company or PS can cancel the
property management contract upon 60 days notice.
Management fee expenses under the contract were $50,000, $45,000
and $47,000 for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and
2007, respectively.
Management
Joseph D. Russell, Jr. leads the Companys senior
management team. Mr. Russell is President and Chief
Executive Officer of the Company. The Companys executive
management includes: John W. Petersen, Executive Vice President
and Chief Operating Officer; Edward A. Stokx, Executive Vice
President and Chief Financial Officer; Maria R. Hawthorne,
Senior Vice President (East Coast); Trenton A. Groves, Vice
President and Corporate Controller; Coby A. Holley, Vice
President (Pacific Northwest Division); Robin E. Mather, Vice
President (Southern California Division); William A. McFaul,
Vice President (Washington Metro Division); Eddie F. Ruiz, Vice
President and Director of Facilities; Viola I. Sanchez, Vice
President (Southeast Division); and David A. Vicars, Vice
President (Midwest Division).
REIT
Structure
If certain detailed conditions imposed by the Code and the
related Treasury Regulations are met, an entity, such as the
Company, that invests principally in real estate and that
otherwise would be taxed as a corporation may elect to be
treated as a REIT. The most important consequence to the Company
of being treated as a REIT for federal income tax purposes is
that the Company can deduct dividend distributions (including
distributions on preferred stock) to its shareholders, thus
effectively eliminating the double taxation (at the
corporate and shareholder levels) that typically results when a
corporation earns income and distributes that income to
shareholders in the form of dividends.
The Company believes that it has operated, and intends to
continue to operate, in such a manner as to qualify as a REIT
under the Code, but no assurance can be given that it will at
all times so qualify. To the extent that the Company continues
to qualify as a REIT, it will not be taxed, with certain limited
exceptions, on the taxable income that is distributed to its
shareholders.
Operating
Strategy
The Company believes its operating, acquisition and finance
strategies combined with its diversified portfolio produces a
low risk, high growth business model. The Companys primary
objective is to grow shareholder value. Key elements of the
Companys growth strategy include:
Maximize Net Cash Flow of Existing Properties: The
Company seeks to maximize the net cash flow generated by its
properties by (i) maximizing average occupancy rates,
(ii) achieving the highest possible
8
levels of realized monthly rents per occupied square foot and
(iii) controlling its operating cost structure by improving
operating efficiencies and economies of scale. The Company
believes that its experienced property management personnel and
comprehensive systems combined with increasing economies of
scale will enhance the Companys ability to meet these
goals. The Company seeks to increase occupancy rates and
realized monthly rents per square foot by providing its field
personnel with incentives to lease space to higher credit
tenants and to maximize the return on investment in each lease
transaction. The Company seeks to maximize its cash flow by
controlling capital expenditures associated with re-leasing
space by acquiring and owning properties with easily
reconfigured space that appeal to a wide range of tenants.
Focus on Targeted Markets: The Company intends to
continue investing in markets that have characteristics which
enable them to be competitive economically. The Company believes
that markets with some combination of above average population
growth, education levels and personal income will produce better
overall economic returns. As of December 31, 2009,
substantially all of the Companys square footage was
located in these targeted core markets. The Company targets
individual properties in those markets that are close to
critical infrastructure, middle to high income housing,
universities and have easy access to major transportation
arteries.
Reduce Capital Expenditures and Increase Occupancy Rates by
Providing Flexible Properties and Attracting a Diversified
Tenant Base: By focusing on properties with easily
reconfigurable space, the Company believes it can offer
facilities that appeal to a wide range of potential tenants,
which aids in reducing the capital expenditures associated with
re-leasing space. The Company believes this property flexibility
also allows it to better serve existing tenants by accommodating
their inevitable expansion and contraction needs. In addition,
the Company believes that a diversified tenant base and property
flexibility helps it maintain high occupancy rates during
periods when market demand is weak, by enabling it to attract a
greater number of potential users to its space.
Provide Superior Property Management: The Company
seeks to provide a superior level of service to its tenants in
order to achieve high occupancy and rental rates, as well as
minimal customer turnover. The Companys property
management offices are primarily located
on-site or
regionally located, providing tenants with convenient access to
management and helping the Company maintain its properties and
convey a sense of quality, order and security. The Company has
significant experience in acquiring properties managed by others
and thereafter improving tenant satisfaction, occupancy levels,
renewal rates and rental income by implementing established
tenant service programs.
Financing
Strategy
The Companys primary objective in its financing strategy
is to maintain financial flexibility and a low risk capital
structure using permanent capital to finance its growth. Key
elements of this strategy are:
Retain Operating Cash Flow: The Company seeks to
retain significant funds (after funding its distributions and
capital improvements) for additional investments. During the
year ended December 31, 2009, the Company distributed 32.2%
of its funds from operations (FFO) to common
shareholders/unit holders. During the year ended
December 31, 2008, the Company distributed 37.3% of its FFO
to common shareholders/unit holders. FFO is computed in
accordance with the White Paper on FFO approved by the Board of
Governors of the National Association of Real Estate Investment
Trusts (NAREIT). The White Paper defines FFO as net
income, computed in accordance with U.S. generally accepted
accounting principles (GAAP), before depreciation,
amortization, gains or losses on asset dispositions, net income
allocable to noncontrolling interests common units,
net income allocable to restricted stock unit holders and
nonrecurring items. FFO is a non-GAAP financial measure and
should be analyzed in conjunction with net income. However, FFO
should not be viewed as a substitute for net income as a measure
of operating performance as it does not reflect depreciation and
amortization costs or the level of capital expenditure and
leasing costs necessary to maintain the operating performance of
the Companys properties, which are significant economic
costs and could materially impact the Companys results of
operations. Other REITs may use different methods for
calculating FFO and, accordingly, the Companys FFO may not
be comparable to other real estate companies funds from
operations. See Item 7, Managements Discussion
and Analysis of Financial
9
Condition and Results of Operations Liquidity and
Capital Resources Non-GAAP Supplemental
Disclosure Measure: Funds from Operations, for a
reconciliation of FFO and net income allocable to common
shareholders and for information on why the Company presents FFO.
Perpetual Preferred Stock/Units: The primary source
of leverage in the Companys capital structure is perpetual
preferred stock or equivalent preferred units in the Operating
Partnership. This method of financing eliminates interest rate
and refinancing risks because the dividend rate is fixed and the
stated value or capital contribution is not required to be
repaid. In addition, the consequences of defaulting on required
preferred distributions is less severe than with debt. The
preferred shareholders may elect two additional directors if six
quarterly distributions go unpaid, whether or not consecutive.
Debt Financing: The Company has used debt financing
to a limited degree. The primary source of debt that the Company
relies upon to provide short term capital is its
$100.0 million unsecured line of credit with Wells Fargo.
The Company had no balance outstanding on its Credit Facility at
December 31, 2009 and 2008.
Access to Capital: The Company seeks to maintain a
minimum ratio of FFO to combined fixed charges and preferred
distributions paid of 2.6 to 1.0. Fixed charges include interest
expense and capitalized interest. Preferred distributions
include amounts paid to preferred shareholders and preferred
Operating Partnership unit holders. For the year ended
December 31, 2009, the FFO to combined fixed charges and
preferred distributions paid ratio was 3.4 to 1.0, excluding the
$35.6 million net gain on the repurchase of preferred
equity. The Company believes that its financial position will
enable it to access capital to finance its future growth.
Subject to market conditions, the Company may add leverage to
its capital structure. Throughout this
Form 10-K,
we use the term preferred equity to mean both the
preferred stock issued by the Company and the preferred
partnership units issued by the Operating Partnership and the
term preferred distributions to mean dividends and
distributions on the preferred stock and preferred partnership
units.
Competition
Competition in the market areas in which many of the
Companys properties are located is significant and has
from time to time reduced the occupancy levels and rental rates
of, and increased the operating expenses of, certain of these
properties. Competition may be accelerated by any increase in
availability of funds for investment in real estate. Barriers to
entry are relatively low for those with the necessary capital
and the Company competes for property acquisitions and tenants
with entities that have greater financial resources than the
Company. Recent increases in sublease space and unleased
developments are expected to further intensify competition among
operators in certain market areas in which the Company operates.
The Companys properties compete for tenants with similar
properties located in its markets primarily on the basis of
location, rent charged, services provided and the design and
condition of improvements. The Company believes it possesses
several distinguishing characteristics that enable it to compete
effectively in the flex, office and industrial space markets.
The Company believes its personnel are among the most
experienced in these real estate markets. The Companys
facilities are part of a comprehensive system encompassing
standardized procedures and integrated reporting and information
networks. The Company believes that the significant operating
and financial experience of its executive officers and directors
combined with the Companys capital structure, national
investment scope, geographic diversity and economies of scale
should enable the Company to compete effectively.
Investments
in Real Estate Facilities
As of December 31, 2009 and 2008, the Company owned and
operated approximately 19.6 million rentable square feet.
Summary
of Business Model
The Company has a diversified portfolio. It is diversified
geographically in eight states and has a diversified customer
mix by size and industry concentration. The Company believes
that this diversification combined with a conservative financing
strategy, focus on markets with strong demographics for growth
and our operating strategy gives the Company a business model
that mitigates risk and provides strong long-term growth
opportunities.
10
Restrictions
on Transactions with Affiliates
The Companys Bylaws provide that the Company may engage in
transactions with affiliates provided that a purchase or sale
transaction with an affiliate is (i) approved by a majority
of the Companys independent directors and (ii) fair
to the Company based on an independent appraisal or fairness
opinion.
Borrowings
As of December 31, 2009, the Company had outstanding
mortgage notes payable of $52.9 million. See Notes 5
and 6 to the consolidated financial statements for a summary of
the Companys outstanding borrowings as of
December 31, 2009.
The Company has a line of credit (the Credit
Facility) with Wells Fargo Bank which expires on
August 1, 2010. The Credit Facility has a borrowing limit
of $100.0 million. Interest on outstanding borrowings is
payable monthly. At the option of the Company, the rate of
interest charged is equal to (i) the prime rate or
(ii) a rate ranging from the London Interbank Offered Rate
(LIBOR) plus 0.70% to LIBOR plus 1.50% depending on
the Companys credit ratings and coverage ratios, as
defined (currently LIBOR plus 0.85%). In addition, the Company
is required to pay an annual commitment fee ranging from 0.15%
to 0.30% of the borrowing limit (currently 0.20%). In connection
with the modification of the Credit Facility, the Company paid a
fee of $300,000, which is being amortized over the life of the
Credit Facility. The Company had no balance outstanding on its
Credit Facility at December 31, 2009 and 2008.
The Credit Facility requires the Company to meet certain
covenants including (i) maintain a balance sheet leverage
ratio (as defined therein) of less than 0.45 to 1.00,
(ii) maintain a fixed charge coverage ratio (as defined
therein) of not less than 1.75 to 1.00, (iii) maintain a
minimum tangible net worth (as defined) and (iv) limit
distributions to 95% of funds from operations (as defined
therein) for any four consecutive quarters. In addition, the
Company is limited in its ability to incur additional borrowings
(the Company is required to maintain unencumbered assets with an
aggregate book value equal to or greater than two times the
Companys unsecured recourse debt; the Company did not have
any unsecured recourse debt at December 31, 2009) or
sell assets. The Company was in compliance with the covenants of
the Credit Facility at December 31, 2009.
The Company has broad powers to borrow in furtherance of the
Companys objectives. The Company has incurred in the past,
and may incur in the future, both short-term and long-term
indebtedness to increase its funds available for investment in
real estate, capital expenditures and distributions.
Employees
As of December 31, 2009, the Company employed 138
individuals, primarily personnel engaged in property operations.
The Company believes that its relationship with its employees is
good, and none of its employees are represented by a labor union.
Insurance
The Company believes that its properties are adequately insured.
Facilities operated by the Company have historically been
covered by comprehensive insurance, including fire, earthquake,
liability and extended coverage from nationally recognized
carriers.
Environmental
Matters
Compliance with laws and regulations relating to the protection
of the environment, including those regarding the discharge of
material into the environment, has not had any material effect
upon the capital expenditures, earnings or competitive position
of the Company.
Substantially all of the Companys properties have been
subjected to Phase I environmental reviews. Such reviews have
not revealed, nor is management aware of, any probable or
reasonably possible environmental costs that management believes
would have a material adverse effect on the Companys
business, assets or results of operations, nor is the Company
aware of any potentially material environmental liability.
11
In addition to the other information in this
Form 10-K,
the following factors should be considered in evaluating our
company and our business.
PS has
significant influence over us.
At December 31, 2009, PS and its affiliates owned 23.8% of
the outstanding shares of the Companys common stock and
23.0% of the outstanding common units of the Operating
Partnership (100% of the common units not owned by the Company).
Assuming issuance of the Companys common stock upon
redemption of its partnership units, PS would own 41.3% of the
outstanding shares of the Companys common stock. Ronald L.
Havner, Jr., the Companys chairman, is also the Chief
Executive Officer, President and a Director of PS. Harvey Lenkin
is a Director of both the Company and PS. Consequently, PS has
the ability to significantly influence all matters submitted to
a vote of our shareholders, including electing directors,
changing our articles of incorporation, dissolving and approving
other extraordinary transactions such as mergers, and all
matters requiring the consent of the limited partners of the
Operating Partnership. PSs interest in such matters may
differ from other shareholders. In addition, PSs ownership
may make it more difficult for another party to take over our
company without PSs approval.
Provisions
in our organizational documents may prevent changes in
control.
Our articles generally prohibit any person from owning more
than 7% of our shares: Our articles of incorporation
restrict the number of shares that may be owned by any other
person, and the partnership agreement of our Operating
Partnership contains an anti-takeover provision. No shareholder
(other than PS and certain other specified shareholders) may own
more than 7% of the outstanding shares of our common stock,
unless our board of directors waives this limitation. We imposed
this limitation to avoid, to the extent possible, a
concentration of ownership that might jeopardize our ability to
qualify as a REIT. This limitation, however, also makes a change
of control much more difficult (if not impossible) even if it
may be favorable to our public shareholders. These provisions
will prevent future takeover attempts not approved by PS even if
a majority of our public shareholders consider it to be in their
best interests because they would receive a premium for their
shares over market value or for other reasons.
Our board can set the terms of certain securities without
shareholder approval: Our board of directors is authorized,
without shareholder approval, to issue up to 50.0 million
shares of preferred stock and up to 100.0 million shares of
Equity Stock, in each case in one or more series. Our board has
the right to set the terms of each of these series of stock.
Consequently, the board could set the terms of a series of stock
that could make it difficult (if not impossible) for another
party to take over our company even if it might be favorable to
our public shareholders. Our articles of incorporation also
contain other provisions that could have the same effect. We can
also cause our Operating Partnership to issue additional
interests for cash or in exchange for property.
The partnership agreement of our Operating Partnership
restricts mergers: The partnership agreement of our
Operating Partnership generally provides that we may not merge
or engage in a similar transaction unless the limited partners
of our Operating Partnership are entitled to receive the same
proportionate payments as our shareholders. In addition, we have
agreed not to merge unless the merger would have been approved
had the limited partners been able to vote together with our
shareholders, which has the effect of increasing PSs
influence over us due to PSs ownership of operating
partnership units. These provisions may make it more difficult
for us to merge with another entity.
Our
Operating Partnership poses additional risks to us.
Limited partners of our Operating Partnership, including PS,
have the right to vote on certain changes to the partnership
agreement. They may vote in a way that is against the interests
of our shareholders. Also, as general partner of our Operating
Partnership, we are required to protect the interests of the
limited partners of the Operating Partnership. The interests of
the limited partners and of our shareholders may differ.
12
We would
incur adverse tax consequences if we fail to qualify as a
REIT.
Our cash flow would be reduced if we fail to qualify as a
REIT: While we believe that we have qualified since 1990 to
be taxed as a REIT, and will continue to be so qualified, we
cannot be certain. To continue to qualify as a REIT, we need to
satisfy certain requirements under the federal income tax laws
relating to our income, assets, distributions to shareholders
and shareholder base. In this regard, the share ownership limits
in our articles of incorporation do not necessarily ensure that
our shareholder base is sufficiently diverse for us to qualify
as a REIT. For any year we fail to qualify as a REIT, we would
be taxed at regular corporate tax rates on our taxable income
unless certain relief provisions apply. Taxes would reduce our
cash available for distributions to shareholders or for
reinvestment, which could adversely affect us and our
shareholders. Also we would not be allowed to elect REIT status
for five years after we fail to qualify unless certain relief
provisions apply.
We may need to borrow funds to meet our REIT distribution
requirements: To qualify as a REIT, we must generally
distribute to our shareholders 90% of our taxable income. Our
income consists primarily of our share of our Operating
Partnerships income. We intend to make sufficient
distributions to qualify as a REIT and otherwise avoid corporate
tax. However, differences in timing between income and expenses
and the need to make nondeductible expenditures such as capital
improvements and principal payments on debt could force us to
borrow funds to make necessary shareholder distributions.
The
recent market disruptions may adversely affect our operating
results and financial condition.
The United States economy is currently undergoing pervasive and
fundamental disruptions. The continuation or intensification of
any such volatility may have an adverse impact on the
availability of credit to businesses generally and could lead to
a further weakening of the U.S. and global economies. To
the extent that turmoil in the financial markets continues or
intensifies, it has the potential to materially affect the value
of our properties, the availability or the terms of financing
and may impact the ability of our customers to enter into new
leasing transactions or satisfy rental payments under existing
leases. The current market disruption could also affect our
operating results and financial condition as follows:
Debt and Equity Markets: Our results of operations
and share price are sensitive to the volatility of the credit
markets. The commercial real estate debt markets are currently
experiencing volatility as a result of various factors,
including the tightening of underwriting standards by lenders
and credit rating agencies and the continued erosion of
operating fundamentals of assets pledged as collateral. Credit
spreads for major sources of capital have widened significantly
as investors have demanded a higher risk premium. This is
resulting in lenders increasing the cost for debt financing.
Should the overall cost of borrowings increase, either by
increases in the index rates or by increases in lender spreads,
we will need to factor such increases into the economics of our
acquisitions. In addition, the state of the debt markets could
have an effect on the overall amount of capital being invested
in real estate, which may result in price or value decreases of
real estate assets and affect our ability to raise capital.
Valuations: The recent market volatility will likely
make the valuation of our properties more difficult. There may
be significant uncertainty in the valuation, or in the stability
of the value, of our properties, which could result in a
substantial decrease in the value of our properties. As a
result, we may not be able to recover the carrying amount of our
properties, which may require us to recognize an impairment
charge in earnings.
Government Intervention: The pervasive and
fundamental disruptions that the United States economy is
currently undergoing have led to extensive and unprecedented
governmental intervention. Such intervention has in certain
cases been implemented on an emergency basis,
suddenly and substantially eliminating market participants
ability to continue to implement certain strategies or manage
the risk of their outstanding positions. In addition, these
interventions have typically been unclear in scope and
application, resulting in confusion and uncertainty which in
itself has been materially detrimental to the efficient
functioning of the markets as well as previously successful
investment strategies. It is impossible to predict what, if any,
additional interim or permanent governmental restrictions may be
imposed on the markets or the effect of such restrictions on us
and our results of operations. There is a high likelihood of
significantly increased regulation of the financial markets that
could have a material effect on our operating results and
financial condition.
13
Since we
buy and operate real estate, we are subject to general real
estate investment and operating risks.
Summary of real estate risks: We own and operate
commercial properties and are subject to the risks of owning
real estate generally and commercial properties in particular.
These risks include:
|
|
|
|
|
the national, state and local economic climate and real estate
conditions, such as oversupply of or reduced demand for space
and changes in market rental rates;
|
|
|
|
how prospective tenants perceive the attractiveness, convenience
and safety of our properties;
|
|
|
|
difficulties in consummating and financing acquisitions and
developments on advantageous terms and the failure of
acquisitions and developments to perform as expected;
|
|
|
|
our ability to provide adequate management, maintenance and
insurance;
|
|
|
|
our ability to collect rent from tenants on a timely basis;
|
|
|
|
the expense of periodically renovating, repairing and reletting
spaces;
|
|
|
|
environmental issues;
|
|
|
|
compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and other
federal, state, and local laws and regulations;
|
|
|
|
increasing operating costs, including real estate taxes,
insurance and utilities, if these increased costs cannot be
passed through to tenants;
|
|
|
|
changes in tax, real estate and zoning laws;
|
|
|
|
increase in new commercial properties in our market;
|
|
|
|
tenant defaults and bankruptcies;
|
|
|
|
tenants right to sublease space; and
|
|
|
|
concentration of properties leased to non-rated private
companies.
|
Certain significant costs, such as mortgage payments, real
estate taxes, insurance and maintenance, generally are not
reduced even when a propertys rental income is reduced. In
addition, environmental and tax laws, interest rate levels, the
availability of financing and other factors may affect real
estate values and property income. Furthermore, the supply of
commercial space fluctuates with market conditions.
If our properties do not generate sufficient income to meet
operating expenses, including any debt service, tenant
improvements, lease commissions and other capital expenditures,
we may have to borrow additional amounts to cover fixed costs,
and we may have to reduce our distributions to shareholders.
We may be unable to consummate acquisitions and developments
on advantageous terms or new acquisitions and developments may
fail to perform as expected: While we have not acquired a
property since August, 2007, we continue to seek to acquire and
develop flex, industrial and office properties where they meet
our criteria and we believe that they will enhance our future
financial performance and the value of our portfolio. Our
belief, however, is subject to risks, uncertainties and other
factors, many of which are forward-looking and are uncertain in
nature or are beyond our control, including the risks that our
acquisitions and developments may not perform as expected, that
we may be unable to quickly integrate new acquisitions and
developments into our existing operations, and that any costs to
develop projects or redevelop acquired properties may exceed
estimates. Further, we face significant competition for suitable
acquisition properties from other real estate investors,
including other publicly traded real estate investment trusts
and private institutional investors. As a result, we may be
unable to acquire additional properties we desire or the
purchase price for desirable properties may be significantly
increased. In addition, some of these properties may have
unknown characteristics or deficiencies or may not complement
our portfolio of existing properties. In addition, we may
finance future acquisitions and developments through a
combination of borrowings, proceeds from equity or debt
offerings by us or the Operating Partnership, and proceeds from
property divestitures. These financing options may not be
available when desired or required or may be more costly than
anticipated, which could adversely affect our cash flow. Real
property development is subject to a number of risks,
14
including construction delays, complications in obtaining
necessary zoning, occupancy and other governmental permits, cost
overruns, financing risks, and the possible inability to meet
expected occupancy and rent levels. If any of these problems
occur, development costs for a project may increase, and there
may be costs incurred for projects that are not completed. As a
result of the foregoing, some properties may be worth less or
may generate less revenue than, or simply not perform as well
as, we believed at the time of acquisition or development,
negatively affecting our operating results. Any of the foregoing
risks could adversely affect our financial condition, operating
results and cash flow, and our ability to pay dividends on, and
the market price of, our stock. In addition, we may be unable to
successfully integrate and effectively manage the properties we
do acquire and develop, which could adversely affect our results
of operations.
We may encounter significant delays and expense in reletting
vacant space, or we may not be able to relet space at existing
rates, in each case resulting in losses of income: When
leases expire, we will incur expenses in retrofitting space and
we may not be able to re-lease the space on the same terms.
Certain leases provide tenants with the right to terminate early
if they pay a fee. As of December 31, 2009, our properties
generally had lower vacancy rates than the average for the
markets in which they are located, and leases accounting for
21.8% of our annualized rental income expire in 2010. While we
have estimated our cost of renewing leases that expire in 2010,
our estimates could be wrong. If we are unable to re-lease space
promptly, if the terms are significantly less favorable than
anticipated or if the costs are higher, we may have to reduce
our distributions to shareholders.
Tenant defaults and bankruptcies may reduce our cash flow and
distributions: We may have difficulty collecting from
tenants in default, particularly if they declare bankruptcy.
This could affect our cash flow and our ability to fund
distributions to shareholders. Since many of our tenants are
non-rated private companies, this risk may be enhanced. There is
inherent uncertainty in a tenants ability to continue
paying rent if they are in bankruptcy. As of February 26,
2010, the Company had approximately 17,000 square feet of
leased space that is occupied by tenants that are protected by
Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. In addition,
we had tenants occupying approximately 818,000 square feet
who vacated their space during the year ended December 31,
2009 prior to their scheduled lease expiration as a result of
business failures. As of December 31, 2009,
466,000 square feet has been re-leased. During the years
ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, write-offs of unpaid
rents were $988,000 and $602,000, respectively. A number of
other tenants have contacted us requesting early termination of
their lease, reduction in space under lease, or rent deferment
or abatement. At this time, the Company cannot anticipate what
effect, if any, the ultimate outcome of these discussions will
have on our future operating results.
We may be adversely affected by significant competition among
commercial properties: Many other commercial properties
compete with our properties for tenants. Some of the competing
properties may be newer and better located than our properties.
We also expect that new properties will be built in our markets.
In addition, we compete with other buyers, many of which are
larger than us, for attractive commercial properties. Therefore,
we may not be able to grow as rapidly as we would like.
We may be adversely affected if casualties to our properties
are not covered by insurance: We could suffer uninsured
losses or losses in excess of our insurance policy limits for
occurrences such as earthquakes or hurricanes that adversely
affect us or even result in loss of the property. We might still
remain liable on any mortgage debt or other unsatisfied
obligations related to that property.
The illiquidity of our real estate investments may prevent us
from adjusting our portfolio to respond to market changes:
There may be delays and difficulties in selling real estate.
Therefore, we cannot easily change our portfolio when economic
conditions change. Also, tax laws limit a REITs ability to
sell properties held for less than four years.
We may be adversely affected by changes in
laws: Increases in income and service taxes may reduce
our cash flow and ability to make expected distributions to our
shareholders. Our properties are also subject to various
federal, state and local regulatory requirements, such as state
and local fire and safety codes. If we fail to comply with these
requirements, governmental authorities could fine us or courts
could award damages against us. We believe our properties comply
with all significant legal requirements. However, these
requirements could change in a way that would reduce our cash
flow and ability to make distributions to shareholders.
15
We may incur significant environmental remediation costs:
Under various federal, state and local environmental laws,
an owner or operator of real estate may have to clean spills or
other releases of hazardous or toxic substances on or from a
property. Certain environmental laws impose liability whether or
not the owner knew of, or was responsible for, the presence of
the hazardous or toxic substances. In some cases, liability may
exceed the value of the property. The presence of toxic
substances, or the failure to properly remedy any resulting
contamination, may make it more difficult for the owner or
operator to sell, lease or operate its property or to borrow
money using its property as collateral. Future environmental
laws may impose additional material liabilities on us.
We depend
on external sources of capital to grow our company.
We are generally required under the Internal Revenue Code to
distribute at least 90% of our taxable income. Because of this
distribution requirement, we may not be able to fund future
capital needs, including any necessary building and tenant
improvements, from operating cash flow. Consequently, we may
need to rely on third-party sources of capital to fund our
capital needs. We may not be able to obtain the financing on
favorable terms or at all. Access to third-party sources of
capital depends, in part, on general market conditions, the
markets perception of our growth potential, our current
and expected future earnings, our cash flow, and the market
price per share of our common stock. If we cannot obtain capital
from third-party sources, we may not be able to acquire
properties when strategic opportunities exist, satisfy any debt
service obligations, or make cash distributions to shareholders.
Our
ability to control our properties may be adversely affected by
ownership through partnerships and joint ventures.
We own most of our properties through our Operating Partnership.
Our organizational documents do not prevent us from acquiring
properties with others through partnerships or joint ventures.
This type of investment may present additional risks. For
example, our partners may have interests that differ from ours
or that conflict with ours, or our partners may become bankrupt.
We can
change our business policies and increase our level of debt
without shareholder approval.
Our board of directors establishes our investment, financing,
distribution and our other business policies and may change
these policies without shareholder approval. Our organizational
documents do not limit our level of debt. A change in our
policies or an increase in our level of debt could adversely
affect our operations or the price of our common stock.
We can
issue additional securities without shareholder
approval.
We can issue preferred equity, common stock and Equity Stock
without shareholder approval. Holders of preferred stock have
priority over holders of common stock, and the issuance of
additional shares of stock reduces the interest of existing
holders in our company.
Increases
in interest rates may adversely affect the market price of our
common stock.
One of the factors that influences the market price of our
common stock is the annual rate of distributions that we pay on
our common stock, as compared with interest rates. An increase
in interest rates may lead purchasers of REIT shares to demand
higher annual distribution rates, which could adversely affect
the market price of our common stock.
Shares
that become available for future sale may adversely affect the
market price of our common stock.
Substantial sales of our common stock, or the perception that
substantial sales may occur, could adversely affect the market
price of our common stock. As of December 31, 2009, PS and
its affiliates owned 23.8% of the outstanding shares of the
Companys common stock and 23.0% of the outstanding common
units of the Operating Partnership (100% of the common units not
owned by the Company). Assuming issuance of the Companys
common stock upon redemption of its partnership units, PS would
own 41.3% of the outstanding shares of the
16
Companys common stock. These shares, as well as shares of
common stock held by certain other significant shareholders, are
eligible to be sold in the public market, subject to compliance
with applicable securities laws.
We depend
on key personnel.
We depend on our key personnel, including Joseph D.
Russell, Jr., our President and Chief Executive Officer.
The loss of Mr. Russell or other key personnel could
adversely affect our operations. We maintain no key person
insurance on our key personnel.
Change in
taxation of corporate dividends may adversely affect the value
of our shares.
The Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003,
enacted on May 28, 2003, generally reduced to 15% the
maximum marginal rate of federal tax payable by individuals on
dividends received from a regular C corporation. This reduced
tax rate, however, does not apply to dividends paid to
individuals by a REIT on its shares except for certain limited
amounts. The earnings of a REIT that are distributed to its
shareholders are generally subject to less federal income
taxation on an aggregate basis than earnings of a regular C
corporation that are distributed to its shareholders net of
corporate-level income tax. The Jobs and Growth Tax Act,
however, could cause individual investors to view stocks of
regular C corporations as more attractive relative to shares of
REITs than was the case prior to the enactment of the
legislation because the dividends from regular C corporations,
which previously were taxed at the same rate as REIT dividends,
are now at a maximum marginal rate of 15% while REIT dividends
are generally taxed at a maximum marginal rate of 35%.
|
|
ITEM 1B.
|
UNRESOLVED
STAFF COMMENTS
|
None.
17
As of December 31, 2009, the Company owned approximately
12.2 million square feet of flex space, 3.9 million
square feet of industrial space and 3.4 million square feet
of office space concentrated primarily in 10 regions consisting
of Southern and Northern California, Southern and Northern
Texas, South Florida, Virginia, Maryland, Oregon, Arizona and
Washington. Additionally, the Company owned 131,000 square
feet of office space in Southern Texas classified as properties
held for disposition at December 31, 2009. The weighted
average occupancy rate throughout 2009 was 90.4% and the average
realized rent per square foot was $15.43, both of which exclude
the effect of assets classified as held for disposition.
The following table contains information about all properties
(excluding those classified as properties held for disposition)
owned by the Company as of December 31, 2009 and the
weighted average occupancy rates throughout 2009 (except as set
forth below, all of the properties are held in fee simple
interest) (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
Rentable Square Footage
|
|
Average
|
Location
|
|
Flex
|
|
Industrial
|
|
Office
|
|
Total
|
|
Occupancy Rate
|
|
Arizona
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mesa
|
|
|
78
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
78
|
|
|
|
81.2
|
%
|
Phoenix
|
|
|
310
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
310
|
|
|
|
80.4
|
%
|
Tempe
|
|
|
291
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
291
|
|
|
|
92.1
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
679
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
679
|
|
|
|
85.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Northern California
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hayward
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
407
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
407
|
|
|
|
96.1
|
%
|
Monterey
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
86.9
|
%
|
Sacramento
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
367
|
|
|
|
367
|
|
|
|
84.6
|
%
|
San Jose
|
|
|
708
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
708
|
|
|
|
87.3
|
%
|
San Ramon
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
|
84.8
|
%
|
Santa Clara
|
|
|
178
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
178
|
|
|
|
52.0
|
%
|
So. San Francisco
|
|
|
94
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
94
|
|
|
|
93.8
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
980
|
|
|
|
407
|
|
|
|
431
|
|
|
|
1,818
|
|
|
|
85.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Southern California
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Buena Park
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
317
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
317
|
|
|
|
98.7
|
%
|
Carson
|
|
|
77
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
77
|
|
|
|
87.3
|
%
|
Cerritos
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
395
|
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
426
|
|
|
|
98.7
|
%
|
Culver City
|
|
|
149
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
149
|
|
|
|
94.8
|
%
|
Irvine
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
160
|
|
|
|
160
|
|
|
|
95.9
|
%
|
Laguna Hills
|
|
|
614
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
614
|
|
|
|
91.2
|
%
|
Lake Forest
|
|
|
297
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
297
|
|
|
|
89.6
|
%
|
Monterey Park
|
|
|
199
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
199
|
|
|
|
86.7
|
%
|
Orange
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
108
|
|
|
|
108
|
|
|
|
85.3
|
%
|
San Diego(1)
|
|
|
768
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
768
|
|
|
|
92.2
|
%
|
Santa Ana
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
437
|
|
|
|
437
|
|
|
|
82.6
|
%
|
Signal Hill
|
|
|
267
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
267
|
|
|
|
87.4
|
%
|
Studio City
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
90.8
|
%
|
Torrance
|
|
|
147
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
147
|
|
|
|
90.8
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,540
|
|
|
|
712
|
|
|
|
736
|
|
|
|
3,988
|
|
|
|
91.3
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maryland
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beltsville
|
|
|
309
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
309
|
|
|
|
84.8
|
%
|
Gaithersburg
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
97.8
|
%
|
Rockville
|
|
|
212
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
688
|
|
|
|
900
|
|
|
|
95.6
|
%
|
Silver Spring(1)
|
|
|
366
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
166
|
|
|
|
532
|
|
|
|
89.9
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
887
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
883
|
|
|
|
1,770
|
|
|
|
92.1
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oregon
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beaverton
|
|
|
1,024
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
188
|
|
|
|
1,212
|
|
|
|
79.4
|
%
|
Milwaukee
|
|
|
102
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
102
|
|
|
|
86.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,126
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
188
|
|
|
|
1,314
|
|
|
|
79.9
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
Rentable Square Footage
|
|
Average
|
Location
|
|
Flex
|
|
Industrial
|
|
Office
|
|
Total
|
|
Occupancy Rate
|
|
Northern Texas
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dallas
|
|
|
237
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
237
|
|
|
|
86.0
|
%
|
Farmers Branch
|
|
|
112
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
112
|
|
|
|
79.4
|
%
|
Garland
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
84.1
|
%
|
Irving(2)
|
|
|
715
|
|
|
|
231
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
946
|
|
|
|
94.3
|
%
|
Mesquite
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
|
92.4
|
%
|
Plano
|
|
|
184
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
184
|
|
|
|
92.7
|
%
|
Richardson
|
|
|
117
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
117
|
|
|
|
86.3
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,458
|
|
|
|
231
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,689
|
|
|
|
91.1
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Southern Texas
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Austin
|
|
|
787
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
787
|
|
|
|
83.8
|
%
|
Houston
|
|
|
177
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
177
|
|
|
|
92.6
|
%
|
Missouri City
|
|
|
66
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
66
|
|
|
|
97.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,030
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,030
|
|
|
|
86.2
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
South Florida
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Boca Raton(1)
|
|
|
135
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
135
|
|
|
|
87.2
|
%
|
Miami
|
|
|
631
|
|
|
|
2,556
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
3,199
|
|
|
|
95.4
|
%
|
Wellington(1)
|
|
|
262
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
262
|
|
|
|
86.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,028
|
|
|
|
2,556
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
3,596
|
|
|
|
94.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Virginia
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alexandria
|
|
|
155
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
54
|
|
|
|
209
|
|
|
|
94.2
|
%
|
Chantilly
|
|
|
563
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38
|
|
|
|
601
|
|
|
|
82.3
|
%
|
Fairfax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
292
|
|
|
|
292
|
|
|
|
90.9
|
%
|
Herndon
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
244
|
|
|
|
244
|
|
|
|
95.0
|
%
|
Lorton
|
|
|
246
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
246
|
|
|
|
98.0
|
%
|
Merrifield
|
|
|
303
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
355
|
|
|
|
658
|
|
|
|
98.9
|
%
|
Springfield
|
|
|
270
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
90
|
|
|
|
360
|
|
|
|
97.6
|
%
|
Sterling
|
|
|
296
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
296
|
|
|
|
97.3
|
%
|
Woodbridge
|
|
|
114
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
114
|
|
|
|
93.4
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,947
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,073
|
|
|
|
3,020
|
|
|
|
93.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Washington
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Redmond
|
|
|
465
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
493
|
|
|
|
88.8
|
%
|
Renton
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
77.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
493
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
521
|
|
|
|
88.2
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
12,168
|
|
|
|
3,906
|
|
|
|
3,351
|
|
|
|
19,425
|
|
|
|
90.4
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Five commercial properties, one in San Diego, California,
one in Silver Spring, Maryland, one in Boca Raton, Florida, and
two in Wellington, Florida, serve as collateral to mortgage
notes payable. For more information, see Note 6 to the
consolidated financial statements. |
|
(2) |
|
The Company owns two properties that are subject to ground
leases in Las Colinas, Texas, expiring in 2019 and 2020, each
with one 10 year extension option. |
We currently anticipate that each of the properties listed above
will continue to be used for its current purpose. Competition
exists in each of the market areas in which these properties are
located. For information regarding general competitive
conditions to which the Companys properties are or may be
subject, see Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations
Overview Effect of Economic Conditions on the
Companys Primary Markets.
The Company has no plans to change the current use of its
properties. The Company typically renovates its properties in
connection with the re-leasing of space to tenants and expects
that it will pay the costs of such renovations from rental
income. The Company has risks that tenants will default on
leases and declare bankruptcy. Management believes these risks
are mitigated through the Companys geographic diversity
and diverse tenant base.
19
The Company evaluates the performance of its properties
primarily based on net operating income (NOI). NOI
is defined by the Company as rental income as defined by GAAP
less cost of operations as defined by GAAP. See
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations
Overview Concentration of Portfolio by Region
below for more information on NOI, including why the Company
presents NOI and how the Company uses NOI. The following
information illustrates rental income, cost of operations and
NOI generated by the Companys total portfolio in 2009,
2008 and 2007 by geographic region and by property
classifications. As a result of acquisitions and dispositions,
certain properties were not held for the full year.
The Companys calculation of NOI may not be comparable to
those of other companies and should not be used as an
alternative to measures of performance in accordance with GAAP.
The tables below also include a reconciliation of NOI to the
most comparable amounts based on GAAP (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For The Year Ended December 31, 2009
|
|
|
For The Year Ended December 31, 2008
|
|
|
For The Year Ended December 31, 2007
|
|
|
|
Flex
|
|
|
Office
|
|
|
Industrial
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Flex
|
|
|
Office
|
|
|
Industrial
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Flex
|
|
|
Office
|
|
|
Industrial
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Rental Income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Southern California
|
|
$
|
41,566
|
|
|
$
|
14,767
|
|
|
$
|
5,554
|
|
|
$
|
61,887
|
|
|
$
|
43,894
|
|
|
$
|
15,619
|
|
|
$
|
5,804
|
|
|
$
|
65,317
|
|
|
$
|
43,049
|
|
|
$
|
16,099
|
|
|
$
|
5,326
|
|
|
$
|
64,474
|
|
Northern California
|
|
|
11,103
|
|
|
|
6,733
|
|
|
|
2,859
|
|
|
|
20,695
|
|
|
|
13,859
|
|
|
|
7,190
|
|
|
|
2,890
|
|
|
|
23,939
|
|
|
|
12,559
|
|
|
|
6,977
|
|
|
|
2,676
|
|
|
|
22,212
|
|
Southern Texas
|
|
|
9,899
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,899
|
|
|
|
10,228
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,228
|
|
|
|
9,648
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,648
|
|
Northern Texas
|
|
|
15,331
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,245
|
|
|
|
16,576
|
|
|
|
15,686
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,278
|
|
|
|
16,964
|
|
|
|
14,062
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,100
|
|
|
|
15,162
|
|
South Florida
|
|
|
11,292
|
|
|
|
212
|
|
|
|
19,912
|
|
|
|
31,416
|
|
|
|
12,336
|
|
|
|
214
|
|
|
|
20,005
|
|
|
|
32,555
|
|
|
|
11,777
|
|
|
|
230
|
|
|
|
19,508
|
|
|
|
31,515
|
|
Virginia
|
|
|
34,265
|
|
|
|
24,575
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
58,840
|
|
|
|
34,508
|
|
|
|
24,684
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
59,192
|
|
|
|
32,666
|
|
|
|
21,536
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
54,202
|
|
Maryland
|
|
|
16,670
|
|
|
|
22,442
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39,112
|
|
|
|
16,288
|
|
|
|
21,689
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
37,977
|
|
|
|
17,341
|
|
|
|
21,532
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38,873
|
|
Oregon
|
|
|
14,269
|
|
|
|
2,941
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,210
|
|
|
|
14,985
|
|
|
|
3,481
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18,466
|
|
|
|
15,015
|
|
|
|
3,266
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18,281
|
|
Arizona
|
|
|
6,393
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,393
|
|
|
|
7,006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,006
|
|
|
|
6,976
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,976
|
|
Washington
|
|
|
8,291
|
|
|
|
638
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,929
|
|
|
|
8,850
|
|
|
|
621
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,471
|
|
|
|
6,676
|
|
|
|
555
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,231
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
169,079
|
|
|
|
72,308
|
|
|
|
29,570
|
|
|
|
270,957
|
|
|
|
177,640
|
|
|
|
73,498
|
|
|
|
29,977
|
|
|
|
281,115
|
|
|
|
169,769
|
|
|
|
70,195
|
|
|
|
28,610
|
|
|
|
268,574
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of Operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Southern California
|
|
|
10,872
|
|
|
|
5,647
|
|
|
|
1,097
|
|
|
|
17,616
|
|
|
|
10,951
|
|
|
|
5,873
|
|
|
|
1,042
|
|
|
|
17,866
|
|
|
|
10,580
|
|
|
|
5,875
|
|
|
|
1,038
|
|
|
|
17,493
|
|
Northern California
|
|
|
3,771
|
|
|
|
2,336
|
|
|
|
681
|
|
|
|
6,788
|
|
|
|
3,816
|
|
|
|
2,322
|
|
|
|
724
|
|
|
|
6,862
|
|
|
|
3,426
|
|
|
|
2,279
|
|
|
|
750
|
|
|
|
6,455
|
|
Southern Texas
|
|
|
4,124
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,124
|
|
|
|
4,235
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,235
|
|
|
|
4,041
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,041
|
|
Northern Texas
|
|
|
5,441
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
336
|
|
|
|
5,777
|
|
|
|
5,712
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
299
|
|
|
|
6,011
|
|
|
|
5,477
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
288
|
|
|
|
5,765
|
|
South Florida
|
|
|
3,985
|
|
|
|
130
|
|
|
|
5,952
|
|
|
|
10,067
|
|
|
|
4,118
|
|
|
|
104
|
|
|
|
6,094
|
|
|
|
10,316
|
|
|
|
4,157
|
|
|
|
110
|
|
|
|
5,807
|
|
|
|
10,074
|
|
Virginia
|
|
|
8,890
|
|
|
|
8,635
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,525
|
|
|
|
8,692
|
|
|
|
8,558
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,250
|
|
|
|
8,263
|
|
|
|
7,332
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,595
|
|
Maryland
|
|
|
4,820
|
|
|
|
7,293
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,113
|
|
|
|
4,680
|
|
|
|
7,312
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,992
|
|
|
|
4,719
|
|
|
|
7,055
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,774
|
|
Oregon
|
|
|
5,403
|
|
|
|
1,352
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,755
|
|
|
|
5,610
|
|
|
|
1,409
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,019
|
|
|
|
5,288
|
|
|
|
1,375
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,663
|
|
Arizona
|
|
|
2,735
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,735
|
|
|
|
3,013
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,013
|
|
|
|
2,907
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,907
|
|
Washington
|
|
|
2,205
|
|
|
|
207
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,412
|
|
|
|
2,410
|
|
|
|
208
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,618
|
|
|
|
2,289
|
|
|
|
189
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,478
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
52,246
|
|
|
|
25,600
|
|
|
|
8,066
|
|
|
|
85,912
|
|
|
|
53,237
|
|
|
|
25,786
|
|
|
|
8,159
|
|
|
|
87,182
|
|
|
|
51,147
|
|
|
|
24,215
|
|
|
|
7,883
|
|
|
|
83,245
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOI:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Southern California
|
|
|
30,694
|
|
|
|
9,120
|
|
|
|
4,457
|
|
|
|
44,271
|
|
|
|
32,943
|
|
|
|
9,746
|
|
|
|
4,762
|
|
|
|
47,451
|
|
|
|
32,469
|
|
|
|
10,224
|
|
|
|
4,288
|
|
|
|
46,981
|
|
Northern California
|
|
|
7,332
|
|
|
|
4,397
|
|
|
|
2,178
|
|
|
|
13,907
|
|
|
|
10,043
|
|
|
|
4,868
|
|
|
|
2,166
|
|
|
|
17,077
|
|
|
|
9,133
|
|
|
|
4,698
|
|
|
|
1,926
|
|
|
|
15,757
|
|
Southern Texas
|
|
|
5,775
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,775
|
|
|
|
5,993
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,993
|
|
|
|
5,607
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,607
|
|
Northern Texas
|
|
|
9,890
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
909
|
|
|
|
10,799
|
|
|
|
9,974
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
979
|
|
|
|
10,953
|
|
|
|
8,585
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
812
|
|
|
|
9,397
|
|
South Florida
|
|
|
7,307
|
|
|
|
82
|
|
|
|
13,960
|
|
|
|
21,349
|
|
|
|
8,218
|
|
|
|
110
|
|
|
|
13,911
|
|
|
|
22,239
|
|
|
|
7,620
|
|
|
|
120
|
|
|
|
13,701
|
|
|
|
21,441
|
|
Virginia
|
|
|
25,375
|
|
|
|
15,940
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41,315
|
|
|
|
25,816
|
|
|
|
16,126
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41,942
|
|
|
|
24,403
|
|
|
|
14,204
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38,607
|
|
Maryland
|
|
|
11,850
|
|
|
|
15,149
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26,999
|
|
|
|
11,608
|
|
|
|
14,377
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25,985
|
|
|
|
12,622
|
|
|
|
14,477
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27,099
|
|
Oregon
|
|
|
8,866
|
|
|
|
1,589
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,455
|
|
|
|
9,375
|
|
|
|
2,072
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,447
|
|
|
|
9,727
|
|
|
|
1,891
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,618
|
|
Arizona
|
|
|
3,658
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,658
|
|
|
|
3,993
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,993
|
|
|
|
4,069
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,069
|
|
Washington
|
|
|
6,086
|
|
|
|
431
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,517
|
|
|
|
6,440
|
|
|
|
413
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,853
|
|
|
|
4,387
|
|
|
|
366
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,753
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total 120
|
|
$
|
116,833
|
|
|
$
|
46,708
|
|
|
$
|
21,504
|
|
|
$
|
185,045
|
|
|
$
|
124,403
|
|
|
$
|
47,712
|
|
|
$
|
21,818
|
|
|
$
|
193,933
|
|
|
$
|
118,622
|
|
|
$
|
45,980
|
|
|
$
|
20,727
|
|
|
$
|
185,329
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20
The following table is provided to reconcile NOI to consolidated
income from continuing operations as determined by GAAP (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For The Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Property net operating income
|
|
$
|
185,045
|
|
|
$
|
193,933
|
|
|
$
|
185,329
|
|
Facility management fees
|
|
|
698
|
|
|
|
728
|
|
|
|
724
|
|
Interest and other income
|
|
|
536
|
|
|
|
1,457
|
|
|
|
5,104
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
(84,504
|
)
|
|
|
(99,317
|
)
|
|
|
(97,998
|
)
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
(6,202
|
)
|
|
|
(8,099
|
)
|
|
|
(7,917
|
)
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(3,552
|
)
|
|
|
(3,952
|
)
|
|
|
(4,130
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations
|
|
$
|
92,021
|
|
|
$
|
84,750
|
|
|
$
|
81,112
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Significant
Properties
As of and for the year ended December 31, 2009, one of the
Companys properties had a book value of more than 10% of
the Companys total assets. The property, known as MICC, is
a business park in Miami, Florida, consisting of 46 buildings
(3.2 million square feet) consisting of flex
(631,000 square feet), industrial (2.6 million square
feet) and office (12,000 square feet) space. The property
was purchased on December 30, 2003 and has a net book value
of $159.7 million, representing approximately 10.2% of the
Companys total assets at December 31, 2009.
MICC property taxes for the year ended December 31, 2009
were $3.5 million at a rate of 1.9% of the respective
assessed parcel value.
The following table sets forth information with respect to
occupancy and rental rates at MICC for each of the last five
years, including the dispositions of a 56,000 square foot
retail center and 94,000 square feet of flex space:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
|
Weighted average occupancy rate
|
|
|
95.4
|
%
|
|
|
96.9
|
%
|
|
|
98.2
|
%
|
|
|
96.4
|
%
|
|
|
91.8
|
%
|
Realized rent per square foot
|
|
$
|
8.69
|
|
|
$
|
8.76
|
|
|
$
|
8.24
|
|
|
$
|
7.88
|
|
|
$
|
7.47
|
|
There is no one tenant that occupies 10% or more of the rentable
square footage at MICC.
The following table sets forth information with respect to lease
expirations at MICC (in thousands, except number of leases
expiring):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rentable Square
|
|
|
Annualized Rental
|
|
|
Annualized Rental
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
Footage Subject to
|
|
|
Income Under
|
|
|
Income Represented
|
|
Year of Lease Expiration
|
|
Leases Expiring
|
|
|
Expiring Leases
|
|
|
Expiring Leases
|
|
|
by Expiring Leases
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
77
|
|
|
|
748
|
|
|
$
|
6,290
|
|
|
|
22.5
|
%
|
2011
|
|
|
93
|
|
|
|
800
|
|
|
|
7,412
|
|
|
|
26.6
|
%
|
2012
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
635
|
|
|
|
5,743
|
|
|
|
20.6
|
%
|
2013
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
489
|
|
|
|
4,632
|
|
|
|
16.6
|
%
|
2014
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
280
|
|
|
|
2,460
|
|
|
|
8.8
|
%
|
2015
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
65
|
|
|
|
593
|
|
|
|
2.1
|
%
|
2016
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
198
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
%
|
2017
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2018
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
75
|
|
|
|
588
|
|
|
|
2.1
|
%
|
2019
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
305
|
|
|
|
3,123
|
|
|
$
|
27,916
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21
The following table sets forth information with respect to tax
depreciation at MICC (in thousands, except year data):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rate of
|
|
|
|
|
|
Life in
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
Tax Basis
|
|
|
Depreciation
|
|
|
Method
|
|
|
Years
|
|
|
Depreciation
|
|
|
Land Improvements
|
|
$
|
45,588
|
|
|
|
5.9
|
%
|
|
|
MACRS, 150
|
%
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
$
|
21,560
|
|
Improvements
|
|
|
24,582
|
|
|
|
0.0
|
%
|
|
|
VARIOUS
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
24,435
|
|
Tenant Buildings
|
|
|
83,000
|
|
|
|
3.7
|
%
|
|
|
MACRS, SL
|
|
|
|
VAR
|
|
|
|
12,797
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
153,170
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
58,792
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated depreciation for personal property shown in the
preceding table was derived using the mid-quarter convention.
Portfolio
Information
The table below sets forth information with respect to occupancy
and rental rates of the Companys total portfolio for each
of the last five years, including discontinued operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
|
Weighted average occupancy rate
|
|
|
90.5
|
%
|
|
|
93.5
|
%
|
|
|
93.4
|
%
|
|
|
93.4
|
%
|
|
|
91.5
|
%
|
Realized rent per square foot
|
|
$
|
15.45
|
|
|
$
|
15.50
|
|
|
$
|
14.97
|
|
|
$
|
14.36
|
|
|
$
|
13.82
|
|
Approximately 59.5% of the Companys annualized rental
income is derived from large tenants, which the Company defines
as tenants with leases averaging greater than or equal to
5,000 square feet. These tenants generally sign longer
leases, may require more generous tenant improvements, are
typically represented by a broker and are more creditworthy. The
remaining 40.5% of the Companys annualized rental income
are derived from small tenants with average space requirements
of less than 5,000 square feet and a shorter lease term
duration. Tenant improvements are relatively less for these
tenants; most of these tenants are not represented by brokers
and therefore the Company does not pay lease commissions. The
following tables set forth the lease expirations for all assets
in continuing operations as of December 31, 2009, in
addition to bifurcating the lease expirations for properties
serving primarily small businesses and those properties serving
primarily larger businesses (in thousands):
Lease
Expirations (Entire Portfolio) as of December 31,
2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of
|
|
|
|
Rentable Square
|
|
|
Annualized Rental
|
|
|
Annualized Rental
|
|
|
|
Footage Subject to
|
|
|
Income Under
|
|
|
Income Represented
|
|
Year of Lease Expiration
|
|
Expiring Leases
|
|
|
Expiring Leases
|
|
|
by Expiring Leases
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
4,115
|
|
|
$
|
60,828
|
|
|
|
21.8
|
%
|
2011
|
|
|
4,575
|
|
|
|
71,672
|
|
|
|
25.6
|
%
|
2012
|
|
|
3,437
|
|
|
|
53,821
|
|
|
|
19.3
|
%
|
2013
|
|
|
2,416
|
|
|
|
35,871
|
|
|
|
12.8
|
%
|
2014
|
|
|
1,775
|
|
|
|
26,972
|
|
|
|
9.6
|
%
|
2015
|
|
|
578
|
|
|
|
10,125
|
|
|
|
3.6
|
%
|
2016
|
|
|
499
|
|
|
|
10,497
|
|
|
|
3.8
|
%
|
2017
|
|
|
67
|
|
|
|
2,127
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
%
|
2018
|
|
|
190
|
|
|
|
3,613
|
|
|
|
1.3
|
%
|
2019
|
|
|
78
|
|
|
|
2,329
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
%
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
65
|
|
|
|
1,585
|
|
|
|
0.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
17,795
|
|
|
$
|
279,440
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22
Lease
Expirations (Small Tenant Portfolio) as of December 31,
2009
The Companys small tenant portfolio consists of properties
with average leases less than 5,000 square feet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of
|
|
|
|
Rentable Square
|
|
|
Annualized Rental
|
|
|
Annualized Rental
|
|
|
|
Footage Subject to
|
|
|
Income Under
|
|
|
Income Represented
|
|
Year of Lease Expiration
|
|
Expiring Leases
|
|
|
Expiring Leases
|
|
|
by Expiring Leases
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2,227
|
|
|
$
|
34,650
|
|
|
|
12.4
|
%
|
2011
|
|
|
1,938
|
|
|
|
30,624
|
|
|
|
10.9
|
%
|
2012
|
|
|
1,298
|
|
|
|
21,954
|
|
|
|
7.9
|
%
|
2013
|
|
|
627
|
|
|
|
12,044
|
|
|
|
4.3
|
%
|
2014
|
|
|
420
|
|
|
|
8,116
|
|
|
|
2.9
|
%
|
2015
|
|
|
136
|
|
|
|
2,602
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
%
|
2016
|
|
|
79
|
|
|
|
1,809
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
%
|
2017
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
97
|
|
|
|
0.0
|
%
|
2018
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
216
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
%
|
2019
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
1,273
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
%
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
62
|
|
|
|
0.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
6,780
|
|
|
$
|
113,447
|
|
|
|
40.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lease
Expirations (Large Tenant Portfolio) as of December 31,
2009
The Companys large tenant portfolio consists of properties
with leases averaging greater than or equal to 5,000 square
feet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of
|
|
|
|
Rentable Square
|
|
|
Annualized Rental
|
|
|
Annualized Rental
|
|
|
|
Footage Subject to
|
|
|
Income Under
|
|
|
Income Represented
|
|
Year of Lease Expiration
|
|
Expiring Leases
|
|
|
Expiring Leases
|
|
|
by Expiring Leases
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
1,888
|
|
|
$
|
26,178
|
|
|
|
9.4
|
%
|
2011
|
|
|
2,637
|
|
|
|
41,048
|
|
|
|
14.7
|
%
|
2012
|
|
|
2,139
|
|
|
|
31,867
|
|
|
|
11.4
|
%
|
2013
|
|
|
1,789
|
|
|
|
23,827
|
|
|
|
8.5
|
%
|
2014
|
|
|
1,355
|
|
|
|
18,856
|
|
|
|
6.7
|
%
|
2015
|
|
|
442
|
|
|
|
7,523
|
|
|
|
2.7
|
%
|
2016
|
|
|
420
|
|
|
|
8,688
|
|
|
|
3.1
|
%
|
2017
|
|
|
62
|
|
|
|
2,030
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
%
|
2018
|
|
|
183
|
|
|
|
3,397
|
|
|
|
1.2
|
%
|
2019
|
|
|
38
|
|
|
|
1,056
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
%
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
62
|
|
|
|
1,523
|
|
|
|
0.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
11,015
|
|
|
$
|
165,993
|
|
|
|
59.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ITEM 3.
|
LEGAL
PROCEEDINGS
|
We are not presently subject to material litigation nor, to our
knowledge, is any material litigation threatened against us,
other than routine actions for negligence and other claims and
administrative proceedings arising in the ordinary course of
business, some of which are expected to be covered by liability
insurance or third party indemnifications and all of which
collectively we do not expect to have a material adverse effect
on our financial condition, results of operations, or liquidity.
|
|
ITEM 4.
|
SUBMISSION
OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS
|
The Company did not submit any matter to a vote of security
holders in the fourth quarter of the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2009.
23
PART II
|
|
ITEM 5.
|
MARKET
FOR REGISTRANTS COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS
AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES
|
Market Price of the Registrants Common Equity:
The common stock of the Company trades on the New York Stock
Exchange under the symbol PSB. Prior to September 9, 2008,
the Company common stock traded on the American Stock Exchange.
The following table sets forth the high and low sales prices of
the common stock on the New York Stock Exchange and the American
Stock Exchange for the applicable periods:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Range
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
High
|
|
Low
|
|
March 31, 2008
|
|
$
|
55.20
|
|
|
$
|
40.33
|
|
June 30, 2008
|
|
$
|
59.90
|
|
|
$
|
51.60
|
|
September 30, 2008
|
|
$
|
60.25
|
|
|
$
|
50.00
|
|
December 31, 2008
|
|
$
|
57.18
|
|
|
$
|
32.99
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2009
|
|
$
|
46.37
|
|
|
$
|
28.29
|
|
June 30, 2009
|
|
$
|
49.24
|
|
|
$
|
35.57
|
|
September 30, 2009
|
|
$
|
56.44
|
|
|
$
|
42.36
|
|
December 31, 2009
|
|
$
|
53.56
|
|
|
$
|
46.03
|
|
Holders:
As of February 22, 2010, there were 457 holders of record
of the common stock.
Dividends:
Holders of common stock are entitled to receive distributions
when, as and if declared by the Companys Board of
Directors out of any funds legally available for that purpose.
The Company is required to distribute at least 90% of its
taxable income prior to the filing of the Companys tax
return to maintain its REIT status for federal income tax
purposes. It is managements intention to pay distributions
of not less than these required amounts.
Distributions paid per share of common stock for the years ended
December 31, 2009 and 2008 amounted to $1.76 per year. The
Board of Directors has established a distribution policy
intended to maximize the retention of operating cash flow and
distribute the minimum amount required for the Company to
maintain its tax status as a REIT. Pursuant to restrictions
contained in the Companys Credit Facility, distributions
may not exceed 95% of funds from operations, as defined therein,
for any four consecutive quarters. For more information on the
Credit Facility, see Note 5 to the consolidated financial
statements.
Issuer Repurchases of Equity Securities:
The Companys Board of Directors has authorized the
repurchase, from time to time, of up to 6.5 million shares
of the Companys common stock on the open market or in
privately negotiated transactions. The program does not expire.
Purchases will be made subject to market conditions and other
investment opportunities available to the Company.
During the three months ended December 31, 2009, there were
no shares of the Companys common stock repurchased. As of
December 31, 2009, the Company has 2,206,221 shares
available for purchase under the program.
Securities Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation
Plans:
The equity compensation plan information is provided in
Item 12.
24
|
|
ITEM 6.
|
SELECTED
FINANCIAL DATA
|
The following sets forth selected consolidated and combined
financial and operating information on a historical basis of the
Company. The following information should be read in conjunction
with the consolidated financial statements and notes thereto of
the Company included elsewhere in this
Form 10-K.
Note that historical results from 2008 through 2005 were
reclassified to confirm with 2009 presentation for discontinued
operations. See Note 3 to the consolidated financial
statements included elsewhere in this
Form 10-K
for a discussion of income from discontinued operations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For The Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rental income
|
|
$
|
270,957
|
|
|
$
|
281,115
|
|
|
$
|
268,574
|
|
|
$
|
240,013
|
|
|
$
|
217,895
|
|
Facility management fees
|
|
|
698
|
|
|
|
728
|
|
|
|
724
|
|
|
|
625
|
|
|
|
579
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating revenues
|
|
|
271,655
|
|
|
|
281,843
|
|
|
|
269,298
|
|
|
|
240,638
|
|
|
|
218,474
|
|
Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of operations
|
|
|
85,912
|
|
|
|
87,182
|
|
|
|
83,245
|
|
|
|
73,652
|
|
|
|
64,779
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
84,504
|
|
|
|
99,317
|
|
|
|
97,998
|
|
|
|
85,735
|
|
|
|
75,721
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
6,202
|
|
|
|
8,099
|
|
|
|
7,917
|
|
|
|
7,046
|
|
|
|
5,843
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
176,618
|
|
|
|
194,598
|
|
|
|
189,160
|
|
|
|
166,433
|
|
|
|
146,343
|
|
Other income and expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest and other income
|
|
|
536
|
|
|
|
1,457
|
|
|
|
5,104
|
|
|
|
6,874
|
|
|
|
4,888
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(3,552
|
)
|
|
|
(3,952
|
)
|
|
|
(4,130
|
)
|
|
|
(2,575
|
)
|
|
|
(1,330
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other income and expenses
|
|
|
(3,016
|
)
|
|
|
(2,495
|
)
|
|
|
974
|
|
|
|
4,299
|
|
|
|
3,558
|
|
Asset impairment due to casualty loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations
|
|
|
92,021
|
|
|
|
84,750
|
|
|
|
81,112
|
|
|
|
78,504
|
|
|
|
75,617
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discontinued operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from discontinued operations
|
|
|
830
|
|
|
|
597
|
|
|
|
563
|
|
|
|
576
|
|
|
|
3,088
|
|
Gain on disposition of real estate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,328
|
|
|
|
18,109
|
|
Gain on sale of land
|
|
|
1,488
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total discontinued operations
|
|
|
2,318
|
|
|
|
597
|
|
|
|
563
|
|
|
|
2,904
|
|
|
|
21,197
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
94,339
|
|
|
$
|
85,347
|
|
|
$
|
81,675
|
|
|
$
|
81,408
|
|
|
$
|
96,814
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income allocation:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income allocable to noncontrolling interests:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncontrolling interests common units
|
|
$
|
19,730
|
|
|
$
|
8,296
|
|
|
$
|
6,155
|
|
|
$
|
5,673
|
|
|
$
|
10,869
|
|
Noncontrolling interests preferred units
|
|
|
(2,569
|
)
|
|
|
7,007
|
|
|
|
6,854
|
|
|
|
11,155
|
|
|
|
10,651
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net income allocable to noncontrolling interests
|
|
|
17,161
|
|
|
|
15,303
|
|
|
|
13,009
|
|
|
|
16,828
|
|
|
|
21,520
|
|
Net income allocable to PS Business Parks, Inc.:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common shareholders
|
|
|
59,413
|
|
|
|
23,179
|
|
|
|
17,537
|
|
|
|
16,513
|
|
|
|
32,242
|
|
Preferred shareholders
|
|
|
17,440
|
|
|
|
46,630
|
|
|
|
50,937
|
|
|
|
47,933
|
|
|
|
43,011
|
|
Restricted stock unit holders
|
|
|
325
|
|
|
|
235
|
|
|
|
192
|
|
|
|
134
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net income allocable to PS Business Parks, Inc.
|
|
|
77,178
|
|
|
|
70,044
|
|
|
|
68,666
|
|
|
|
64,580
|
|
|
|
75,294
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
94,339
|
|
|
$
|
85,347
|
|
|
$
|
81,675
|
|
|
$
|
81,408
|
|
|
$
|
96,814
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For The Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data)
|
|
|
|
Per Common Share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Distribution
|
|
$
|
1.76
|
|
|
$
|
1.76
|
|
|
$
|
1.61
|
|
|
$
|
1.16
|
|
|
$
|
1.16
|
|
Net income basic
|
|
$
|
2.70
|
|
|
$
|
1.13
|
|
|
$
|
0.82
|
|
|
$
|
0.77
|
|
|
$
|
1.48
|
|
Net income diluted
|
|
$
|
2.68
|
|
|
$
|
1.12
|
|
|
$
|
0.81
|
|
|
$
|
0.77
|
|
|
$
|
1.47
|
|
Weighted average common shares basic
|
|
|
21,998
|
|
|
|
20,443
|
|
|
|
21,313
|
|
|
|
21,335
|
|
|
|
21,826
|
|
Weighted average common shares diluted
|
|
|
22,128
|
|
|
|
20,618
|
|
|
|
21,573
|
|
|
|
21,584
|
|
|
|
21,970
|
|
Balance Sheet Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
1,564,822
|
|
|
$
|
1,469,323
|
|
|
$
|
1,516,583
|
|
|
$
|
1,463,599
|
|
|
$
|
1,463,794
|
|
Total debt
|
|
$
|
52,887
|
|
|
$
|
59,308
|
|
|
$
|
60,725
|
|
|
$
|
67,048
|
|
|
$
|
25,893
|
|
Preferred stock called for redemption
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
50,000
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PS Business Parks, Inc.s shareholders equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock
|
|
$
|
626,046
|
|
|
$
|
706,250
|
|
|
$
|
716,250
|
|
|
$
|
572,500
|
|
|
$
|
593,350
|
|
Common stock
|
|
$
|
589,633
|
|
|
$
|
414,564
|
|
|
$
|
439,330
|
|
|
$
|
482,703
|
|
|
$
|
500,108
|
|
Noncontrolling interests:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred units
|
|
$
|
73,418
|
|
|
$
|
94,750
|
|
|
$
|
94,750
|
|
|
$
|
82,750
|
|
|
$
|
135,750
|
|
Common units
|
|
$
|
176,540
|
|
|
$
|
148,023
|
|
|
$
|
154,470
|
|
|
$
|
165,469
|
|
|
$
|
169,451
|
|
Other Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities
|
|
$
|
179,625
|
|
|
$
|
189,337
|
|
|
$
|
184,094
|
|
|
$
|
166,134
|
|
|
$
|
148,828
|
|
Net cash (used in) provided by investing activities
|
|
$
|
(26,956
|
)
|
|
$
|
(35,192
|
)
|
|
$
|
(180,188
|
)
|
|
$
|
(169,986
|
)
|
|
$
|
24,389
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities
|
|
$
|
545
|
|
|
$
|
(134,171
|
)
|
|
$
|
(35,882
|
)
|
|
$
|
(129,694
|
)
|
|
$
|
(13,058
|
)
|
Funds from operations (1)
|
|
$
|
163,074
|
|
|
$
|
131,558
|
|
|
$
|
122,405
|
|
|
$
|
106,235
|
|
|
$
|
102,608
|
|
Square footage owned at end of period
|
|
|
19,556
|
|
|
|
19,556
|
|
|
|
19,556
|
|
|
|
18,687
|
|
|
|
17,555
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Funds from operations (FFO) is computed in
accordance with the White Paper on FFO approved by the Board of
Governors of NAREIT. The White Paper defines FFO as net income,
computed in accordance with GAAP, before depreciation,
amortization, gains or losses on asset dispositions, net income
allocable to noncontrolling interests common units,
net income allocable to restricted stock unit holders and
nonrecurring items. FFO should be analyzed in conjunction with
net income. However, FFO should not be viewed as a substitute
for net income as a measure of operating performance or
liquidity as it does not reflect depreciation and amortization
costs or the level of capital expenditure and leasing costs
necessary to maintain the operating performance of the
Companys properties, which are significant economic costs
and could materially impact the Companys results of
operations. Other REITs may use different methods for
calculating FFO and, accordingly, the Companys FFO may not
be comparable to that of other real estate companies. See
Item 7, Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations
Liquidity and Capital Resources Funds from
Operations, for a reconciliation of FFO and net income
allocable to common shareholders and for information on why the
Company presents FFO. |
26
|
|
ITEM 7.
|
MANAGEMENTS
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF
OPERATIONS
|
The following discussion and analysis of the results of
operations and financial condition should be read in conjunction
with the selected financial data and the Companys
consolidated financial statements and notes thereto included
elsewhere in the
Form 10-K.
Forward-Looking Statements: Forward-looking
statements are made throughout this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
Any statements contained herein that are not statements of
historical fact may be deemed to be forward-looking statements.
Without limiting the foregoing, the words may,
believes, anticipates,
plans, expects, seeks,
estimates, intends, and similar
expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements.
There are a number of important factors that could cause the
results of the Company to differ materially from those indicated
by such forward-looking statements, including those detailed
under the heading Item 1A. Risk Factors. In
light of the significant uncertainties inherent in the
forward-looking statements included herein, the inclusion of the
information contained in such forward-looking statements should
not be regarded as a representation by us or any other person
that our objectives and plans will be achieved. Moreover, we
assume no obligation to update these forward-looking statements
to reflect actual results, changes in assumptions or changes in
other factors affecting such forward-looking statements except
as required by law.
Overview
As of December 31, 2009, the Company owned and operated
approximately 19.6 million rentable square feet of
multi-tenant flex, industrial and office properties located in
eight states.
The Company focuses on increasing profitability and cash flow
aimed at maximizing shareholder value. The Company strives to
maintain high occupancy levels while increasing rental rates
when market conditions allow. The Company also acquires
properties it believes will create long-term value, and from
time to time disposes of properties which no longer fit within
the Companys strategic objectives or in situations where
the Company believes it can optimize cash proceeds. Operating
results are driven by income from rental operations and are
therefore substantially influenced by rental demand for space
within our properties.
The Company successfully leased or re-leased 5.9 million
square feet of space in 2009 and achieved an overall weighted
average occupancy of 90.4% for 2009. During 2009, the Company
experienced a decrease in effective rental rates compared to
2008. Total net operating income decreased by $8.9 million,
or 4.6%, from the year ended December 31, 2008 to 2009. See
further discussion of operating results below.
Critical
Accounting Policies and Estimates:
Our accounting policies are described in Note 2 to the
consolidated financial statements included in this
Form 10-K.
We believe our most critical accounting policies relate to
revenue recognition, allowance for doubtful accounts, impairment
of long-lived assets, depreciation, accruals of operating
expenses and accruals for contingencies, each of which we
discuss below.
Revenue Recognition: The Company must meet four
basic criteria before revenue can be recognized: persuasive
evidence of an arrangement exists; the delivery has occurred or
services rendered; the fee is fixed or determinable; and
collectability is reasonably assured. All leases are classified
as operating leases. Rental income is recognized on a
straight-line basis over the terms of the leases. Straight-line
rent is recognized for all tenants with contractual fixed
increases in rent that are not included on the Companys
credit watch list. Deferred rent receivable represents rental
revenue recognized on a straight-line basis in excess of billed
rents. Reimbursements from tenants for real estate taxes and
other recoverable operating expenses are recognized as rental
income in the period the applicable costs are incurred.
Property Acquisitions: The Company allocates the
purchase price of acquired properties to land, buildings and
equipment and identified tangible and intangible assets and
liabilities associated with in-place leases (including tenant
improvements, unamortized lease commissions, value of
above-market and below-market leases, acquired in-place lease
values, and tenant relationships, if any) based on their
respective
27
estimated fair values. In addition, beginning January 1,
2009, acquisition-related costs are recognized separately and
expensed as incurred.
In determining the fair value of the tangible assets of the
acquired properties, management considers the value of the
properties as if vacant as of the acquisition date. Management
must make significant assumptions in determining the value of
assets acquired and liabilities assumed. Using different
assumptions in the allocation of the purchase cost of the
acquired properties would affect the timing of recognition of
the related revenue and expenses. Amounts allocated to land are
derived from comparable sales of land within the same region.
Amounts allocated to buildings and improvements, tenant
improvements and unamortized lease commissions are based on
current market replacement costs and other market rate
information.
The value allocable to the above-market or below-market in-place
lease values of acquired properties is determined based upon the
present value (using a discount rate which reflects the risks
associated with the acquired leases) of the difference between
(i) the contractual rents to be paid pursuant to the
in-place leases, and (ii) managements estimate of
fair market lease rates for the corresponding in-place leases,
measured over a period equal to the remaining non-cancelable
term of the lease. The amounts allocated to above-market or
below-market leases are included in other assets or other
liabilities in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets and
are amortized on a straight-line basis as an increase or
reduction of rental income over the remaining non-cancelable
term of the respective leases.
Allowance for Doubtful Accounts: Rental revenue from
our tenants is our principal source of revenue. We monitor the
collectibility of our receivable balances including the deferred
rent receivable on an ongoing basis. Based on these reviews, we
maintain an allowance for doubtful accounts for estimated losses
resulting from the possible inability of our tenants to make
required rent payments to us. Tenant receivables and deferred
rent receivables are carried net of the allowances for
uncollectible tenant receivables and deferred rent. As discussed
below, determination of the adequacy of these allowances
requires significant judgments and estimates. Our estimate of
the required allowance is subject to revision as the factors
discussed below change and is sensitive to the effect of
economic and market conditions on our tenants.
Tenant receivables consist primarily of amounts due for
contractual lease payments, reimbursements of common area
maintenance expenses, property taxes and other expenses
recoverable from tenants. Determination of the adequacy of the
allowance for uncollectible current tenant receivables is
performed using a methodology that incorporates specific
identification, aging analysis, an overall evaluation of the
historical loss trends and the current economic and business
environment. The specific identification methodology relies on
factors such as the age and nature of the receivables, the
payment history and financial condition of the tenant, the
assessment of the tenants ability to meet its lease
obligations, and the status of negotiations of any disputes with
the tenant. The allowance also includes a reserve based on
historical loss trends not associated with any specific tenant.
This reserve as well as the specific identification reserve is
reevaluated quarterly based on economic conditions and the
current business environment.
Deferred rent receivable represents the amount that the
cumulative straight-line rental income recorded to date exceeds
cash rents billed to date under the lease agreement. Given the
long-term nature of these types of receivables, determination of
the adequacy of the allowance for unbilled deferred rent
receivable is based primarily on historical loss experience.
Management evaluates the allowance for unbilled deferred rent
receivable using a specific identification methodology for
significant tenants designed to assess their financial condition
and ability to meet their lease obligations.
Impairment of Long-Lived Assets: The Company
evaluates a property for potential impairment whenever events or
changes in circumstances indicate that its carrying amount may
not be recoverable. On a quarterly basis we evaluate our entire
portfolio for impairment based on current operating information.
In the event that these periodic assessments reflect that the
carrying amount of a property exceeds the sum of the
undiscounted cash flows (excluding interest) that are expected
to result from the use and eventual disposition of the property,
the Company would recognize an impairment loss to the extent the
carrying amount exceeded the estimated fair value of the
property. The estimation of expected future net cash flows is
inherently uncertain and relies on subjective assumptions
dependent upon future and current market conditions and events
that affect the ultimate value of the property. Management must
make assumptions related to the property such as future rental
rates,
28
tenant allowances, operating expenditures, property taxes,
capital improvements, occupancy levels and the estimated
proceeds generated from the future sale of the property. These
assumptions could differ materially from actual results in
future periods. Our intent to hold properties over the long-term
directly decreases the likelihood of recording an impairment
loss. If our strategy changes or if market conditions otherwise
dictate an earlier sale date, an impairment loss could be
recognized, and such loss could be material.
Depreciation: We compute depreciation on our
buildings and equipment using the straight-line method based on
estimated useful lives of generally 30 and five years,
respectively. A significant portion of the acquisition cost of
each property is allocated to building and building components.
The allocation of the acquisition cost to building and building
components, as well as the determination of their useful lives,
are based on estimates. If we do not appropriately allocate to
these components or we incorrectly estimate the useful lives of
these components, our computation of depreciation expense may
not appropriately reflect the actual impact of these costs over
future periods, which will affect net income. In addition, the
net book value of real estate assets could be overstated or
understated. The statement of cash flows, however, would not be
affected.
Accruals of Operating Expenses: The Company accrues
for property tax expenses, performance bonuses and other
operating expenses each quarter based on historical trends and
anticipated disbursements. If these estimates are incorrect, the
timing and amount of expense recognized will be affected.
Accruals for Contingencies: The Company is exposed
to business and legal liability risks with respect to events
that may have occurred, but in accordance with GAAP has not
accrued for such potential liabilities because the loss is
either not probable or not estimable. Future events and the
result of pending litigation could result in such potential
losses becoming probable and estimable, which could have a
material adverse impact on our financial condition or results of
operations.
Effect of Economic Conditions on the Companys
Operations: During 2009, the severe recession and weak
economic conditions continued to impact commercial real estate
as the Company experienced a decrease in new rental rates over
expiring rental rates on executed leases as well as declining
occupancy. Although it is uncertain what impact the current
recession will have on the Companys ability to maintain
current occupancy levels and rental rates, management expects
that the decrease in rental rates on new and renewal
transactions combined with further reductions in occupancy will
result in a decrease in rental income for 2010 when compared to
2009. A continued deepening economic recession may have a
significant impact on the Company, potentially resulting in
further reductions in occupancy and rental rates.
While the Company historically has experienced a low level of
write-offs due to bankruptcy, there is inherent uncertainty in a
tenants ability to continue paying rent when in
bankruptcy. As of February 26, 2010, the Company had
approximately 17,000 square feet of leased space that is
occupied by tenants that are protected by Chapter 11 of the
U.S. Bankruptcy Code. In addition, the Company had tenants
occupying approximately 818,000 square feet who vacated
their space during the year ended December 31, 2009 prior
to their scheduled lease expiration as a result of business
failures. As of December 31, 2009, 466,000 square feet
has been re-leased. During the years ended December 31,
2009 and 2008, write-offs of unpaid rents were $988,000 and
$602,000, respectively. During 2009, we also recorded
$2.7 million of accelerated depreciation expense related to
unamortized tenant improvements and lease commissions for leases
terminated prior to their scheduled expiration. A number of
other tenants have contacted us, requesting early termination of
their lease, reduction in space under lease, or rent deferment
or abatement. At this time, the Company cannot anticipate what
impact, if any, the ultimate outcome of these discussions will
have on our future operating results.
Company Performance and Effect of Economic Conditions on
Primary Markets: The Company has concentrated its
operations in 10 regions. The Companys assessment of these
regions as of December 31, 2009 is summarized below. During
the year ended December 31, 2009, rental rates on new and
renewed leases within the Companys overall portfolio
decreased 15.0% over expiring rents. The Companys overall
vacancy rate at December 31, 2009 was 8.0%. Each of the 10
regions in which the Company owns assets is subject to its own
unique market influences. The Company has outlined the various
market influences for each specific region below. In addition,
the Company has compiled market occupancy information using
third party reports for each of the
29
respective markets. These sources are deemed to be reliable by
the Company, but there can be no assurance that these reports
are accurate.
The Company owns approximately 4.0 million square feet in
Southern California located in Los Angeles, Orange and
San Diego Counties. Market vacancies have increased due to
the continued weakness in the economy and the resulting job
losses combined with the lack of credit availability and its
effect on businesses. These factors have also created
significantly more competition for tenants, which in turn has
placed pressure on occupancy and rental rates. Vacancy rates in
Southern California range from 4.8% to 19.5%. The Companys
vacancy rate in this region at December 31, 2009 was 6.4%.
For the year ended December 31, 2009, the overall market
experienced negative net absorption of 0.8% for the reasons
noted above as well as the completion of newly constructed space
in 2008. The Companys weighted average occupancy for the
region decreased from 93.8% in 2008 to 91.3% in 2009. Realized
rent per square foot decreased 2.6% from $17.47 per square foot
in 2008 to $17.01 per square foot in 2009.
The Company owns approximately 1.8 million square feet in
Northern California with concentrations in Sacramento, the East
Bay (Hayward and San Ramon) and Silicon Valley
(San Jose and Santa Clara). Vacancy rates in these
submarkets are 23.5%, 20.5% and 18.6%, respectively. The
Companys vacancy rate in its Northern California portfolio
at December 31, 2009 was 10.9%. Demand in these submarkets
slowed measurably in the second half of 2008 and continued
throughout 2009. Renewals and company consolidations continued
to be the trend in this market, which negatively impacted both
rental and occupancy rates. For the year ended December 31,
2009, the combined submarkets experienced negative net
absorption of 2.7%. The Companys weighted average
occupancy in this region decreased from 92.0% in 2008 to 85.5%
in 2009 due in part to two tenant defaults comprising
134,000 square feet. Realized rent per square foot
decreased 7.0% from $14.31 per square foot in 2008 to $13.31 per
square foot in 2009.
The Company owns approximately 1.2 million square feet in
Southern Texas, specifically in the Austin and Houston markets.
Market vacancy rates are 14.5% in the Austin market and 15.9% in
the Houston market. The Companys vacancy rate for these
combined markets at December 31, 2009 was 10.4%. During the
second half of 2008 and continuing through 2009, demand eased in
these markets due to the slowdown in the oil and gas industry
and the weakness of the nations economy. For the year
ended December 31, 2009, the combined markets experienced
negative net absorption of 1.6%. The Companys weighted
average occupancy in this region decreased from 94.6% in 2008 to
87.3% in 2009 due in part to a tenant default and two
significant lease expirations during 2008, which comprised a
total of 89,000 square feet. Despite the decrease in
weighted average occupancy, realized rent per square foot
increased 6.7% from $11.48 per square foot in 2008 to $12.25 per
square foot in 2009 as rental rates increased modestly on
in-place leases.
The Company owns approximately 1.7 million square feet in
Northern Texas, primarily located in the Dallas Metroplex
market. The market vacancy rate in Las Colinas, where
significant concentrations of the Companys properties are
located, is 10.7%. The Companys vacancy rate at
December 31, 2009 in this market was 7.9%. In 2008 and
2009, this market began to show signs of softening in
fundamentals as a result of the impact of the national
recession. Although the markets vacancy rate and net
absorption were flat for the year ended December 31, 2009,
the Companys weighted average occupancy for the region
decreased from 93.3% in 2008 to 91.1% in 2009. Although the
Company experienced a decrease in weighted average occupancy,
realized rent per square foot increased 0.1% from $10.76 per
square foot in 2008 to $10.77 per square foot in 2009 as rental
rates increased modestly on in-place leases partially offset by
rental rate reductions on new and renewed leases.
The Company owns approximately 3.6 million square feet in
South Florida, which consists of MICC business park located in
the Airport West submarket of Miami-Dade County and two
multi-tenant flex parks located in Palm Beach County. MICC is
located less than one mile from the cargo entrance of the Miami
International Airport, which is one of the most active ports in
the United States. The effect of the economic recession on the
import/export business has had a measurable negative impact on
demand in Miami. Market vacancy rates for Miami-Dade County and
Palm Beach County are 9.4% and 12.0%, respectively, compared
with the Companys South Florida vacancy rate of 4.3% at
December 31, 2009. For the year ended December 31,
2009, the combined markets experienced negative net absorption
of 2.4%. The Companys weighted average occupancy in this
region outperformed the market, decreasing from 96.4% in 2008 to
94.5% in 2009. Realized rent per square foot decreased 1.6% from
$9.39 per square foot in 2008 to $9.24 per square foot in 2009.
30
The Company owns approximately 3.0 million square feet in
the Northern Virginia submarket of Washington D.C., where the
average market vacancy rate is 14.3%. The Companys vacancy
rate at December 31, 2009 was 5.3%. Vacancy rates in this
market increased as tenants downsize their existing space due to
the economic recession. The increase in sublease space and
decrease in demand has lengthened the time of lease
negotiations. For the year ended December 31, 2009, the
market experienced negative net absorption of 0.1%. The
Companys weighted average occupancy decreased from 96.6%
in 2008 to 93.6% in 2009. The decrease was primarily related to
a 64,000 square foot tenant vacating its space during the
third quarter of 2008 due to natural expiration. Despite the
decrease in weighted average occupancy, the Companys
realized rent per square foot increased 2.6% from $20.30 per
square foot in 2008 to $20.82 per square foot in 2009.
The Company owns approximately 1.8 million square feet in
the Maryland submarket of Washington D.C. The Companys
vacancy rate in the region at December 31, 2009 was 6.3%
compared to 15.0% for the market as a whole. For the year ended
December 31, 2009, the market experienced negative net
absorption of 1.0%, which is attributed to a decrease in demand
for large blocks of space due to the economy. Despite weak
fundamentals in this market, the Companys weighted average
occupancy increased from 91.8% in 2008 to 92.1% in 2009.
Realized rent per square foot increased 2.7% from $23.37 per
square foot in 2008 to $23.99 per square foot in 2009.
The Company owns approximately 1.3 million square feet in
the Beaverton submarket of Portland, Oregon. The market vacancy
rate in this region is 24.4%. The Companys vacancy rate in
the market was 18.5% at December 31, 2009. The economic
recession has resulted in higher vacancy rates and increased
rent concessions in the market. For the year ended
December 31, 2009, the market experienced negative net
absorption of 1.5%. The Companys weighted average
occupancy decreased from 84.0% in 2008 to 79.9% in 2009. The
decrease was primarily related to a 120,000 square foot
tenant vacating its space during the second quarter of 2008 and
a 28,000 square foot tenant defaulting during the second
quarter of 2009. Realized rent per square foot decreased 2.0%
from $16.73 per square foot in 2008 to $16.40 per square foot in
2009.
The Company owns approximately 679,000 square feet in the
Phoenix and Tempe submarkets of Arizona. Market vacancies
increased significantly due in part to the number of
housing-related tenants who have vacated space combined with
companies contracting and reorganizing business operations in
the hard hit market. These factors have created significantly
more competition for tenants, resulting in higher lease
concessions while limiting the Companys ability to
generate rental rate growth. The market vacancy rate is 16.1%
compared to the Companys vacancy rate of 17.4% at
December 31, 2009. For the year ended December 31,
2009, the market experienced negative net absorption of 1.8%.
Realized rent per square foot decreased 7.3% from $11.88 per
square foot in 2008 to $11.01 per square foot in 2009. The
Companys weighted average occupancy in the region
decreased from 86.9% in 2008 to 85.5% in 2009.
The Company owns approximately 521,000 square feet in the
state of Washington which mostly consists of Overlake Business
Center, a 493,000 square foot multi-tenant office and flex
business park located in Redmond. The weakened aerospace
manufacturing industry and global economic slowdown has resulted
in a softened demand in this market. The market vacancy rate is
13.6%. For the year ended December 31, 2009, this market
experienced negative net absorption of 3.2%. The Companys
vacancy rate in this region at December 31, 2009 was 14.7%.
The Companys weighted average occupancy decreased from
94.2% in 2008 to 88.2% in 2009. Despite the decrease in weighted
average occupancy, realized rent per square foot increased 0.7%
from $19.30 per square foot in 2008 to $19.43 per square foot in
2009 as rental rates increased modestly as a result of in-place
leases.
Growth of the Companys Operations and Acquisitions
and Dispositions of Properties: The Company is focused
on maximizing cash flow from its existing portfolio of
properties by looking for opportunities to expand its presence
in existing and new markets through strategic acquisitions. The
Company will dispose of non-strategic assets that do not meet
this criterion. The Company has historically maintained a
low-leverage-level approach intended to provide the Company with
the flexibility for future growth.
During May, 2009, the Company sold 3.4 acres of land held
for development in Portland, Oregon, for a gross sales price of
$2.7 million, resulting in a net gain of $1.5 million.
The Company made no dispositions during the years ended
December 31, 2008 and 2007.
31
Subsequent to the year ended December, 31, 2009, the Company
completed the sale of a 131,000 square foot office building
located in Houston, Texas. The sales price was
$10.0 million, resulting in a net gain of $5.2 million.
As of December 31, 2009, the Company had commenced
development on a parcel within its Miami International Commerce
Center in Miami, Florida, which upon completion is expected to
comprise 75,000 square feet of leasable small-bay
industrial space. The construction is scheduled to be completed
in the third quarter of 2010.
In 2007, the Company acquired 870,000 square feet for an
aggregate cost of $140.6 million. The Company acquired
Overlake Business Center, a 493,000 square foot
multi-tenant office and flex business park located in Redmond,
Washington, for $76.0 million; Commerce Campus, a
252,000 square foot multi-tenant office and flex business
park located in Santa Clara, California, for
$39.2 million; and Fair Oaks Corporate Center, a
125,000 square foot multi-tenant office park located in
Fairfax, Virginia, for $25.4 million. The Company made no
acquisitions during the years ended December 31, 2009 and
2008.
Scheduled Lease Expirations: In addition to
the 1.6 million square feet, or 8.1%, of space available in
our total portfolio (excluding those classified as properties
held for disposition) as of December 31, 2009, leases
representing approximately 23.1% of the leased square footage of
our total portfolio are scheduled to expire in 2010. Our ability
to re-lease available space depends upon the market conditions
in the specific submarkets in which our properties are located.
Impact of Inflation: Although inflation has
not been significant in recent years, it remains a factor in our
economy, and the Company continues to seek ways to mitigate its
potential impact. A substantial portion of the Companys
leases require tenants to pay operating expenses, including real
estate taxes, utilities, and insurance, as well as increases in
common area expenses, partially reducing the Companys
exposure to inflation.
Concentration of Portfolio by Region: Rental
income, cost of operations and rental income less cost of
operations, excluding depreciation and amortization, or net
operating income (defined as NOI for purposes of the
following table) are summarized below for the year ended
December 31, 2009 by major geographic region. The Company
uses NOI and its components as a measurement of the performance
of its commercial real estate. Management believes that these
financial measures provide them, as well as the investor, the
most consistent measurement on a comparative basis of the
performance of the commercial real estate and its contribution
to the value of the Company. Depreciation and amortization have
been excluded from NOI as they are generally not used in
determining the value of commercial real estate by management or
the investment community. Depreciation and amortization are
generally not used in determining value as they consider the
historical costs of an asset compared to its current value;
therefore, to understand the effect of the assets
historical cost on the Companys results, investors should
look at GAAP financial measures, such as total operating costs
including depreciation and amortization. The Companys
calculation of NOI may not be comparable to those of other
companies and should not be used as an alternative to measures
of performance calculated in accordance with GAAP. The table
below reflects rental income, operating expenses and NOI from
continuing operations for the year ended December 31, 2009
based on geographical concentration. The total of all regions is
equal to the amount of rental income and cost of operations
recorded by the Company in accordance with GAAP. As part of the
table below, we have reconciled total NOI to income from
continuing operations, which we consider the most directly
comparable financial measure calculated
32
in accordance with GAAP. The percent of total by region reflects
the actual contribution to rental income, cost of operations and
NOI during the period (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Square
|
|
|
Percent of
|
|
|
Rental
|
|
|
Percent of
|
|
|
Cost of
|
|
|
Percent of
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of
|
|
Region
|
|
Footage
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Operations
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
NOI
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Southern California
|
|
|
3,988
|
|
|
|
20.5
|
%
|
|
$
|
61,887
|
|
|
|
22.8
|
%
|
|
$
|
17,616
|
|
|
|
20.5
|
%
|
|
$
|
44,271
|
|
|
|
23.9
|
%
|
Northern California
|
|
|
1,818
|
|
|
|
9.4
|
%
|
|
|
20,695
|
|
|
|
7.6
|
%
|
|
|
6,788
|
|
|
|
7.9
|
%
|
|
|
13,907
|
|
|
|
7.5
|
%
|
Southern Texas
|
|
|
1,030
|
|
|
|
5.3
|
%
|
|
|
9,899
|
|
|
|
3.7
|
%
|
|
|
4,124
|
|
|
|
4.8
|
%
|
|
|
5,775
|
|
|
|
3.3
|
%
|
Northern Texas
|
|
|
1,689
|
|
|
|
8.7
|
%
|
|
|
16,576
|
|
|
|
6.1
|
%
|
|
|
5,777
|
|
|
|
6.7
|
%
|
|
|
10,799
|
|
|
|
5.8
|
%
|
South Florida
|
|
|
3,596
|
|
|
|
18.5
|
%
|
|
|
31,416
|
|
|
|
11.6
|
%
|
|
|
10,067
|
|
|
|
11.7
|
%
|
|
|
21,349
|
|
|
|
11.5
|
%
|
Virginia
|
|
|
3,020
|
|
|
|
15.5
|
%
|
|
|
58,840
|
|
|
|
21.7
|
%
|
|
|
17,525
|
|
|
|
20.4
|
%
|
|
|
41,315
|
|
|
|
22.3
|
%
|
Maryland
|
|
|
1,770
|
|
|
|
9.1
|
%
|
|
|
39,112
|
|
|
|
14.4
|
%
|
|
|
12,113
|
|
|
|
14.1
|
%
|
|
|
26,999
|
|
|
|
14.6
|
%
|
Oregon
|
|
|
1,314
|
|
|
|
6.8
|
%
|
|
|
17,210
|
|
|
|
6.4
|
%
|
|
|
6,755
|
|
|
|
7.9
|
%
|
|
|
10,455
|
|
|
|
5.6
|
%
|
Arizona
|
|
|
679
|
|
|
|
3.5
|
%
|
|
|
6,393
|
|
|
|
2.4
|
%
|
|
|
2,735
|
|
|
|
3.2
|
%
|
|
|
3,658
|
|
|
|
2.0
|
%
|
Washington
|
|
|
521
|
|
|
|
2.7
|
%
|
|
|
8,929
|
|
|
|
3.3
|
%
|
|
|
2,412
|
|
|
|
2.8
|
%
|
|
|
6,517
|
|
|
|
3.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total NOI
|
|
|
19,425
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
270,957
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
85,912
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
185,045
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reconciliation of NOI to income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
from continuing operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total NOI
|
|
$
|
185,045
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income and expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Facility management fees
|
|
|
698
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest and other income
|
|
|
536
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(3,552
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
(84,504
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
(6,202
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations
|
|
$
|
92,021
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33
Concentration of Credit Risk by Industry: The
information below depicts the industry concentration of our
tenant base as of December 31, 2009. The Company analyzes
this concentration to minimize significant industry exposure
risk. (1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of
|
|
|
|
Annualized
|
|
Industry
|
|
Rental Income
|
|
|
Business services
|
|
|
14.7
|
%
|
Health services
|
|
|
11.4
|
%
|
Computer hardware, software and related services
|
|
|
9.3
|
%
|
Warehouse, distribution, transportation and logistics
|
|
|
8.7
|
%
|
Government
|
|
|
8.5
|
%
|
Engineering and construction
|
|
|
7.2
|
%
|
Insurance and financial services
|
|
|
7.1
|
%
|
Retail, food and automotive
|
|
|
6.9
|
%
|
Communications
|
|
|
5.2
|
%
|
Home furnishing
|
|
|
3.9
|
%
|
Electronics
|
|
|
3.5
|
%
|
Educational services
|
|
|
2.7
|
%
|
Aerospace/defense products and services
|
|
|
2.5
|
%
|
Other
|
|
|
8.4
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
Excludes assets classified as properties held for disposition.
|
The information below depicts the Companys top 10
customers by annualized rental income as of December 31,
2009 (1) (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Annualized
|
|
|
Annualized
|
|
Tenants
|
|
Square Footage
|
|
|
Rental Income (2)
|
|
|
Rental Income
|
|
|
U.S. Government
|
|
|
507
|
|
|
$
|
12,663
|
|
|
|
4.6
|
%
|
Kaiser Permanente
|
|
|
186
|
|
|
|
4,615
|
|
|
|
1.7
|
%
|
Wells Fargo Bank
|
|
|
101
|
|
|
|
1,767
|
|
|
|
0.6
|
%
|
AARP
|
|
|
102
|
|
|
|
1,739
|
|
|
|
0.6
|
%
|
American Intercontinental University
|
|
|
75
|
|
|
|
1,450
|
|
|
|
0.6
|
%
|
Welch Allyn Protocol, Inc.
|
|
|
91
|
|
|
|
1,420
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
%
|
Verizon
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
|
1,382
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
%
|
Montgomery County Public School
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
|
1,366
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
%
|
Intel Corporation
|
|
|
94
|
|
|
|
1,307
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
%
|
Symantec Corporation
|
|
|
73
|
|
|
|
1,243
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
1,348
|
|
|
$
|
28,952
|
|
|
|
10.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
Excludes assets classified as properties held for disposition.
|
|
|
(2)
|
For leases expiring prior to December 31, 2010, annualized
rental income represents income to be received under existing
leases from December 31, 2009 through the date of
expiration.
|
Comparison
of 2009 to 2008
Results of Operations: Net income for the
year ended December 31, 2009 was $94.3 million
compared to $85.3 million for the year ended
December 31, 2008. Net income allocable to common
shareholders for the year
34
ended December 31, 2009 was $59.4 million compared to
$23.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2008.
Net income per common share on a diluted basis was $2.68 for the
year ended December 31, 2009 compared to $1.12 for the year
ended December 31, 2008 (based on weighted average diluted
common shares outstanding of 22,128,000 and 20,618,000,
respectively). The increase in net income allocable to common
shareholders was primarily as a result of an increase in the net
gain of $31.4 million on the repurchase of preferred
equity, a reduction in depreciation expense of
$14.8 million, a decrease in preferred equity distributions
of $7.4 million and a $1.5 million gain on the sale of
a parcel of land in Oregon. The increase was partially offset by
an increase in net income allocable to noncontrolling
interests common units and a decrease in net
operating income due to decreases in both occupancy and rental
rates.
In order to evaluate the performance of the Companys
overall portfolio over two given years, management analyzes the
operating performance of a consistent group of properties owned
and operated throughout both years (herein referred to as
Same Park). For 2009 and 2008, the Same Park
facilities constitute 19.4 million rentable square feet,
which includes all assets in continuing operations that the
Company owned from January 1, 2008 through
December 31, 2009, representing approximately 99.3% of the
total square footage of the Companys portfolio as of
December 31, 2009. The balance of the square footage, or
131,000 square feet, represents an asset sold by the
Company in January, 2010 that has been accounted for as
discontinued operations. The table below excludes income from
discontinued operations.
The following table presents the operating results of the
properties for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008
in addition to other income and expense items affecting income
from continuing operations. The Company reports Same Park
operations to provide information regarding trends for
properties the Company has held for the periods being compared
(in thousands, except per square foot data):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For The Years
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
Rental income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same Park (1)
|
|
$
|
270,957
|
|
|
$
|
281,115
|
|
|
|
(3.6
|
%)
|
Cost of operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same Park
|
|
|
85,912
|
|
|
|
87,182
|
|
|
|
(1.5
|
%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net operating income (2):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same Park
|
|
|
185,045
|
|
|
|
193,933
|
|
|
|
(4.6
|
%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income and expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Facility management fees
|
|
|
698
|
|
|
|
728
|
|
|
|
(4.1
|
%)
|
Interest and other income
|
|
|
536
|
|
|
|
1,457
|
|
|
|
(63.2
|
%)
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(3,552
|
)
|
|
|
(3,952
|
)
|
|
|
(10.1
|
%)
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
(84,504
|
)
|
|
|
(99,317
|
)
|
|
|
(14.9
|
%)
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
(6,202
|
)
|
|
|
(8,099
|
)
|
|
|
(23.4
|
%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations
|
|
$
|
92,021
|
|
|
$
|
84,750
|
|
|
|
8.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same Park gross margin (3)
|
|
|
68.3
|
%
|
|
|
69.0
|
%
|
|
|
(1.0
|
)%
|
Same Park weighted average for the period:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Occupancy
|
|
|
90.4
|
%
|
|
|
93.4
|
%
|
|
|
(3.2
|
%)
|
Realized rent per square foot (4)
|
|
$
|
15.43
|
|
|
$
|
15.49
|
|
|
|
(0.4
|
%)
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
See above for a definition of Same Park. |
|
(2) |
|
Net operating income (NOI) is an important
measurement in the commercial real estate industry for
determining the value of the real estate generating the NOI. See
Concentration of Portfolio by Region above for more
information on NOI. The Companys calculation of NOI may
not be comparable to those of other companies and should not be
used as an alternative to measures of performance in accordance
with GAAP. |
|
(3) |
|
Same Park gross margin is computed by dividing Same Park NOI by
Same Park rental income. |
|
(4) |
|
Same Park realized rent per square foot represents the Same Park
rental income earned per occupied square foot. |
35
Supplemental Property Data and Trends: Rental
income, cost of operations and rental income less cost of
operations, excluding depreciation and amortization, or net
operating income prior to depreciation and amortization (defined
as NOI for purposes of the following table) from
continuing operations summarized for the years ended
December 31, 2009 and 2008 by major geographic region
below. See Concentration of Portfolio by Region
above for more information on NOI, including why the Company
presents NOI and how the Company uses NOI. The Companys
calculation of NOI may not be comparable to those of other
companies and should not be used as an alternative to measures
of performance calculated in accordance with GAAP.
The following table summarizes the Same Park operating results
by major geographic region for the years ended December 31,
2009 and 2008. As part of the table below, we have reconciled
total NOI to income from continuing operations (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of
|
|
|
Cost of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rental Income
|
|
|
Rental Income
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operations
|
|
|
Operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOI
|
|
|
NOI
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
Region
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
Southern California
|
|
$
|
61,887
|
|
|
$
|
65,317
|
|
|
|
(5.3
|
%)
|
|
$
|
17,616
|
|
|
$
|
17,866
|
|
|
|
(1.4
|
%)
|
|
$
|
44,271
|
|
|
$
|
47,451
|
|
|
|
(6.7
|
%)
|
Northern California
|
|
|
20,695
|
|
|
|
23,939
|
|
|
|
(13.6
|
%)
|
|
|
6,788
|
|
|
|
6,862
|
|
|
|
(1.1
|
%)
|
|
|
13,907
|
|
|
|
17,077
|
|
|
|
(18.6
|
%)
|
Southern Texas
|
|
|
9,899
|
|
|
|
10,228
|
|
|
|
(3.2
|
%)
|
|
|
4,124
|
|
|
|
4,235
|
|
|
|
(2.6
|
%)
|
|
|
5,775
|
|
|
|
5,993
|
|
|
|
(3.6
|
%)
|
Northern Texas
|
|
|
16,576
|
|
|
|
16,964
|
|
|
|
(2.3
|
%)
|
|
|
5,777
|
|
|
|
6,011
|
|
|
|
(3.9
|
%)
|
|
|
10,799
|
|
|
|
10,953
|
|
|
|
(1.4
|
%)
|
South Florida
|
|
|
31,416
|
|
|
|
32,555
|
|
|
|
(3.5
|
%)
|
|
|
10,067
|
|
|
|
10,316
|
|
|
|
(2.4
|
%)
|
|
|
21,349
|
|
|
|
22,239
|
|
|
|
(4.0
|
%)
|
Virginia
|
|
|
58,840
|
|
|
|
59,192
|
|
|
|
(0.6
|
%)
|
|
|
17,525
|
|
|
|
17,250
|
|
|
|
1.6
|
%
|
|
|
41,315
|
|
|
|
41,942
|
|
|
|
(1.5
|
%)
|
Maryland
|
|
|
39,112
|
|
|
|
37,977
|
|
|
|
3.0
|
%
|
|
|
12,113
|
|
|
|
11,992
|
|
|
|
1.0
|
%
|
|
|
26,999
|
|
|
|
25,985
|
|
|
|
3.9
|
%
|
Oregon
|
|
|
17,210
|
|
|
|
18,466
|
|
|
|
(6.8
|
%)
|
|
|
6,755
|
|
|
|
7,019
|
|
|
|
(3.8
|
%)
|
|
|
10,455
|
|
|
|
11,447
|
|
|
|
(8.7
|
%)
|
Arizona
|
|
|
6,393
|
|
|
|
7,006
|
|
|
|
(8.7
|
%)
|
|
|
2,735
|
|
|
|
3,013
|
|
|
|
(9.2
|
%)
|
|
|
3,658
|
|
|
|
3,993
|
|
|
|
(8.4
|
%)
|
Washington
|
|
|
8,929
|
|
|
|
9,471
|
|
|
|
(5.7
|
%)
|
|
|
2,412
|
|
|
|
2,618
|
|
|
|
(7.9
|
%)
|
|
|
6,517
|
|
|
|
6,853
|
|
|
|
(4.9
|
%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total NOI
|
|
$
|
270,957
|
|
|
$
|
281,115
|
|
|
|
(3.6
|
%)
|
|
$
|
85,912
|
|
|
$
|
87,182
|
|
|
|
(1.5
|
%)
|
|
$
|
185,045
|
|
|
$
|
193,933
|
|
|
|
(4.6
|
%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reconciliation of NOI to income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
from continuing operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total NOI
|
|
$
|
185,045
|
|
|
$
|
193,933
|
|
|
|
(4.6
|
%)
|
Other income and expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Facility management fees
|
|
|
698
|
|
|
|
728
|
|
|
|
(4.1
|
%)
|
Interest and other income
|
|
|
536
|
|
|
|
1,457
|
|
|
|
(63.2
|
%)
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(3,552
|
)
|
|
|
(3,952
|
)
|
|
|
(10.1
|
%)
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
(84,504
|
)
|
|
|
(99,317
|
)
|
|
|
(14.9
|
%)
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
(6,202
|
)
|
|
|
(8,099
|
)
|
|
|
(23.4
|
%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations
|
|
$
|
92,021
|
|
|
$
|
84,750
|
|
|
|
8.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rental Income: Rental income decreased
$10.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2009
driven by a decrease in weighted average occupancy from 93.4% to
90.4% over the prior year and a decrease in rental rates.
Facility Management Operations: The
Companys facility management operations account for a
small portion of the Companys net income. During the year
ended December 31, 2009, $698,000 of revenue was recognized
from facility management fees compared to $728,000 for the year
ended December 31, 2008.
Cost of Operations: Cost of operations for
the year ended December 31, 2009 was $85.9 million
compared to $87.2 million for the year ended
December 31, 2008, a decrease of $1.3 million, or
1.5%. The decrease in cost of operations was primarily due to a
decrease in payroll costs of $902,000 and a decrease in repairs
and maintenance costs of $871,000 partially offset by increases
in utility costs and property taxes of $525,000 and $431,000,
respectively. Utility costs increased due in part to the
expiration of various contractual rate agreements and the
increase in property taxes was a result of an increase in tax
rates.
Depreciation and Amortization
Expense: Depreciation and amortization expense was
$84.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2009
compared to $99.3 million for the year ended
December 31, 2008. The decrease was primarily due to a
number of capital improvements that became fully depreciated
combined with a decrease in capital expenditures and no
acquisition activity for 2009 and 2008.
General and Administrative Expense: General
and administrative expense was $6.2 million for the year
ended December 31, 2009 compared to $8.1 million for
the year ended December 31, 2008. The decrease of
$1.9 million, or 23.4%, was primarily due to lower stock
compensation expense resulting from the completion of a four
year long-
36
term incentive plan for senior management in March, 2009 and a
decrease in cash compensation expense due in part to personnel
reductions.
Interest and Other Income: Interest and other
income reflect earnings on cash balances in addition to
miscellaneous income items. Interest income was $431,000 for the
year ended December 31, 2009 compared to $1.4 million
for the year ended December 31, 2008. The decrease was
attributable to lower effective interest rates. The effective
interest rate for the year ended December 31, 2009 was 0.4%
compared to 2.7% for the year ended December 31, 2008.
Interest Expense: Interest expense was
$3.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2009
compared to $4.0 million for the year ended
December 31, 2008. The decrease was primarily attributable
to the repayment of a mortgage note of $5.1 million during
the first quarter of 2009.
Gain on Sale of Land: Included in income from
discontinued operations is the gain on the sale of
3.4 acres of land held for development in Portland, Oregon,
for a gross sales price of $2.7 million, resulting in a net
gain of $1.5 million during May, 2009.
Net Income Allocable to Noncontrolling
Interests: Net income allocable to noncontrolling
interests reflects the net income allocable to equity interests
in the Operating Partnership that are not owned by the Company.
Net income allocable to noncontrolling interests was
$17.2 million ($2.6 million of loss allocated to
preferred unit holders and $19.7 million of income
allocated to common unit holders) for the year ended
December 31, 2009 compared to $15.3 million of
allocated income ($7.0 million allocated to preferred unit
holders and $8.3 million allocated to common unit holders)
for the year ended December 31, 2008. The increase in net
income allocable to noncontrolling interests for the year ended
December 31, 2009 over the prior year was primarily due to
the net gain on the repurchase of preferred equity combined with
a decrease in depreciation expense partially offset by a
decrease in net operating income.
Comparison
of 2008 to 2007
Results of Operations: Net income for the
year ended December 31, 2008 was $85.3 million
compared to $81.7 million for the year ended
December 31, 2007. Net income allocable to common
shareholders for the year ended December 31, 2008 was
$23.2 million compared to $17.5 million for the year
ended December 31, 2007. Net income per common share on a
diluted basis was $1.12 for the year ended December 31,
2008 compared to $0.81 for the year ended December 31, 2007
(based on weighted average diluted common shares outstanding of
20,618,000 and 21,573,000, respectively). The increase in net
income allocable to common shareholders was due to an increase
in net operating income of $8.6 million combined with the
net gain of $4.2 million on the repurchase of preferred
stock offset by a decrease in interest and other income of
$3.6 million and an increase in the allocation of net
income to noncontrolling interests of $2.3 million.
In order to evaluate the performance of the Companys
overall portfolio over two given years, management analyzes the
operating performance of a consistent group of properties owned
and operated throughout both years (herein referred to as
Same Park). Operating properties that the Company
acquired subsequent to January 1, 2007 are referred to as
Non-Same Park. For 2008 and 2007, the Same Park
facilities constitute 18.6 million rentable square feet,
which includes all assets in continuing operations that the
Company owned from January 1, 2007 through
December 31, 2008, representing approximately 94.9% of the
total square footage of the Companys portfolio as of
December 31, 2008.
The following table presents the operating results of the
properties for the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007
in addition to other income and expense items affecting income
from continuing operations. The Company
37
reports Same Park operations to provide information regarding
trends for properties the Company has held for the periods being
compared (in thousands, except per square foot data):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For The Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
Rental income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same Park (18.6 million rentable square feet) (1)
|
|
$
|
265,860
|
|
|
$
|
258,431
|
|
|
|
2.9
|
%
|
Non-Same Park (870,000 rentable square feet) (2)
|
|
|
15,255
|
|
|
|
10,143
|
|
|
|
50.4
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total rental income
|
|
|
281,115
|
|
|
|
268,574
|
|
|
|
4.7
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same Park
|
|
|
82,461
|
|
|
|
79,664
|
|
|
|
3.5
|
%
|
Non-Same Park
|
|
|
4,721
|
|
|
|
3,581
|
|
|
|
31.8
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total cost of operations
|
|
|
87,182
|
|
|
|
83,245
|
|
|
|
4.7
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net operating income 3):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same Park
|
|
|
183,399
|
|
|
|
178,767
|
|
|
|
2.6
|
%
|
Non-Same Park
|
|
|
10,534
|
|
|
|
6,562
|
|
|
|
60.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net operating income
|
|
|
193,933
|
|
|
|
185,329
|
|
|
|
4.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income and expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Facility management fees
|
|
|
728
|
|
|
|
724
|
|
|
|
0.6
|
%
|
Interest and other income
|
|
|
1,457
|
|
|
|
5,104
|
|
|
|
(71.5
|
%)
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(3,952
|
)
|
|
|
(4,130
|
)
|
|
|
(4.3
|
%)
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
(99,317
|
)
|
|
|
(97,998
|
)
|
|
|
1.3
|
%
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
(8,099
|
)
|
|
|
(7,917
|
)
|
|
|
2.3
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations
|
|
$
|
84,750
|
|
|
$
|
81,112
|
|
|
|
4.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same Park gross margin (4)
|
|
|
69.0
|
%
|
|
|
69.2
|
%
|
|
|
(0.3
|
%)
|
Same Park weighted average for the period:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Occupancy
|
|
|
93.6
|
%
|
|
|
93.7
|
%
|
|
|
(0.1
|
%)
|
Realized rent per square foot (5)
|
|
$
|
15.31
|
|
|
$
|
14.87
|
|
|
|
3.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
See above for a definition of Same Park. |
|
(2) |
|
See above for a definition of Non-Same Park. |
|
(3) |
|
Net operating income (NOI) is an important
measurement in the commercial real estate industry for
determining the value of the real estate generating the NOI. See
Concentration of Portfolio by Region above for more
information on NOI. The Companys calculation of NOI may
not be comparable to those of other companies and should not be
used as an alternative to measures of performance in accordance
with GAAP. |
|
(4) |
|
Same Park gross margin is computed by dividing Same Park NOI by
Same Park rental income. |
|
(5) |
|
Same Park realized rent per square foot represents the Same Park
rental income earned per occupied square foot. |
Supplemental Property Data and Trends: Rental
income, cost of operations and rental income less cost of
operations, excluding depreciation and amortization, or net
operating income prior to depreciation and amortization (defined
as NOI for purposes of the following table) from
continuing operations summarized for the years ended
December 31, 2008 and 2007 by major geographic region
below. See Concentration of Portfolio by Region
above for more information on NOI, including why the Company
presents NOI and how the Company uses NOI. The
38
Companys calculation of NOI may not be comparable to those
of other companies and should not be used as an alternative to
measures of performance calculated in accordance with GAAP.
The following table summarizes the Same Park operating results
by major geographic region for the years ended December 31,
2008 and 2007. In addition, the table reflects the comparative
impact on the overall rental income, cost of operations and NOI
from properties that have been acquired since January 1,
2007, and the impact of such is included in Non-Same Park
facilities in the table below. As part of the table below, we
have reconciled total NOI to income from continuing operations
(in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of
|
|
|
Cost of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rental Income
|
|
|
Rental Income
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operations
|
|
|
Operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOI
|
|
|
NOI
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
Region
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
Southern California
|
|
$
|
65,317
|
|
|
$
|
64,474
|
|
|
|
1.3
|
%
|
|
$
|
17,866
|
|
|
$
|
17,483
|
|
|
|
2.2
|
%
|
|
$
|
47,451
|
|
|
$
|
46,991
|
|
|
|
1.0
|
%
|
Northern California
|
|
|
20,890
|
|
|
|
20,221
|
|
|
|
3.3
|
%
|
|
|
5,728
|
|
|
|
5,673
|
|
|
|
1.0
|
%
|
|
|
15,162
|
|
|
|
14,548
|
|
|
|
4.2
|
%
|
Southern Texas
|
|
|
10,228
|
|
|
|
9,647
|
|
|
|
6.0
|
%
|
|
|
4,235
|
|
|
|
4,038
|
|
|
|
4.9
|
%
|
|
|
5,993
|
|
|
|
5,609
|
|
|
|
6.8
|
%
|
Northern Texas
|
|
|
16,964
|
|
|
|
15,162
|
|
|
|
11.9
|
%
|
|
|
6,011
|
|
|
|
5,764
|
|
|
|
4.3
|
%
|
|
|
10,953
|
|
|
|
9,398
|
|
|
|
16.5
|
%
|
South Florida
|
|
|
32,555
|
|
|
|
31,514
|
|
|
|
3.3
|
%
|
|
|
10,316
|
|
|
|
10,060
|
|
|
|
2.5
|
%
|
|
|
22,239
|
|
|
|
21,454
|
|
|
|
3.7
|
%
|
Virginia
|
|
|
56,108
|
|
|
|
52,957
|
|
|
|
6.0
|
%
|
|
|
16,169
|
|
|
|
15,226
|
|
|
|
6.2
|
%
|
|
|
39,939
|
|
|
|
37,731
|
|
|
|
5.9
|
%
|
Maryland
|
|
|
37,977
|
|
|
|
38,873
|
|
|
|
(2.3
|
%)
|
|
|
11,992
|
|
|
|
11,746
|
|
|
|
2.1
|
%
|
|
|
25,985
|
|
|
|
27,127
|
|
|
|
(4.2
|
%)
|
Oregon
|
|
|
18,466
|
|
|
|
18,278
|
|
|
|
1.0
|
%
|
|
|
7,019
|
|
|
|
6,659
|
|
|
|
5.4
|
%
|
|
|
11,447
|
|
|
|
11,619
|
|
|
|
(1.5
|
%)
|
Arizona
|
|
|
7,006
|
|
|
|
6,976
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
%
|
|
|
3,013
|
|
|
|
2,904
|
|
|
|
3.8
|
%
|
|
|
3,993
|
|
|
|
4,072
|
|
|
|
(1.9
|
%)
|
Washington
|
|
|
349
|
|
|
|
329
|
|
|
|
6.1
|
%
|
|
|
112
|
|
|
|
111
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
%
|
|
|
237
|
|
|
|
218
|
|
|
|
8.7
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Same Park
|
|
|
265,860
|
|
|
|
258,431
|
|
|
|
2.9
|
%
|
|
|
82,461
|
|
|
|
79,664
|
|
|
|
3.5
|
%
|
|
|
183,399
|
|
|
|
178,767
|
|
|
|
2.6
|
%
|
Non-Same Park
|
|
|
15,255
|
|
|
|
10,143
|
|
|
|
50.4
|
%
|
|
|
4,721
|
|
|
|
3,581
|
|
|
|
31.8
|
%
|
|
|
10,534
|
|
|
|
6,562
|
|
|
|
60.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total NOI
|
|
$
|
281,115
|
|
|
$
|
268,574
|
|
|
|
4.7
|
%
|
|
$
|
87,182
|
|
|
$
|
83,245
|
|
|
|
4.7
|
%
|
|
$
|
193,933
|
|
|
$
|
185,329
|
|
|
|
4.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reconciliation of NOI to income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
from continuing operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total NOI
|
|
$
|
193,933
|
|
|
$
|
185,329
|
|
|
|
4.6
|
%
|
Other income and expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Facility management fees
|
|
|
728
|
|
|
|
724
|
|
|
|
0.6
|
%
|
Interest and other income
|
|
|
1,457
|
|
|
|
5,104
|
|
|
|
(71.5
|
%)
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(3,952
|
)
|
|
|
(4,130
|
)
|
|
|
(4.3
|
%)
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
(99,317
|
)
|
|
|
(97,998
|
)
|
|
|
1.3
|
%
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
(8,099
|
)
|
|
|
(7,917
|
)
|
|
|
2.3
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations
|
|
$
|
84,750
|
|
|
$
|
81,112
|
|
|
|
4.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rental Income: Rental income increased
$12.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2008
over the prior year. The increase in revenue was due to an
increase in Non-Same Park revenue of 50.4%, or
$5.1 million, primarily due to higher rental and occupancy
rates. In addition, Same Park revenue increased by 2.9%, or
$7.4 million, primarily due to higher rental rates.
Facility Management Operations: The
Companys facility management operations account for a
small portion of the Companys net income. During the year
ended December 31, 2008, $728,000 of revenue was recognized
from facility management fees compared to $724,000 for the year
ended December 31, 2007.
Cost of Operations: Cost of operations for
the year ended December 31, 2008 was $87.2 million
compared to $83.2 million for the year ended
December 31, 2007, an increase of $3.9 million, or
4.7%. Assets acquired in 2007 accounted for $1.1 million,
or 29.0%, of the increase. The increase in cost of operations
was primarily due to an increase in property taxes of
$2.6 million as a result of an increase in both rates and
assessed values, higher utility costs of $1.0 million and
higher payroll cost of $813,000 offset by a decrease in
professional fees of $322,000 and a decrease in other expenses
of $175,000 due to a decrease in personnel procurement costs,
marketing materials and third party services.
Depreciation and Amortization
Expense: Depreciation and amortization expense was
$99.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2008
compared to $98.0 million for the year ended
December 31, 2007. The increase is primarily due to the
acquisition of 870,000 square feet during 2007, as well as
depreciation expense on capital and tenant improvements made
during 2008 and 2007.
General and Administrative Expense: General
and administrative expense was $8.1 million for the year
ended December 31, 2008 compared to $7.9 million for
the year ended December 31, 2007. The increase of $182,000,
or
39
2.3%, was primarily a result of higher stock compensation
expense related to the long-term incentive plan for the senior
management.
Interest and Other Income: Interest and other
income reflect earnings on cash balances in addition to
miscellaneous income items. Interest income was
$1.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2008
compared to $4.9 million for the year ended
December 31, 2007. The decrease is attributable to lower
cash balances and lower effective interest rates. Average cash
balances and effective interest rates for the year ended
December 31, 2008 were $49.6 million and 2.7%,
respectively, compared to $98.4 million and 5.0%,
respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2007.
Interest Expense: Interest expense was
$4.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2008
compared to $4.1 million for the year ended
December 31, 2007. The decrease is primarily attributable
to the repayment of a mortgage note of $5.0 million during
the first quarter of 2007.
Net Income Allocable to Noncontrolling
Interests: Net income allocable to noncontrolling
interests reflects the net income allocable to equity interests
in the Operating Partnership that are not owned by the Company.
Net income allocable to noncontrolling interests was
$15.3 million ($7.0 million allocated to preferred
unit holders and $8.3 million allocated to common unit
holders) for the year ended December 31, 2008 compared to
$13.0 million ($6.9 million allocated to preferred
unit holders and $6.2 million allocated to common unit
holders) for the year ended December 31, 2007. The increase
was primarily due to an increase in net operating income
combined with the net gain on the repurchase of preferred stock
offset by a decrease in interest and other income.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
Cash and cash equivalents increased $153.2 million from
$55.0 million at December 31, 2008 to
$208.2 million at December 31, 2009. The increase was
primarily due to net proceeds received from a public offering of
the Companys common stock and the sale of common stock to
PS combined with retained cash from operations partially offset
by the repurchase of preferred equity.
Net cash provided by operating activities for the years ended
December 31, 2009 and 2008 was $179.6 million and
$189.3 million, respectively. Management believes that the
Companys internally generated net cash provided by
operating activities will be sufficient to enable it to meet its
operating expenses, capital improvements, debt service
requirements and distributions to shareholders in addition to
providing additional cash for future growth and debt repayment.
Net cash used in investing activities was $27.0 million and
$35.2 million for the years ended December 31, 2009
and 2008, respectively. The change of $8.2 million was
primarily due to a decrease in recurring capital improvements of
$5.7 million combined with proceeds received from land
disposition of $2.6 million during 2009. No properties were
acquired during the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008.
Net cash provided by financing activities was $545,000 for the
year ended December 31, 2009 compared to net cash used in
financing activities of $134.2 million for the year ended
December 31, 2008. The change of $134.7 million was
primarily due to net proceeds received from a public offering of
the Companys common stock and the sale of common stock to
PS of $171.2 million combined with a decrease in cash paid
for common stock repurchases of $21.4 million and a
decrease in preferred equity distributions of $7.4 million.
This change was partially offset by an increase in cash paid for
preferred equity repurchases of $57.1 million and the
repayment of a mortgage note payable of $5.1 million
combined with an increase in common stock distributions of
$3.5 million as a result of the common stock issuance. The
Company repurchased an aggregate $111.5 million of
preferred equity for $68.0 million during the fourth
quarter of 2008 and the first quarter of 2009 resulting in a
reduction of quarterly preferred equity distributions of
$2.0 million.
-.The Companys preferred equity outstanding decreased to
29.9% of its market capitalization during the year ended
December 31, 2009 due to the repurchase of preferred equity
combined with the issuance of common stock during 2009. The
Companys capital structure is characterized by a low level
of leverage. As of December 31, 2009, the Company had five
fixed-rate mortgages totaling $52.9 million, which
represented 2.3% of its total market capitalization. The Company
calculates market capitalization by adding (1) the
liquidation preference of the Companys outstanding
preferred equity, (2) principal value of the Companys
outstanding mortgages and (3) the
40
total number of common shares and common units outstanding at
December 31, 2009 multiplied by the closing price of the
stock on that date. The weighted average interest rate for the
mortgages is approximately 5.8% per annum. The Company had
approximately 7.3% of its properties, in terms of net book
value, encumbered at December 31, 2009.
On August 14, 2009, the Company closed the sale of
3,450,000 shares of common stock in a public offering and
concurrently sold 383,333 shares of common stock to PS. The
aggregate net proceeds were $171.2 million.
During 2007, the Company issued an aggregate of
$155.8 million of preferred equity with a weighted average
rate of 6.688%. Proceeds from the various offerings were used to
redeem higher rate preferred equity aggregating
$50.0 million with a rate of 8.750%. In addition, proceeds
were used to provide permanent financing for the Companys
acquisitions made in 2007.
The Company focuses on retaining cash for reinvestment as we
believe that this provides the greatest level of financial
flexibility. While operating performance has been down recently
due to the economic recession, it is possible that when the
economy recovers and operating fundamentals improve, additional
increases in distributions to the Companys common
shareholders may be required. Going forward, the Company will
continue to monitor its taxable income and the corresponding
dividend requirements.
The Company has a line of credit (the Credit
Facility) with Wells Fargo Bank which expires on
August 1, 2010. The Credit Facility has a borrowing limit
of $100.0 million. Interest on outstanding borrowings is
payable monthly. At the option of the Company, the rate of
interest charged is equal to (i) the prime rate or
(ii) a rate ranging from the London Interbank Offered Rate
(LIBOR) plus 0.70% to LIBOR plus 1.50% depending on
the Companys credit ratings and coverage ratios, as
defined (currently LIBOR plus 0.85%). In addition, the Company
is required to pay an annual commitment fee ranging from 0.15%
to 0.30% of the borrowing limit (currently 0.20%). In connection
with the modification of the Credit Facility, the Company paid a
fee of $300,000, which is being amortized over the life of the
Credit Facility. The Company had no balance outstanding under
the Credit Facility at December 31, 2009 and 2008.
The Companys funding strategy has been to use permanent
capital, including common and preferred stock, along with
internally generated retained cash flows to meet its liquidity
needs. In addition, the Company may sell properties that no
longer meet its investment criteria. The Company may finance
acquisitions on a temporary basis with borrowings from its
Credit Facility. The Company targets a minimum ratio of funds
from operations (FFO) to combined fixed charges and
preferred distributions of 2.6 to 1.0. Fixed charges include
interest expense and capitalized interest. Preferred
distributions include amounts paid to preferred shareholders and
preferred Operating Partnership unit holders. For the year ended
December 31, 2009, the FFO to fixed charges and preferred
distributions coverage ratio was 3.4 to 1.0, excluding the
$35.6 million net gain on the repurchase of preferred
equity.
Non-GAAP Supplemental Disclosure Measure: Funds from
Operations: Management believes that FFO is a useful
supplemental measure of the Companys operating
performance. The Company computes FFO in accordance with the
White Paper on FFO approved by the Board of Governors of NAREIT.
The White Paper defines FFO as net income, computed in
accordance with GAAP, before depreciation, amortization, gains
or losses on asset dispositions, net income allocable to
noncontrolling interests common units, net income
allocable to restricted stock unit holders and nonrecurring
items. Management believes that FFO provides a useful measure of
the Companys operating performance and when compared year
over year, reflects the impact to operations from trends in
occupancy rates, rental rates, operating costs, development
activities, general and administrative expenses and interest
costs, providing a perspective not immediately apparent from net
income.
FFO should be analyzed in conjunction with net income. However,
FFO should not be viewed as a substitute for net income as a
measure of operating performance or liquidity as it does not
reflect depreciation and amortization costs or the level of
capital expenditure and leasing costs necessary to maintain the
operating performance of the Companys properties, which
are significant economic costs and could materially affect the
Companys results of operations.
Management believes FFO provides useful information to the
investment community about the Companys operating
performance when compared to the performance of other real
estate companies as FFO is generally
41
recognized as the industry standard for reporting operations of
REITs. Other REITs may use different methods for calculating FFO
and, accordingly, our FFO may not be comparable to other real
estate companies.
FFO for the Company is computed as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For The Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Net income allocable to common shareholders
|
|
$
|
59,413
|
|
|
$
|
23,179
|
|
|
$
|
17,537
|
|
|
$
|
16,513
|
|
|
$
|
32,242
|
|
Gain on disposition of real estate
|
|
|
(1,488
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,328
|
)
|
|
|
(18,109
|
)
|
Depreciation and amortization (1)
|
|
|
85,094
|
|
|
|
99,848
|
|
|
|
98,521
|
|
|
|
86,243
|
|
|
|
77,420
|
|
Net income allocable to noncontrolling interests
common units
|
|
|
19,730
|
|
|
|
8,296
|
|
|
|
6,155
|
|
|
|
5,673
|
|
|
|
10,869
|
|
Net income allocable to restricted stock unit holders
|
|
|
325
|
|
|
|
235
|
|
|
|
192
|
|
|
|
134
|
|
|
|
186
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated FFO allocable to common and dilutive shares
|
|
|
163,074
|
|
|
|
131,558
|
|
|
|
122,405
|
|
|
|
106,235
|
|
|
|
102,608
|
|
FFO allocated to noncontrolling interests common
units
|
|
|
(40,472
|
)
|
|
|
(34,443
|
)
|
|
|
(31,094
|
)
|
|
|
(26,974
|
)
|
|
|
(25,620
|
)
|
FFO allocated to restricted stock unit holders
|
|
|
(726
|
)
|
|
|
(730
|
)
|
|
|
(598
|
)
|
|
|
(486
|
)
|
|
|
(444
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FFO allocated to common shares
|
|
$
|
121,876
|
|
|
$
|
96,385
|
|
|
$
|
90,713
|
|
|
$
|
78,775
|
|
|
$
|
76,544
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
Includes depreciation from discontinued operations.
|
FFO allocable to common and dilutive shares for the year ended
December 31, 2009 increased $31.5 million over the
prior year. The increase was primarily due to an increase in the
net gain of $31.4 million on the repurchase of preferred
equity combined with a decrease in preferred equity
distributions and a decrease in general and administrative
expense partially offset by a decrease in net operating income.
Capital Expenditures: During the years ended
December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, the Company incurred
$28.3 million, $33.3 million and $37.4 million,
respectively, in recurring capital expenditures, or $1.45, $1.70
and $1.93 per weighted average square foot, respectively. The
Company defines recurring capital expenditures as those
necessary to maintain and operate its commercial real estate at
its current economic value. The following table depicts actual
capital expenditures (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For The Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Recurring capital expenditures
|
|
$
|
28,345
|
|
|
$
|
33,262
|
|
|
$
|
37,362
|
|
Property renovations and other capital expenditures
|
|
|
1,168
|
|
|
|
1,930
|
|
|
|
5,239
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total capital expenditures
|
|
$
|
29,513
|
|
|
$
|
35,192
|
|
|
$
|
42,601
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock Repurchase: The Companys Board of
Directors previously authorized the repurchase, from time to
time, of up to 6.5 million shares of the Companys
common stock on the open market or in privately negotiated
transactions. During the year ended December 31, 2008, the
Company repurchased 370,042 shares of common stock at an
aggregate cost of $18.3 million or an average cost per
share of $49.52. Since inception of the program, the Company has
repurchased an aggregate of 4.3 million shares of common
stock at an aggregate cost of $152.8 million or an average
cost per share of $35.84. Under existing board authorizations,
the Company can repurchase an additional 2.2 million
shares. No shares of common stock were repurchased under this
program during the year ended December 31, 2009.
Preferred Equity Repurchase: During March,
2009, the Company paid $50.2 million to repurchase
3,208,174 various depositary shares, each representing 1/1,000
of a share of Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock and
42
$12.3 million to repurchase 853,300 units of various
series of Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Units for a weighted
average purchase price of $15.40 per share/unit. The purchase
price discount, equaling the liquidation value of $25.00 per
depositary share/unit over the weighted average purchase price
per share/unit of $15.40, is added to net income allocable to
common shareholders, net of the original issue discount.
During December, 2008, the Company paid $5.5 million to
repurchase 400,000 depositary shares, each representing 1/1,000
of a share of the 6.700% Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock,
Series P, for an average cost of $13.70 per depositary
share. The purchase price discount, equaling the liquidation
value of $25.00 per depositary share over the weighted average
purchase price of $13.70, is added to net income allocable to
common shareholders, net of the original issue discount.
Distributions: The Company has elected and
intends to qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes. In
order to maintain its status as a REIT, the Company must meet,
among other tests, sources of income, share ownership and
certain asset tests. As a REIT, the Company is not taxed on that
portion of its taxable income that is distributed to its
shareholders provided that at least 90% of its taxable income is
distributed to its shareholders prior to the filing of its tax
return.
Related Party Transactions: Concurrent with
the public offering that closed August 14, 2009, the
Company sold 383,333 shares of common stock to PS for net
proceeds of $17.8 million.
At December 31, 2009, PS owned 23.8% of the outstanding
shares of the Companys common stock and 23.0% of the
outstanding common units of the Operating Partnership (100.0% of
the common units not owned by the Company). Assuming issuance of
the Companys common stock upon redemption of its
partnership units, PS would own 41.3% of the outstanding shares
of the Companys common stock. Ronald L. Havner, Jr.,
the Companys chairman, is also the Chief Executive
Officer, President and a Director of PS. Harvey Lenkin is a
Director of both the Company and PS.
Pursuant to a cost sharing and administrative services
agreement, the Company shares costs with PS and affiliated
entities for certain administrative services. These costs
totaled $372,000 in 2009 and are allocated among PS and its
affiliates in accordance with a methodology intended to fairly
allocate those costs. In addition, the Company provides property
management services for properties owned by PS and its
affiliates for a fee of 5% of the gross revenues of such
properties in addition to reimbursement of direct costs. These
management fee revenues recognized under management contracts
with affiliated parties totaled $698,000 in 2009. In December,
2006, PS also began providing property management services for
the mini storage component of two assets owned by the Company
for a fee of 6% of the gross revenues of such properties in
addition to reimbursement of certain costs. Management fee
expense recognized under the management contracts with PS
totaled approximately $50,000 for the year ended
December 31, 2009.
The PS Business Parks name and logo is owned by PS and licensed
to the Company under a non-exclusive, royalty-free license
agreement. The license can be terminated by either party for any
reason with six-months written notice.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements: The Company
does not have any off-balance sheet arrangements.
Contractual Obligations: The table below
summarizes projected payments due under our contractual
obligations as of December 31, 2009 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments Due by Period
|
|
Contractual Obligations
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Less than 1 year
|
|
|
1 - 3 years
|
|
|
3 - 5 years
|
|
|
More than 5 years
|
|
|
Mortgage notes payable (principal and interest)
|
|
$
|
60,917
|
|
|
$
|
4,353
|
|
|
$
|
24,786
|
|
|
$
|
31,778
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
60,917
|
|
|
$
|
4,353
|
|
|
$
|
24,786
|
|
|
$
|
31,778
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Company is scheduled to pay cash dividends of
$50.1 million per year on its preferred equity outstanding
as of December 31, 2009. Dividends are paid when and if
declared by the Companys Board of Directors and accumulate
if not paid. Shares and units of preferred equity are redeemable
by the Company in order to preserve its status as a REIT and are
also redeemable five years after issuance.
43
|
|
ITEM 7A.
|
QUANTITATIVE
AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
|
To limit the Companys exposure to market risk, the Company
principally finances its operations and growth with permanent
equity capital consisting either of common stock or preferred
equity. At December 31, 2009, the Companys debt as a
percentage of equity was 3.6%.
The Companys market risk sensitive instruments include
mortgage notes payable of $52.9 million at
December 31, 2009. All of the Companys mortgage notes
payable bear interest at fixed rates. See Notes 2, 5 and 6
to consolidated financial statements for the terms, valuations
and approximate principal maturities of the Companys
mortgage notes payable and the line of credit as of
December 31, 2009. Based on borrowing rates currently
available to the Company, combined with the amount of fixed rate
debt outstanding, the difference between the carrying amount of
debt and its fair value is insignificant.
|
|
ITEM 8.
|
FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
|
The financial statements of the Company at December 31,
2009 and 2008 and for the years ended December 31, 2009,
2008 and 2007 and the report of Ernst & Young LLP,
Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm, thereon and the
related financial statement schedule, are included elsewhere
herein. Reference is made to the Index to Consolidated Financial
Statements and Schedules in Item 15.
|
|
ITEM 9.
|
CHANGES
IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
|
Not Applicable.
|
|
ITEM 9A.
|
CONTROLS
AND PROCEDURES
|
Conclusion
Regarding the Effectiveness of Disclosure Controls and
Procedures
The Company maintains disclosure controls and procedures that
are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed
in reports the Company files and submits under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (Exchange Act), is
recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time
periods specified in accordance with SEC guidelines and that
such information is accumulated and communicated to the
Companys management, including its Chief Executive Officer
and Chief Financial Officer, to allow for timely decisions
regarding required disclosure based on the definition of
disclosure controls and procedures in
Rules 13a-15(e)
and
15d-15(e) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. In designing and evaluating
the disclosure controls and procedures, management recognizes
that any controls and procedures, no matter how well designed
and operated, can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving
the desired control objectives and management necessarily was
required to apply its judgment in evaluating the cost-benefit
relationship of possible controls and procedures in reaching
that level of reasonable assurance.
The Company carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and
with the participation of the Companys management,
including the Companys Chief Executive Officer and the
Companys Chief Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of
the design and operation of the Companys disclosure
controls and procedures (as such term is defined in
Rules 13a-15(e)
and
15d-15(e) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Based on that evaluation,
the Companys Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer concluded that the Companys disclosure controls
and procedures were effective as of December 31, 2009, at a
reasonable assurance level.
Managements
Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting
Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining
adequate internal control over financial reporting, as such term
is defined in
Rules 13a-15(f)
and
15d-15(f) of
the Exchange Act. Under the supervision and with the
participation of our management, including our Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer, we conducted an evaluation
of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial
reporting based on the framework in Internal
Control-Integrated Framework issued by the Committee on
Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on
our evaluation under the framework in Internal
Control-Integrated Framework, our management concluded that
our internal control over financial reporting was effective as
of December 31, 2009.
44
The effectiveness of the Companys internal control over
financial reporting as of December 31, 2009 has been
audited by Ernst & Young, LLP, an independent
registered public accounting firm, as stated in their report
which is included herein.
Changes
in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
There have not been any changes in our internal control over
financial reporting (as such term is defined in
Rules 13a-15(f)
and
15d-15(f)
under the Exchange Act) during the fourth quarter of 2009 that
have materially affected, or are reasonable likely to materially
affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
45
REPORT OF
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board
of Directors and Shareholders of
PS Business Parks, Inc.
We have audited PS Business Parks, Inc. internal control over
financial reporting as of December 31, 2009, based on
criteria established in Internal Control Integrated
Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of
the Treadway Commission (the COSO criteria). PS Business Parks,
Inc. management is responsible for maintaining effective
internal control over financial reporting, and for its
assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over
financial reporting included in the accompanying
Managements Report on Internal Control over Financial
Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the
companys internal control over financial reporting based
on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control
over financial reporting was maintained in all material
respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of
internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk
that a material weakness exists, testing and evaluating the
design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on
the assessed risk, and performing such other procedures as we
considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our
audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
A companys internal control over financial reporting is a
process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the
reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of
financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles. A companys
internal control over financial reporting includes those
policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance
of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly
reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the
company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions
are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial
statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company
are being made only in accordance with authorizations of
management and directors of the company; and (3) provide
reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of
unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the
companys assets that could have a material effect on the
financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over
financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements.
Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future
periods are subject to the risk that controls may become
inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree
of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
In our opinion, PS Business Parks, Inc. maintained, in all
material respects, effective internal control over financial
reporting as of December 31, 2009, based on the COSO
criteria.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the
consolidated balance sheets of PS Business Parks, Inc. as of
December 31, 2009 and 2008, and the related consolidated
statements of income, shareholders equity, and cash flows
for each of the three years in the period ended
December 31, 2009 and our report dated February 26,
2010 expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.
Los Angeles, California
February 26, 2010
46
|
|
ITEM 9B.
|
OTHER
INFORMATION
|
None.
PART III
|
|
ITEM 10.
|
DIRECTORS,
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
|
The information required by this item with respect to directors
is hereby incorporated by reference to the material appearing in
the Companys definitive proxy statement to be filed in
connection with the annual shareholders meeting to be held
in 2010 (the Proxy Statement) under the caption
Election of Directors.
The following is a biographical summary of the executive
officers of the Company:
Joseph D. Russell, Jr., age 50, has been President
since September, 2002 and was named Chief Executive Officer and
elected as a Director in August, 2003. Mr. Russell joined
Spieker Partners in 1990 and became an officer of Spieker
Properties when it went public as a REIT in 1993. Prior to its
merger with Equity Office Properties (EOP) in 2001,
Mr. Russell was President of Spieker Properties
Silicon Valley Region from 1999 to 2001. Mr. Russell earned
a Bachelor of Science degree from the University of Southern
California and a Masters of Business Administration from the
Harvard Business School. Prior to entering the commercial real
estate business, Mr. Russell spent approximately six years
with IBM in various marketing positions. Mr. Russell has
been a member and past President of the National Association of
Industrial and Office Parks, Silicon Valley Chapter.
Mr. Russell is also a member of the Board of Governors of
NAREIT.
John W. Petersen, age 46, has been Executive Vice President
and Chief Operating Officer since he joined the Company in
December, 2004. Prior to joining the Company, Mr. Petersen
was Senior Vice President, San Jose Region, for Equity
Office Properties from July, 2001 to December, 2004, responsible
for 11.3 million square feet of multi-tenant office,
industrial and R&D space in Silicon Valley. Prior to EOP,
Mr. Petersen was Senior Vice President with Spieker
Properties, from 1995 to 2001 overseeing the growth of that
companys portfolio in San Jose, through acquisition
and development of nearly three million square feet.
Mr. Petersen is a graduate of The Colorado College in
Colorado Springs, Colorado, and was recently the President of
National Association of Industrial and Office Parks, Silicon
Valley Chapter.
Edward A. Stokx, age 44, a certified public accountant, has
been Chief Financial Officer and Secretary of the Company since
December, 2003 and Executive Vice President since March, 2004.
Mr. Stokx has overall responsibility for the Companys
finance and accounting functions. In addition, he has
responsibility for executing the Companys financial
initiatives. Mr. Stokx joined Center Trust, a developer,
owner, and operator of retail shopping centers in 1997. Prior to
his promotion to Chief Financial Officer and Secretary in 2001
he served as Senior Vice President, Finance and Controller.
After Center Trusts merger in January, 2003 with another
public REIT, Mr. Stokx provided consulting services to
various entities. Prior to joining Center Trust, Mr. Stokx
was with Deloitte and Touche from 1989 to 1997, with a focus on
real estate clients. Mr. Stokx earned a Bachelor of Science
degree in Accounting from Loyola Marymount University.
Maria R. Hawthorne, age 50, was promoted to Senior
Vice President of the Company in March, 2004, with
responsibility for property operations on the East Coast, which
include Virginia, Maryland and South Florida. Ms. Hawthorne
has been with the Company and its predecessors for
21 years. From June, 2001 through March, 2004,
Ms. Hawthorne was Vice President of the Company,
responsible for property operations in Virginia. From July, 1994
to June, 2001, Ms. Hawthorne was a Regional Manager of the
Company in Virginia. From August, 1988 to July, 1994,
Ms. Hawthorne was a General Manager, Leasing Director and
Property Manager for American Office Park Properties.
Ms. Hawthorne earned a Bachelor of Arts Degree in
International Relations from Pomona College.
Information required by this item with respect to the nominating
process, the audit committee and the audit committee financial
expert is hereby incorporated by reference to the material
appearing in the Proxy Statement under the caption
Corporate Governance.
47
Information required by this item with respect to a code of
ethics is hereby incorporated by reference to the material
appearing in the Proxy Statement under the caption
Corporate Governance. We have adopted a code of
ethics that applies to our principal executive officer,
principal financial officer and principal accounting officer,
which is available on our website at www.psbusinessparks.com.
The information contained on the Companys website is not a
part of, or incorporated by reference into, this Annual Report
on
Form 10-K.
Any amendments to or waivers of the code of ethics granted to
the Companys executive officers or the controller will be
published promptly on our website or by other appropriate means
in accordance with SEC rules.
Information required by this item with respect to the compliance
with Section 16(a) is hereby incorporated by reference to
the material appearing in the Proxy Statement under the caption
Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting
Compliance.
|
|
ITEM 11.
|
EXECUTIVE
COMPENSATION
|
The information required by this item is hereby incorporated by
reference to the material appearing in the Proxy Statement under
the captions Corporate Governance, Executive
Compensation, Corporate Governance
Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider
Participation and Report of the Compensation
Committee.
48
|
|
ITEM 12.
|
SECURITY
OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND
RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS
|
The information required by this item with respect to security
ownership of certain beneficial owners and management is hereby
incorporated by reference to the material appearing in the Proxy
Statement under the captions Stock Ownership of Certain
Beneficial Owners and Management.
The following table sets forth information as of
December 31, 2009 on the Companys equity compensation
plans:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a)
|
|
|
(b)
|
|
|
(c)
|
|
|
|
Number of Securities
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
Number of Securities
|
|
|
|
to be Issued Upon
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Remaining Available for
|
|
|
|
Exercise of
|
|
|
Exercise Price of
|
|
|
Future Issuance under
|
|
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
|
Equity Compensation
|
|
|
|
Options,
|
|
|
Options,
|
|
|
Plans (Excluding
|
|
|
|
Warrants, and
|
|
|
Warrants, and
|
|
|
Securities Reflected in
|
|
Plan Category
|
|
Rights
|
|
|
Rights
|
|
|
Column (a))
|
|
|
Equity compensation plans approved by security holders
|
|
|
661,843
|
|
|
$
|
41.99
|
|
|
|
1,172,602
|
|
Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
661,843
|
*
|
|
$
|
41.99
|
*
|
|
|
1,172,602
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Amounts include restricted stock units |
|
|
ITEM 13.
|
CERTAIN
RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR
INDEPENDENCE
|
The information required by this item is hereby incorporated by
reference to the material appearing in the Proxy Statement under
the captions Corporate Governance and Certain
Relationships and Related Transactions.
|
|
ITEM 14.
|
PRINCIPAL
ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES
|
The information required by this item is hereby incorporated by
reference to the material appearing in the Proxy Statement under
the captions Ratification of Independent Registered Public
Accountants.
PART IV
|
|
ITEM 15.
|
EXHIBITS AND
FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES
|
a. 1. Financial Statements
The financial statements listed in the accompanying Index to
Consolidated Financial Statements and Schedules are filed as
part of this report.
2. Financial Statements Schedule
The financial statements schedule listed in the accompanying
Index to Consolidated Financial Statements and Schedules are
filed as part of this report.
3. Exhibits
The exhibits listed in the Exhibit Index immediately
preceding such exhibits are filed with or incorporated by
reference in this report.
b. Exhibits
The exhibits listed in the Exhibit Index immediately
preceding such exhibits are filed with or incorporated by
reference in this report.
c. Financial Statement Schedules
Not applicable.
49
PS
BUSINESS PARKS, INC.
INDEX TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SCHEDULES
(Item 15(a)(1)
and Item 15(a)(2))
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page
|
|
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
|
|
|
51
|
|
Consolidated balance sheets as of December 31, 2009 and 2008
|
|
|
52
|
|
Consolidated statements of income for the years ended
December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007
|
|
|
53
|
|
Consolidated statements of equity for the years ended
December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007
|
|
|
54
|
|
Consolidated statements of cash flows for the years ended
December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007
|
|
|
55
|
|
Notes to consolidated financial statements
|
|
|
57
|
|
Schedule:
|
|
|
|
|
III Real estate and accumulated depreciation
|
|
|
74
|
|
All other schedules have been omitted since the required
information is not present or not present in amounts sufficient
to require submission of the schedule, or because the
information required is included in the consolidated financial
statements or notes thereto.
50
REPORT OF
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The Board of
Directors and Shareholders of
PS Business Parks, Inc.
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of
PS Business Parks, Inc. as of December 31, 2009 and 2008,
and the related consolidated statements of income,
shareholders equity, and cash flows for each of the three
years in the period ended December 31, 2009. Our audits
also included the financial statement schedule listed in the
Index at Item 15(a). These financial statements and
financial statement schedule are the responsibility of the
Companys management. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on these financial statements and financial statement
schedule based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the consolidated 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 consolidated financial statements referred
to above present fairly, in all material respects, the
consolidated financial position of PS Business Parks, Inc. at
December 31, 2009 and 2008, and the consolidated results of
their operations and their cash flows for each of the three
years in the period ended December 31, 2009, in conformity
with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. Also,
in our opinion, the related financial statement schedule, when
considered in relation to the basic financial statements taken
as a whole, presents fairly in all material respects the
information set forth therein.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), PS
Business Parks, Inc.s internal control over financial
reporting as of December 31, 2009, based on criteria
established in Internal Control-Integrated Framework issued by
the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission and our report dated February 26, 2010 expressed
an unqualified opinion thereon.
Los Angeles, California
February 26, 2010
51
PS
BUSINESS PARKS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except
|
|
|
|
share data)
|
|
|
ASSETS
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
208,229
|
|
|
$
|
55,015
|
|
Real estate facilities, at cost:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land
|
|
|
493,709
|
|
|
|
493,709
|
|
Buildings and equipment
|
|
|
1,528,044
|
|
|
|
1,510,012
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,021,753
|
|
|
|
2,003,721
|
|
Accumulated depreciation
|
|
|
(707,209
|
)
|
|
|
(633,971
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,314,544
|
|
|
|
1,369,750
|
|
Properties held for disposition, net
|
|
|
4,260
|
|
|
|
4,635
|
|
Land held for development
|
|
|
6,829
|
|
|
|
7,869
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,325,633
|
|
|
|
1,382,254
|
|
Rent receivable
|
|
|
2,504
|
|
|
|
2,055
|
|
Deferred rent receivable
|
|
|
21,596
|
|
|
|
21,633
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
6,860
|
|
|
|
8,366
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
1,564,822
|
|
|
$
|
1,469,323
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND EQUITY
|
Accrued and other liabilities
|
|
$
|
46,298
|
|
|
$
|
46,428
|
|
Mortgage notes payable
|
|
|
52,887
|
|
|
|
59,308
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
99,185
|
|
|
|
105,736
|
|
Commitments and contingencies
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PS Business Parks, Inc.s shareholders equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, $0.01 par value, 50,000,000 shares
authorized, 25,042 and 28,250 shares issued and outstanding
at December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively
|
|
|
626,046
|
|
|
|
706,250
|
|
Common stock, $0.01 par value, 100,000,000 shares
authorized, 24,399,509 and 20,459,916 shares issued and
outstanding at December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively
|
|
|
243
|
|
|
|
204
|
|
Paid-in capital
|
|
|
548,393
|
|
|
|
363,587
|
|
Cumulative net income
|
|
|
699,291
|
|
|
|
622,113
|
|
Cumulative distributions
|
|
|
(658,294
|
)
|
|
|
(571,340
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total PS Business Parks, Inc.s shareholders equity
|
|
|
1,215,679
|
|
|
|
1,120,814
|
|
Noncontrolling interests:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred units
|
|
|
73,418
|
|
|
|
94,750
|
|
Common units
|
|
|
176,540
|
|
|
|
148,023
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total noncontrolling interests
|
|
|
249,958
|
|
|
|
242,773
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total equity
|
|
|
1,465,637
|
|
|
|
1,363,587
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and equity
|
|
$
|
1,564,822
|
|
|
$
|
1,469,323
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes.
52
PS
BUSINESS PARKS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF INCOME
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For The Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data)
|
|
|
Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rental income
|
|
$
|
270,957
|
|
|
$
|
281,115
|
|
|
$
|
268,574
|
|
Facility management fees
|
|
|
698
|
|
|
|
728
|
|
|
|
724
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating revenues
|
|
|
271,655
|
|
|
|
281,843
|
|
|
|
269,298
|
|
Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of operations
|
|
|
85,912
|
|
|
|
87,182
|
|
|
|
83,245
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
84,504
|
|
|
|
99,317
|
|
|
|
97,998
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
6,202
|
|
|
|
8,099
|
|
|
|
7,917
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
176,618
|
|
|
|
194,598
|
|
|
|
189,160
|
|
Other income and expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest and other income
|
|
|
536
|
|
|
|
1,457
|
|
|
|
5,104
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(3,552
|
)
|
|
|
(3,952
|
)
|
|
|
(4,130
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other income and expenses
|
|
|
(3,016
|
)
|
|
|
(2,495
|
)
|
|
|
974
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations
|
|
|
92,021
|
|
|
|
84,750
|
|
|
|
81,112
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discontinued operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from discontinued operations
|
|
|
830
|
|
|
|
597
|
|
|
|
563
|
|
Gain on sale of land
|
|
|
1,488
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total discontinued operations
|
|
|
2,318
|
|
|
|
597
|
|
|
|
563
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
94,339
|
|
|
$
|
85,347
|
|
|
$
|
81,675
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income allocation:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income allocable to noncontrolling interests:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncontrolling interests common units
|
|
$
|
19,730
|
|
|
$
|
8,296
|
|
|
$
|
6,155
|
|
Noncontrolling interests preferred units
|
|
|
(2,569
|
)
|
|
|
7,007
|
|
|
|
6,854
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net income allocable to noncontrolling interests
|
|
|
17,161
|
|
|
|
15,303
|
|
|
|
13,009
|
|
Net income allocable to PS Business Parks, Inc.:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common shareholders
|
|
|
59,413
|
|
|
|
23,179
|
|
|
|
17,537
|
|
Preferred shareholders
|
|
|
17,440
|
|
|
|
46,630
|
|
|
|
50,937
|
|
Restricted stock unit holders
|
|
|
325
|
|
|
|
235
|
|
|
|
192
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net income allocable to PS Business Parks, Inc.
|
|
|
77,178
|
|
|
|
70,044
|
|
|
|
68,666
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
94,339
|
|
|
$
|
85,347
|
|
|
$
|
81,675
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income per common share basic:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing operations
|
|
$
|
2.62
|
|
|
$
|
1.11
|
|
|
$
|
0.80
|
|
Discontinued operations
|
|
$
|
0.08
|
|
|
$
|
0.02
|
|
|
$
|
0.02
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
2.70
|
|
|
$
|
1.13
|
|
|
$
|
0.82
|
|
Net income per common share diluted:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing operations
|
|
$
|
2.61
|
|
|
$
|
1.10
|
|
|
$
|
0.79
|
|
Discontinued operations
|
|
$
|
0.08
|
|
|
$
|
0.02
|
|
|
$
|
0.02
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
2.68
|
|
|
$
|
1.12
|
|
|
$
|
0.81
|
|
Weighted average common shares outstanding:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
21,998
|
|
|
|
20,443
|
|
|
|
21,313
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
22,128
|
|
|
|
20,618
|
|
|
|
21,573
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes.
53
PS
BUSINESS PARKS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total PS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Business Parks, Inc.s
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred Stock
|
|
|
Common Stock
|
|
|
Paid-in
|
|
|
Cumulative
|
|
|
Cumulative
|
|
|
Shareholders
|
|
|
Noncontrolling
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Capital
|
|
|
Net Income
|
|
|
Distributions
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
|
Interests
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except share data)
|
|
|
Balances at December 31, 2006
|
|
|
22,900
|
|
|
$
|
572,500
|
|
|
|
21,311,005
|
|
|
$
|
213
|
|
|
$
|
398,048
|
|
|
$
|
483,403
|
|
|
$
|
(398,961
|
)
|
|
$
|
1,055,203
|
|
|
$
|
248,219
|
|
|
$
|
1,303,422
|
|
Issuance of preferred stock, net of issuance costs
|
|
|
5,750
|
|
|
|
143,750
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,183
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
139,567
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
139,567
|
|
Issuance of preferred units, net of issuance costs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,665
|
|
|
|
11,665
|
|
Repurchase of common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(601,042
|
)
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
(31,847
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(31,853
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(31,853
|
)
|
Exercise of stock options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
43,384
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,468
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,468
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,468
|
|
|