UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

 

xANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For fiscal year ended December 31, 20092010

OR

 

¨TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934.

COMMISSION FILE NO. 1-6622

WASHINGTON REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUST

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

 

MARYLAND 53-0261100
(State of incorporation) (IRS Employer Identification Number)

6110 EXECUTIVE BOULEVARD, SUITE 800, ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND 20852

(Address of principal executive office) (Zip(Zip code)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (301) 984-9400

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

 

Title of Each Class

 

Name of exchange on which registered

Shares of Beneficial Interest New York Stock Exchange

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.    YES  x    NO  ¨

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.    YES  ¨    NO  x

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 such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports) and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past ninety (90) days.    YES  x    NO  ¨

Indicate by checkmark 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  ¨x    NO  ¨

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 registrant’sregistrant's 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.    x

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 definition of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

Large accelerated filer  x            Accelerated filer  ¨            Non-accelerated filer  ¨            Smaller reporting company  ¨

Large accelerated filerxAccelerated filer

¨

Non-accelerated filer¨Smaller reporting company¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act).    YES  ¨    NO  x

As of June 30, 2009,2010, the aggregate market value of such shares held by non-affiliates of the registrant was approximately $1,293,242,069$1,710,524,544 (based on the closing price of the stock on June 30, 2009)2010).

As of February 25, 2010, 59,818,31818, 2011, 65,895,876 common shares were outstanding.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of our definitive Proxy Statement relating to the 20102011 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, are incorporated by reference in Part III, Items 10-14 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K as indicated herein.

 

 

 


WASHINGTON REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUST

20092010 FORM 10-K ANNUAL REPORT

INDEX

 

PART I

       Page
PART I
 

Item 1.

 

Business

  3
 

Item 1A.

 

Risk Factors

  67
 

Item 1B.

 

Unresolved Staff Comments

  14
 

Item 2.

 

Properties

  15
 

Item 3.

 

Legal Proceedings

  17
 

Item 4.

 

Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders(Removed and Reserved)

  17

PART II

    
 

Item 5.

 

Market for the Registrant’sRegistrant's Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

  18
 

Item 6.

 

Selected Financial Data

  19
 

Item 7.

 

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

  20
 

Item 7A.

 

Qualitative and Quantitative Disclosures about Market Risk

  5655
 

Item 8.

 

Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

  5756
 

Item 9.

 

Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure

  5756
 

Item 9A.

 

Controls and Procedures

  5756
 

Item 9B.

 

Other Information

  5756

PART III

    
 

Item 10.

 

Directors, and Executive Officers and Corporate Governance

  5857
 

Item 11.

 

Executive Compensation

  5857
 

Item 12.

 

Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters and Director Independence

  5857
 

Item 13.

 

Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence

  5857
 

Item 14.

 

Principal Accountant Fees and Services

  5857

PART IV

    
 

Item 15.

 

Exhibits and Financial Statements Schedules

  5958
  

Signatures

 64

PART I

ITEM 1:BUSINESS

ITEM 1:  BUSINESS

WRIT Overview

Washington Real Estate Investment Trust (“we” or “WRIT”) is a self-administered, self-managed, equity real estate investment trust (“REIT”) successor to a trust organized in 1960. Our business consists of the ownership and operation of income-producing real property in the greater Washington metro region. We own a diversified portfolio of office buildings, medical office buildings, industrial/flex properties, multifamily buildings and retail centers.

We believe that we qualify as a REIT under Sections 856-860 of the Internal Revenue Code and intend to continue to qualify as such. To maintain our status as a REIT, we are required to distribute 90% of our ordinary taxable income to our shareholders. When selling properties, we have the option of (a) reinvesting the sales proceeds of properties sold, allowing for a deferral of income taxes on the sale, (b) paying out capital gains to the shareholders with no tax to us or (c) treating the capital gains as having been distributed to our shareholders, paying the tax on the gain deemed distributed and allocating the tax paid as a credit to our shareholders.

Over the last five years, dividends paid per share have been $1.73 for 2009, $1.72 for 2008, $1.68 for 2007, $1.64 for 2006 and $1.60 for 2005.

Our geographic focus is based on two principles:

 

 1.Real estate is a local business and is more effectively selected and managed by owners located, and with expertise, in the region.

 

 2.Geographic markets deserving of focus must be among the nation’s best markets with a strong primary industry foundation and diversified enough to withstand downturns in their primary industry.

We consider markets to be local if they can be reached from Washington within two hours by car. While we have historically focused most of our investments in the greater Washington metro region, in order to maximize acquisition opportunities we will consider investments within the two-hour radius described above. We also may consider opportunities to duplicate our Washington-focused approach in other geographic markets which meet the criteria described above.

All of our officers and employees live and work in the greater Washington metro region and all but one of our officers have over 20 years of experience in this region.

This section includes or refers to certain forward-looking statements. You should refer toOver the explanation of the qualificationslast five years, dividends paid per share have been $1.73125 for 2010, $1.73 for 2009, $1.72 for 2008, $1.68 for 2007 and limitations on such forward-looking statements beginning on page 50.$1.64 for 2006.

The Greater Washington Metro Area Economy

In 2009, the national economic recession negatively affected2010, the Washington metro region, evidenced by negativeregion’s economy improved significantly from the prior year, with positive job growth and a decreasean increase in gross regional product (“GRP”). Current estimates by Delta Associates / Transwestern Commercial Services (“Delta”), a national full service real estate firm that provides market research and evaluation services for commercial property, indicate that the Washington metro region lost 24,000gained 20,000 – 25,000 jobs in twelve months ending October2010, compared to a loss of almost 53,000 in 2009. The region’s unemployment rate was 6.2%6.0% at October 2009, upNovember 2010, down from 4.1%6.1% in the prior year. However, it stillThe region’s unemployment rate remains the lowest rate among all of the nation’s largest metro areas. In addition, the region’s unemployment rateareas, and is well below the national average of 10.0% in November 2009.9.8%. The federal government education/health and professional/business services sectors experienced positive job growth, whileremains the other sectors recorded job losses. The Center for Regional Analysis at George Mason University (“CRA”) estimates that the Washington area’s GRP decreased by 0.5% in 2009, which is less severe than the estimated national decline of 2.5%. Approximately one-thirdregion’s most important industry, providing approximately one third of the area’s GRP was generated by the federal government.region’s GRP.

CRADelta expects growth in the Washington metro region to be slowaccelerate from recovery to expansion in 2011, albeit slower than in prior recoveries due to a more cautious business community as the region and the nation recoverwell as more austere spending policies from the severe economic conditions.federal government. According to CRA,Delta, the Washington Leading Index, which forecasts area economic performance over the next 18 months, is 107.0,107.2, as of September 2009,2010, which is above the 20-year average of 102.6. CRADelta also forecasts GRP for the Washington metro region to increase by 2.7%3.3% - 3.6% in 2010. This compares to a national GRP projection of 2.5%3.0% - 3.5%. CRADelta forecasts job growth in the region to increase in 20102011 and 2011,2012, adding 24,90048,100 and 34,90044,000 new jobs, respectively, compared to the 15-year20-year annual average of 52,100.37,000.

Greater Washington Metro Region Real Estate Markets

The Association of Foreign Investors in Real Estate (“AFIRE”) has publicized that it now considers Washington DC as the top U.S. city for real estate investment. The area’smetro region’s economy has translated into strongerimproving relative real estate market performance in each of our segments, compared to other national metropolitan regions, as reported by Delta. Despite our region’s strength in comparison to other metropolitan regions, we believe the potential exists in the current economic environment for continued downward pressure on rents in 2010. Market statistics and information from Delta are set forth below:

Office and Medical Office Sectors

 

Average effective rents decreased 6.9%6.5% in 20092010 in the region compared to an increasea decrease of 0.1%6.9% in 2008.2009.

 

Vacancy was 11.9% at year-end 2010, down from 13.0% at year-end 2009 but up from 10.6% at year-end 2008 and 9.1% at year-end 2007.2008.

 

The region has the fourththird lowest vacancy rate of large metro areas in the United States.

 

Net absorption (defined as the change in occupied, standing inventory from one period to the next) totaled 6.4 million square feet in 2010, up from 0.6 million square feet in 2009 down from 3.4 million square feet in 2008 and a 7.5equal to the 6.4 million square foot long-term average.

 

Of the 5.75.0 million square feet of office space under construction at year-end 20092010 (down from 15.45.7 million square feet at year-end 2008)2009), 48%61% is pre-leased compared to 26%48% one year ago.

Retail Sector

 

Rental rates at grocery-anchored centers decreased 5.8%2.4% in the region in 2009, from2010, compared to the 1.7% increase5.8% decrease in 2008.2009.

 

Vacancy rates increased to 5.6% at year-end 20092010 from 3.7%5.3% at year-end 2008.2009.

 

Total retail sales, decreasedexcluding autos, parts and gas, increased by 7% in 20095.2% for the twelve months ending October 2010, as compared to a 3%2.0% decrease in 2008.2009.

Multifamily Sector

 

RentsNet effective rents for all investment grade apartments decreased 2.0%increased 8.2% in the greater Washington metro region during 2009.2010. Class A rents declinedincreased by 7.8% in 2010 compared to a decline of 1.7% in 2009 compared to growth of 0.1% in 2008.2009.

 

The vacancy rate for all apartments was 3.4% at year-end 2010, compared to 4.3% at year-end 2009, the same as year-end 2008.2009. The national rate was 7.6%6.6% at year-end 2009,2010, which places the Washington metro region as one of the lowest vacancy rates of any metro area in the nation. Class A vacancy decreasedincreased to 4.6% at year-end 2010 from 3.6% at year-end 2009 from 4.4% at year-end 2008.2009.

Industrial/Flex Sector

 

Rental rates for the industrial sector decreased 4.3%3.0% in the Washington metro region in 20092010 compared to an increasea decrease of 0.3%4.3% in 2008.2009.

 

Overall vacancy was 11.0% at year-end 2010, down from 11.4% at year-end 2009, up from 10.1% at year-end 2008.2009.

 

Net absorption was a negative 2.3positive 1.2 million square feet, compared to a positive 4.4negative 2.3 million square feet in 2008.2009.

 

Of the 1.1 million square feet of industrial space under construction at year-end 2009, 41%2010, 51% was pre-leased, compared to 30%41% of space under construction that was pre-leased at year-end 2008.2009.

Our Portfolio

As of December 31, 2009,2010, we owned a diversified portfolio of 9085 properties, consistingtotaling approximately 10.7 million square feet of 27commercial space and 2,540 residential units, and land held for development. These 85 properties consist of 25 office properties, 18 medical office properties, 1415 retail centers, 11 multifamily properties 20and 16 industrial/flex properties and land for development.properties. Our principal objective is to invest in high quality properties in prime locations, then proactively manage, lease and direct ongoing capital improvement programs to improve their economic performance. The percentage of total real estate rental revenue by property group for 2010, 2009 2008 and 2007,2008, and the percent leased, calculated as the percentage of physical net rentable area leased, as of December 31, 2009,2010, were as follows:

 

Percent Leased(1)     Real Estate Rental
Revenue*
 

December 31, 2009

     2009  2008  2007 
91 

Office

  44 42 41
89%(2)  

Medical office

  15   16   15  
96 

Retail

  14   15   17  
96 

Multifamily

  15   13   13  
85 

Industrial

  12   14   14  
           
   100 100 100
           

Percent Leased

December 31, 2010

     Real Estate Rental  Revenue(1) 
    2010  2009  2008 
 90 Office   44  44  42
 90 Medical office   15    15    16  
 92 Retail   14    14    15  
 97 Multifamily   16    16    14  
 80 Industrial   11    11    13  
              
    100  100  100
              

 

(1)

Data excludes discontinued operations.

(2)

Reflects the acquisition of Lansdowne Medical Office Building during the third quarter of 2009. This property was vacant as of December 31, 2009.

The industrial segment’s decrease in share of real estate rental revenue from 13% in 2008 to 11% in 2009 and 2010 is primarily due to declines in that segment’s real estate rental revenue caused by lower occupancy.

On a combined basis, our commercial portfolio (i.e., our office, medical office, retail and industrial properties, but not our multifamily properties) was 88% leased at December 31, 2010, 90% leased at December 31, 2009 94%and 95% leased at December 31, 2008 and 97% leased at December 31, 2007.2008.

The commercial lease expirations for the next five years are as follows:

 

  # of
Leases
  Square Feet  Gross Annual
Rent
  Percentage of
Total Gross
Annual Rent
   # of Leases   Square
Feet
   Gross Annual
Rent
   Percentage of
Total Gross
Annual Rent
 

2010

  297  1,550,000  $33,409,000  14

2011

  292  1,489,000   33,552,000  14     293     1,234,000    $29,374,000     12

2012

  212  1,187,000   26,688,000  11     219     1,225,000     27,861,000     11  

2013

  175  1,300,000   28,369,000  12     216     1,325,000     28,338,000     12  

2014

  143  1,073,000   28,935,000  12     154     1,408,000     37,331,000     15  

2015 and thereafter

  351  2,943,000   90,308,000  37  

2015

   147     1,167,000     31,833,000     13  

2016 and thereafter

   332     2,763,000     88,852,000     37  
                             

Total

  1,470  9,542,000  $241,261,000  100   1,361     9,122,000    $243,589,000     100
                             

Total real estate rental revenue from continuing operations was $306.9$298.0 million for 2010, $298.2 million for 2009 $278.7and $268.7 million for 2008 and $248.9 million for 2007.2008. During the three year period ended December 31, 2009,2010, we acquired fourthree office buildings, sixtwo medical office buildings, one multifamily building, one retail center and twoone industrial/flex properties.property. We also placed into service from development one office building and twoone multifamily buildings.building. During that same time frame, we sold threefive office buildings, one multifamily building and foureight industrial/flex properties. These acquisitions and dispositions were the primary reason for the shifting of each group’s percentage of total real estate rental revenue reflected above.

No single tenant accounted for more than 3.2%3.3% of real estate rental revenue in 2009, 3.5%2010, 3.3% of revenue in 20082009 and 3.6% of revenue in 2007.2008. All federal government tenants in the aggregate accounted for approximately 2.0%2.6% of our 20092010 total revenue. Federal government tenants include the Department of Defense, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Office of Personnel Management, Secret Service, Federal Aviation Administration, NASA and the National Institutes of Health. Our larger non-federal governmentten largest tenants, include the World Bank, The Advisory Board Company, INOVA Health System, IBM Corporation, Patton Boggs LLP, Sunrise Senior Living, Inc., URS Corporation, Lafarge North America, Inc., and Children’s National Medical Center.in terms of aggregate occupied square feet, are as follows:

1.World Bank;

2.Advisory Board Company;

3.General Services Administration;

4.INOVA Health System;

5.Patton Boggs LLP;

6.IBM Corporation;

7.Sunrise Senior Living, Inc.;

8.General Dynamics;

9.Children’s National Medical Center;

10.George Washington University.

We expect to continue investing in additional income-producing properties. We invest in properties which we believe will increase in income and value. Our properties typically compete for tenants with other properties throughout the respective areas in which they are located on the basis of location, quality and rental rates.

In prior years, we have been engaged in significant ground-up development in order to further strengthen our portfolio with long-term growth prospects. In 2007 and 2008, we completed construction on three ground-up development projects. The first was Bennett Park, a 224-unit multifamily property located in Arlington, VA, with the majority of

units delivered by the end of 2007. The second development project was The Clayborne Apartments, a 74-unit multifamily property located in Alexandria, VA. All of the units at Clayborne were delivered during the first quarter of 2008. Bennett Park and Clayborne were 98% and 95% leased, respectively, at December 31, 2009. The third development project was Dulles Station, a Class A office property located in Herndon, VA. Dulles Station is entitled for two office buildings totaling 540,000 square feet. The first 180,000 square foot office building was completed in the third quarter 2007, and was 91% leased at December 31, 2009. Construction of the 360,000 square foot second building remains in the planning phase.

We make capital improvements on an ongoing basis to our properties for the purpose of maintaining and increasing their value and income. Major improvements and/or renovations to the properties in 2010, 2009, 2008, and 20072008 are discussed in Item 7, Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, under the heading “Capital Improvements and Development Costs.”

Further description of the property groups is contained in Item 2, Properties and in Schedule III. Reference is also made to Item 7, Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.

On February 25, 2010,18, 2011, we had 301293 employees including 226213 persons engaged in property management functions and 7580 persons engaged in corporate, financial, leasing, asset management and other functions.

REIT Tax Status

We believe that we qualify as a REIT under Sections 856-860 of the Internal Revenue Code and intend to continue to qualify as such. To maintain our status as a REIT, we are required to distribute 90% of our ordinary taxable income to our shareholders. When selling properties, we have the option of (a) reinvesting the sales proceeds of properties sold, allowing for a deferral of income taxes on the sale, (b) paying out capital gains to the shareholders with no tax to us or (c) treating the capital gains as having been distributed to our shareholders, paying the tax on the gain deemed distributed and allocating the tax paid as a credit to our shareholders.

Tax Treatment of Recent Disposition Activity

We sold several properties during the three year period ended December 31, 2009. 2010:

Disposition Date

  

Property

  

Type

  Rentable
Square Feet
(unaudited)
   Contract Sales
Price

(in thousands)
   Gain on Sale
(in thousands)
 
June 18, 2010  Parklawn Portfolio(1)  Office/Industrial   229,000    $23,400    $7,900  
December 21, 2010  The Ridges  Office   104,000     27,500     4,500  
December 22, 2010  Ammendale I&II/ Amvax  Industrial   305,000     23,000     9,200  
                   
    Total 2010   638,000    $73,900    $21,600  
                   
May 13, 2009  Avondale  Multifamily   170,000    $19,800    $6,700  
July 23, 2009  Tech 100 Industrial Park  Industrial   166,000     10,500     4,100  
July 31, 2009  Brandywine Center  Office   35,000     3,300     1,000  
November 13, 2009  Crossroads Distribution Center  Industrial   85,000     4,400     1,500  
                   
    Total 2009   456,000    $38,000    $13,300  
                   
June 6, 2008  Sullyfield Center/The Earhart Building  Industrial   336,000    $41,100    $15,300  
                   
    Total 2008   336,000    $41,100    $15,300  
                   

(1)

The Parklawn Portfolio consists of three office properties (Parklawn Plaza, Lexington Building and Saratoga Building) and one industrial property (Charleston Business Center).

All disclosed gains on sale are calculated in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”).

In May 2009, we sold a multifamily property, Avondale Apartments, for a gain of $6.7 million. In July 2009, we sold an industrial property, Tech 100 Industrial Park, for a gain of $4.1 million. In July 2009, we sold an office property, Brandywine Center, for a gain of $1.0 million. In November 2009, we sold another industrial property, Crossroads Distribution Center, for a gain of $1.5 million. The capital gains from the sales were paid out to shareholders.

In June 2008, we sold two industrial properties, Sullyfield Center and The Earhart Building, for a gain of $15.3 million. The capital gains from the sales were paid out to shareholders.

In September 2007, we sold two office properties, Maryland Trade Centers I and II, for a gain of $25.0 million. The proceeds from the sales were reinvested in replacement properties.

We distributed all of our 2010, 2009 2008 and 20072008 ordinary taxable income to our shareholders. No provision for income taxes was necessary in 2010, 2009 2008 or 2007.2008.

Availability of Reports

Copies of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, as well as our Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and any amendments to such reports are available, free of charge, on the Internet on our website www.writ.com. All required reports are made available on the website as soon as reasonably practicable after they are electronically filed with or furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission. The reference to our website address does not constitute incorporation by reference of the information contained in the website and such information should not be considered part of this document.

ITEM 1A:RISK FACTORS

ITEM 1A: RISK FACTORS

Set forth below are the risks that we believe are material to our shareholders. We refer to the shares of beneficial interest in WRIT as our “common shares,” and the investors who own shares as our “shareholders.” This section includes or refers to certain forward-looking statements. You should refer to the explanation of the qualifications and limitations on such forward-looking statements beginning on page 50.53.

Further disruptionsDisruptions in the financial markets could affect our ability to obtain financing or have other adverse effects on us or the market price of our common shares.

The United States and global equity and credit markets recentlyhave experienced in the recent past significant price volatility and liquidity disruptions which caused the market prices of stocks to fluctuate substantially and the spreads on prospective debt financings to widen considerably. These circumstances significantly negatively impacted liquidity in the financial markets, making terms for certain financings less attractive or unavailable. FurtherAny disruption in the equity and credit markets could negatively impact our ability to access additional financing at reasonable terms or at all. If such further disruption were to occur, in the event of a debt financing, our cost of borrowing in the future would likely be significantly higher than historical levels. As well, in the case of a common equity financing, the disruptions in the

financial markets could have a material adverse effect on the market value of our common shares, potentially requiring us to issue more shares than we would otherwise have issued with a higher market value for our common shares. Further disruptionDisruption in the financial markets also could negatively affect our ability to make acquisitions, undertake new development projects and refinance our debt. As well,In addition, it could also make it more difficult for us to sell properties and could adversely affect the price we receive for properties that we do sell, as prospective buyers experience increased costs of financing and difficulties in obtaining financing.

Further disruptionsDisruptions in the financial markets also could adversely affect many of our tenants and their businesses, including their ability to pay rents when due and renew their leases at rates at least as favorable as their current rates. As well, our ability to attract prospective new tenants in the future could be adversely affected by disruption in the financial markets.

Our performance and value are subject to risks associated with our real estate assets and with the real estate industry.

Our economic performance and the value of our real estate assets are subject to the risk that if our office, medical office, retail, multifamily and industrial properties do not generate revenues sufficient to meet our operating expenses, debt service and capital expenditures, our cash flow and ability to pay distributions to our shareholders will be adversely affected. The following factors, among others, may adversely affect the cash flow generated by our commercial and multifamily properties:

 

downturns in the national, regional and local economic climate;

 

the economic health of our tenants and the ability to collect rents;

 

consumer confidence, unemployment rates, and consumer tastes and preferences;

 

competition from similar asset type properties;

 

local real estate market conditions, such as oversupply or reduction in demand for office, medical office, retail, multifamily and industrial properties;

 

changes in interest rates and availability of financing;

vacancies, changes in market rental rates and the need to periodically repair, renovate and re-let space;

 

increased operating costs, including insurance premiums, utilities and real estate taxes;

 

inflation;

 

civil disturbances, earthquakes and other natural disasters, terrorist acts or acts of war; and

 

decreases in the underlying value of our real estate.

We are dependent upon the economic climate of the Washington metropolitan region.

All of our properties are located in the Washington metropolitan region, which may expose us to a greater amount of market dependent risk than if we were geographically diverse. General economic conditions and local real estate conditions in our geographic region may be dependent upon one or more industries, thus a downturn in one of the industries may have a particularly strong effect. In particular, economic conditions in our market are directly affected by federal government spending in the region. In the event of reduced federal spending or negative economic changes in our region, we may experience a negative impact to our profitability and may be limited in our ability to make distributions to our shareholders.

We may be adversely affected by any significant reductions in federal government spending.

As aREIT operating exclusively in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area, a significant portion of our properties is occupied by United States Government tenants or tenants that are directly or indirectly serving the United States Government as federal contractors or otherwise. A significant reduction in federal government spending could affect the ability of these tenants to fulfill lease obligations or decrease the likelihood that they will renew their leases with us. Further, economic conditions in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area are significantly dependent upon the level of federal government spending in the region. In the event of a significant reduction in federal government spending, there could be negative economic changes in our region which could adversely impact the ability of our tenants to perform their financial obligations under our leases or the likelihood of their lease renewal. As a result, if such a reduction in federal government spending were to occur, we could experience an adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and ability to make distributions to our shareholders.

We face risks associated with property acquisitions.

We intend to continue to acquire properties which would continue to increase our size and could alter our capital structure. Our acquisition activities and results may be exposed to the following risks:

 

we may be unable to finance acquisitions on favorable terms;

 

the acquired properties may fail to perform as we expected in analyzing our investments;

the actual returns realized on acquired properties may not exceed our average cost of capital;

 

we may be unable to acquire a desired property because of competition from other real estate investors, including publicly traded real estate investment trusts, institutional investment funds and private investors;

 

even if we enter into an acquisition agreement for a property, it is subject to customary conditions to closing, including completion of due diligence investigations which may have findings that are unacceptable;

 

even if we enter into an acquisition agreement for a property, we may be unable to complete that acquisition after making a non-refundable deposit and incurring certain other acquisition-related costs;

 

we may be unable to quickly and efficiently integrate new acquisitions, particularly acquisitions of portfolios of properties, into our existing operations;

competition from other real estate investors may significantly increase the purchase price; and

 

our estimates of capital expenditures required for an acquired property, including the costs of repositioning or redeveloping, may be inaccurate.

We may acquire properties subject to liabilities and without recourse, or with limited recourse with respect to unknown liabilities. As a result, if liability were asserted against us based upon the acquisition of a property, we may have to pay substantial sums to settle it, which could adversely affect our cash flow. Unknown liabilities with respect to properties acquired might include:

 

liabilities for clean-up of undisclosed environmental contamination;

 

claims by tenants, vendors or other persons dealing with the former owners of the properties;

 

liabilities incurred in the ordinary course of business; and

 

claims for indemnification by general partners, directors, officers and others indemnified by the former owners of the properties.

Real estate investments are illiquid, and we may not be able to sell our properties on a timely basis when we determine it is appropriate to do so.

Real estate investments can be difficult to sell and convert to cash quickly, especially if market conditions are not favorable, and we may find that to be the case under the current economic conditions due to limited credit availability for potential buyers. Such illiquidity could limit our ability to quickly change our portfolio of properties in response to changes in economic or other conditions. Moreover, under certain circumstances, the Internal Revenue Code imposes penalties on a REIT that sells property held for less than two years and or sells more than a specified number of properties in a given year. In addition, for properties that we acquire by issuing units in an operating partnership, we may be restricted by agreements with the sellers of the properties for a certain period of time from entering into transactions (such as the sale or refinancing of the acquired property) that will result in a taxable gain to the sellers without the sellers’ consent. Due to these factors, we may be unable to sell a property at an advantageous time.

We face potential difficulties or delays renewing leases or re-leasing space.

FromAs of December 31, 2010, through 2014, leases on our commercial properties will expire on a total of approximately 69% of our leased square footagefrom 2011 through 2015 as of December 31, 2009, with leases on approximately 16% of our leased square footage expiring in 2010, 16% in 2011, 12% in 2012, 14% in 2013 and 11% in 2014. follows:

   % of leased square footage

2011

  12%

2012

  11%

2013

  12%

2014

  15%

2015

  13%
   

Total

  63%
   

We derive substantially all of our income from rent received from tenants. If our tenants decide not to renew their leases, we may not be able to re-let the space. If tenants decide to renew their leases, the terms of renewals, including the cost of required improvements or concessions, may be less favorable than current lease terms. Multifamily properties are leased under operating leases with terms of generally one year or less. For the years ended 2010, 2009 2008 and 2007,2008, the multifamily tenant retention rate was 54%61%, 67%54% and 68%67%, respectively. Similar to our commercial properties, if our multifamily tenants decide not to renew their leases, we may not be able to re-let the space, or the terms of the renewal may be less favorable than current lease terms. As a result of the foregoing, our cash flow could decrease and our ability to make distributions to our shareholders could be adversely affected.

We face potential adverse effects from major tenants’tenants' bankruptcies or insolvencies.

The bankruptcy or insolvency of a major tenant may adversely affect the income produced by a property. For example, during the fourth quarter of 2008, the bankruptcy of a large retail tenant caused a loss of approximately $1.0 million. In light of the current economic recession, it is possible that additional major tenants could file for bankruptcy protection or become insolvent in the future. We cannot evict a tenant solely because of its bankruptcy. On the other hand, a court might authorize the tenant to reject and terminate its lease. In such case, our claim against the bankrupt tenant for unpaid, future rent would be subject to a statutory cap that might be substantially less than the remaining rent actually owed under the lease. As a result, our claim for unpaid rent would likely not be paid in full. This shortfall could adversely affect our cash flow and results from operations.

If a tenant experiences a downturn in its business or other types of financial distress, it may be unable to make timely rental payments. By way of illustration, provision for losses on accounts receivable from continuing operations increased to $6.7 million in 2009, from $4.2 million in 2008 and $1.9 million in 2007. This unfavorable trend could continue or worsen in 2010 and forward.

We face risks associated with property development.

Developing properties present a number of risks for us, including risks that:

 

if we are unable to obtain all necessary zoning and other required governmental permits and authorizations or cease development of the project for any other reason, the development opportunity may be abandoned after expending significant resources, resulting in the loss of deposits or failure to recover expenses already incurred;

 

the development and construction costs of the project may exceed original estimates due to increased interest rates and increased cost of materials, labor, leasing or other expenditures, which could make the completion of the project less profitable because market rents may not increase sufficiently to compensate for the increase in construction costs;

 

construction and/or permanent financing may not be available on favorable terms or may not be available at all, which may cause the cost of the project to increase and lower the expected return;

the project may not be completed on schedule as a result of a variety of factors, many of which are beyond our control, such as weather, labor conditions and material shortages, which would result in increases in construction costs and debt service expenses; and

 

occupancy rates and rents at the newly completed property may not meet the expected levels and could be insufficient to make the property profitable.

Properties developed or acquired for development may generate little or no cash flow from the date of acquisition through the date of completion of development. In addition, new development activities, regardless of whether or not they are ultimately successful, may require a substantial portion of management’s time and attention.

These risks could result in substantial unanticipated delays or expenses and, under certain circumstances, could prevent completion of development activities once undertaken, any of which could have an adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, or ability to satisfy our debt service obligations.

We may suffer economic harm as a result of the actions of our partners in real estate joint ventures and other investments.

We may invest in joint ventures or other entities in which we are not the exclusive investor or principal decision maker. Investments in such entities may involve risks not present when a third party is not involved, including the possibility that the other parties to these investments might become bankrupt or fail to fund their share of required capital contributions. Our partners in these entities may have economic, tax or other business interests or goals which are inconsistent with our business interests or goals, and may be in a position to take actions contrary to our policies or objectives. Such investments may also lead to impasses, for example, as to whether to sell a property, because neither we nor the other parties to these investments may have full control over the entity. In addition, we may in certain circumstances be liable for the actions of the other parties to these investments. Each of these factors could have an adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and ability to make distributions to our shareholders.

Our properties face significant competition.

We face significant competition from developers, owners and operators of office, medical office, retail, multifamily, industrial and other commercial real estate. Substantially all of our properties face competition from similar properties in the same market. Such competition may affect our ability to attract and retain tenants and may reduce the rents we are able to charge. These competing properties may have vacancy rates higher than our properties, which may result in their owners being willing to make space available at lower rents than the space in our properties.

We face risks associated with the use of debt, including refinancing risk.

We rely on borrowings under our credit facilities and offerings of debt securities to finance acquisitions and development activities and for general corporate purposes. The commercial real estate debt markets recentlyhave in the recent past experienced significant volatility due to a number of factors, including the tightening of underwriting standards by lenders and credit rating agencies and the reported significant inventory of unsold mortgage backed securities in the

market. The volatility resulted in investors decreasing the availability of debt financing as well as increasing the cost of debt financing. While the commercial real estate debt markets have begun to improve, weWe believe that circumstances could again arise in which we may not be able to obtain debt financing in the future on favorable terms, or at all. If we were unable to borrow under our credit facilities or to refinance existing debt financing, our financial condition and results of operations would likely be adversely affected.

We are subject to the risks normally associated with debt, including the risk that our cash flow may be insufficient to meet required payments of principal and interest. We anticipate that only a small portion of the principal of our debt will be repaid prior to maturity. Therefore, we are likely to need to refinance a significant portion of our outstanding debt as it matures. There is a risk that we may not be able to refinance existing debt or that the terms of any refinancing will not be as favorable as the terms of the existing debt. If principal payments due at maturity cannot be refinanced, extended or repaid with proceeds from other sources, such as new equity capital, our cash flow may not be sufficient to repay all maturing debt in years when significant “balloon” payments come due.

Our degree of leverage could limit our ability to obtain additional financing or affect the market price of our common shares or debt securities.

On February 25, 2010,18, 2011, our total consolidated debt was approximately $1.2 billion. Consolidated debt to consolidated market capitalization ratio, which measures total consolidated debt as a percentage of the aggregate of total consolidated debt plus the market value of outstanding equity securities, is often used by analysts to gauge leverage for equity REITs such as us. Our market value is calculated using the price per share of our common shares. Using the closing share price of $27.92$30.90 per share of our common shares on February 25, 2010,18, 2011, multiplied by the number of our common shares, our consolidated debt to total consolidated market capitalization ratio was approximately 42%38% as of February 25, 2010.18, 2011.

Our degree of leverage could affect our ability to obtain additional financing for working capital, capital expenditures, acquisitions, development or other general corporate purposes. Our senior unsecured debt is currently rated investment grade by the two major rating agencies. However, there can be no assurance that we will be able to maintain this rating, and in the event our senior debt is downgraded from its current rating, we would likely incur higher borrowing costs and/or difficulty in obtaining additional financing. Our degree of leverage could also make us more vulnerable to a downturn in business or the economy generally. There is a risk that changes in our debt to market capitalization ratio, which is in part a function of our share price, or our ratio of indebtedness to other measures of asset value used by financial analysts, may have an adverse effect on the market price of our equity or debt securities.

Rising interest rates would increase our interest costs.

We may incur indebtedness that bears interest at variable rates. Accordingly, if interest rates increase, so will our interest costs, which could adversely affect our cash flow and our ability to service debt. As a protection against rising interest rates, we may enter into agreements such as interest rate swaps, caps, floors and other interest rate exchange contracts. These agreements, however, increase our risks that other parties to the agreements may not perform or that the agreements may be unenforceable.

Covenants in our debt agreements could adversely affect our financial condition.

Our credit facilities contain customary restrictions, requirements and other limitations on our ability to incur indebtedness. We must maintain a minimum tangible net worth and certain ratios, including a maximum of total liabilities to total gross asset value, a maximum of secured indebtedness to gross asset value, a minimum of annual EBITDA to fixed charges, a minimum of unencumbered asset value to unsecured indebtedness, a minimum of net operating income from unencumbered properties to unsecured interest expense and a maximum of permitted investments to gross asset value. Our ability to borrow under our credit facilities is subject to compliance with our financial and other covenants. The recent economic downturn may adversely affect our ability to comply with these financial and other covenants.

Failure to comply with any of the covenants under our unsecured credit facilities or other debt instruments could result in a default under one or more of our debt instruments. ThisIn particular, we could suffer a default under one of our secured debt instruments that could exceed a cross default threshold under our unsecured credit facilities, causing an event of default under the unsecured credit facilities. Alternatively, even if a secured debt instrument is below the cross default threshold for non-recourse secured debt under our unsecured credit facilities, a default under such secured debt instrument may still cause a cross default under our unsecured credit facilities because such secured debt instrument may not qualify as “non-recourse” under the definition in our unsecured credit facilities. Another possible cross default could occur between our unsecured credit facilities, on the one hand, and our senior unsecured notes, on the other hand. Any of the foregoing default or cross

default events could cause our lenders to accelerate the timing of payments and/or prohibit future borrowings, either of which would have a material adverse effect on our business, operations, financial condition and liquidity.

We face risks associated with short-term liquid investments.

We have significant cash balances from time to time that we invest in a variety of short-term investments that are intended to preserve principal value and maintain a high degree of liquidity while providing current income. From time to time, these investments may include (either directly or indirectly):

 

direct obligations issued by the U.S. Treasury;

 

obligations issued or guaranteed by the U.S. government or its agencies;

 

taxable municipal securities;

 

obligations (including certificates of deposit) of banks and thrifts;

 

commercial paper and other instruments consisting of short-term U.S. dollar denominated obligations issued by corporations and banks;

 

repurchase agreements collateralized by corporate and asset-backed obligations;

 

both registered and unregistered money market funds; and

 

other highly rated short-term securities.

Investments in these securities and funds are not insured against loss of principal. Under certain circumstances we may be required to redeem all or part of our investment, and our right to redeem some or all of our investment may be delayed or suspended. In addition, there is no guarantee that our investments in these securities or funds will be redeemable at par value. A decline in the value of our investment or a delay or suspension of our right to redeem may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or financial condition.

Further issuances of equity securities may be dilutive to current shareholders.

The interests of our existing shareholders could be diluted if additional equity securities are issued, including to finance future developments and acquisitions, instead of incurring additional debt. Our ability to execute our business strategy depends on our access to an appropriate blend of debt financing, including unsecured lines of credit and other forms of secured and unsecured debt, and equity financing.

Compliance or failure to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and other laws and regulations could result in substantial costs.

The Americans with Disabilities Act generally requires that public buildings, including commercial and multifamily properties, be made accessible to disabled persons. Noncompliance could result in imposition of fines by the federal government or the award of damages to private litigants. If, pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, we are required to make substantial alterations and capital expenditures in one or more of our properties, including the removal of access barriers, it could adversely affect our results of operations.

We may also incur significant costs complying with other regulations. Our properties are subject to various federal, state and local regulatory requirements, such as state and local fair housing, rent control and fire and life safety requirements. If we fail to comply with these requirements, we may incur fines or private damage awards. We believe that our properties are currently in material compliance with regulatory requirements. However, we do not know whether existing requirements will change or whether compliance with future requirements will require significant unanticipated expenditures that will adversely affect our results of operations.

Some potential losses are not covered by insurance.

We carry insurance coverage on our properties of types and in amounts that we believe are in line with coverage customarily obtained by owners of similar properties. We believe all of our properties are adequately insured. The property insurance that we maintain for our properties has historically been on an “all risk” basis, which is in full force

and effect until renewal in September 2010.August 2011. There are other types of losses, such as from wars or catastrophic events, for which we cannot obtain insurance at all or at a reasonable cost.

We have an insurance policy which has no terrorism exclusion, except for non-certified nuclear, chemical and biological acts of terrorism. Our financial condition and results of operations are subject to the risks associated with acts of terrorism and the potential for uninsured losses as the result of any such acts. Effective November 26, 2002, under this existing coverage, any losses caused by certified acts of terrorism would be partially reimbursed by the United States under a formula established by federal law. Under this formula the United States pays 85% of covered terrorism losses exceeding the statutorily established deductible paid by the insurance provider, and insurers pay 10% until aggregate insured losses from all insurers reach $100 billion in a calendar year. If the aggregate amount of insured losses under this program exceeds $100 billion during the applicable period for all insured and insurers combined, then each insurance provider will not be liable for payment of any amount which exceeds the aggregate amount of $100 billion. On December 26, 2007, the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007 was signed into law and extends the program through December 31, 2014. We continue to monitor the state of the insurance market in general, and the scope and costs of coverage for acts of terrorism in particular, but we cannot anticipate what amount of coverage will be available on commercially reasonable terms in future policy years.

In the event of an uninsured loss or a loss in excess of our insurance limits, we could lose both the revenues generated from the affected property and the capital we have invested in the affected property. Depending on the specific circumstances of the affected property it is possible that we could be liable for any mortgage indebtedness or other obligations related to the property. Any such loss could adversely affect our business and financial condition and results of operations.

We have to renew our policies in most cases on an annual basis and negotiate acceptable terms for coverage, exposing us to the volatility of the insurance markets, including the possibility of rate increases. Any material increase in insurance rates or decrease in available coverage in the future could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.

Actual or threatened terrorist attacks may adversely affect our ability to generate revenues and the value of our properties.

All of our properties are located in or near Washington D.C., a metropolitan area that has been and may in the future be the target of actual or threatened terrorism attacks. As a result, some tenants in our market may choose to relocate their businesses to other markets. This could result in an overall decrease in the demand for commercial space in this market generally, which could increase vacancies in our properties or necessitate that we lease our properties on less favorable terms, or both. In addition, future terrorist attacks in or near Washington D.C. could directly or indirectly damage our properties, both physically and financially, or cause losses that materially exceed our insurance coverage. As a result of the foregoing, our ability to generate revenues and the value of our properties could decline materially.

Potential liability for environmental contamination could result in substantial costs.

Under federal, state and local environmental laws, ordinances and regulations, we may be required to investigate and clean up the effects of releases of hazardous or toxic substances or petroleum products at our properties, regardless of our knowledge or responsibility, simply because of our current or past ownership or operation of the real estate. In addition, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration and other state and local governmental authorities are increasingly involved in indoor air quality standards, especially with respect to asbestos, mold, medical waste and lead-based paint. The clean up of any environmental contamination, including asbestos and mold, can be costly. If environmental problems arise, we may have to make substantial payments which could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations because:

 

as owner or operator we may have to pay for property damage and for investigation and clean-up costs incurred in connection with the contamination;

 

the law typically imposes clean-up responsibility and liability regardless of whether the owner or operator knew of or caused the contamination;

 

even if more than one person may be responsible for the contamination, each person who shares legal liability under the environmental laws may be held responsible for all of the clean-up costs; and

 

governmental entities and third parties may sue the owner or operator of a contaminated site for damages and costs.

These costs could be substantial and in extreme cases could exceed the value of the contaminated property. The presence of hazardous or toxic substances or petroleum products or the failure to properly remediate contamination may adversely affect our ability to borrow against, sell or rent an affected property. In addition, applicable environmental laws create liens on contaminated sites in favor of the government for damages and costs it incurs in connection with a contamination.

Environmental laws also govern the presence, maintenance and removal of asbestos. Such laws require that owners or operators of buildings containing asbestos:

 

properly manage and maintain the asbestos;

 

notify and train those who may come into contact with asbestos; and

 

undertake special precautions, including removal or other abatement, if asbestos would be disturbed during renovation or demolition of a building.

Such laws may impose fines and penalties on building owners or operators who fail to comply with these requirements and may allow third parties to seek recovery from owners or operators for personal injury associated with exposure to asbestos fibers.

It is our policy to retain independent environmental consultants to conduct Phase I environmental site assessments and asbestos surveys with respect to our acquisition of properties. These assessments generally include a visual inspection of the properties and the surrounding areas, an examination of current and historical uses of the properties and the surrounding areas and a review of relevant state, federal and historical documents. However, they do not always involve invasive techniques such as soil and ground water sampling. Where appropriate, on a property-by-property basis, our general practice is to have these consultants conduct additional testing. However, even though these additional assessments may be conducted, there is still the risk that:

 

the environmental assessments and updates did not identify all potential environmental liabilities;

 

a prior owner created a material environmental condition that is not known to us or the independent consultants preparing the assessments;

 

new environmental liabilities have developed since the environmental assessments were conducted; and

 

future uses or conditions or changes in applicable environmental laws and regulations could result in environmental liability to us.

Failure to qualify as a REIT would cause us to be taxed as a corporation, which would substantially reduce funds available for payment of dividends.

If we fail to qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes, we would be taxed as a corporation. We believe that we are organized and qualified as a REIT and intend to operate in a manner that will allow us to continue to qualify as a REIT. However, we cannot assure you that we are qualified as such, or that we will remain qualified as such in the future. This is because qualification as a REIT involves the application of highly technical and complex provisions of the

Internal Revenue Code as to which there are only limited judicial and administrative interpretations and involves the determination of facts and circumstances not entirely within our control. Future legislation, new regulations, administrative interpretations or court decisions may significantly change the tax laws or the application of the tax laws with respect to qualification as a REIT for federal income tax purposes or the federal income tax consequences of such qualification.

If we fail to qualify as a REIT we could face serious tax consequences that could substantially reduce our funds available for payment of dividends for each of the years involved because:

 

we would not be allowed a deduction for dividends paid to shareholders in computing our taxable income and could be subject to federal income tax at regular corporate rates;

 

we also could be subject to the federal alternative minimum tax and possibly increased state and local taxes;

 

unless we are entitled to relief under statutory provisions, we could not elect to be subject to tax as a REIT for four taxable years following the year during which we are disqualified; and

 

all dividends would be subject to tax as ordinary income to the extent of our current and accumulated earnings and profits potentially eligible as “qualified dividends” subject to the 15% income tax rate.

In addition, if we fail to qualify as a REIT, we would no longer be required to pay dividends. As a result of these factors, our failure to qualify as a REIT could have a material adverse impact on our results of operations, financial condition and liquidity.

The market value of our securities can be adversely affected by many factors.

As with any public company, a number of factors may adversely influence the public market price of our common shares. These factors include:

 

level of institutional interest in us;

 

perceived attractiveness of investment in us, in comparison to other REITs;

 

attractiveness of securities of REITs in comparison to other asset classes taking into account, among other things, that a substantial portion of REITs’ dividends are taxed as ordinary income;

 

our financial condition and performance;

 

the market’s perception of our growth potential and potential future cash dividends;

 

government action or regulation, including changes in tax law;

 

increases in market interest rates, which may lead investors to expect a higher annual yield from our distributions in relation to the price of our shares;

 

changes in federal tax laws;

 

changes in our credit ratings;

 

relatively low trading volume of shares of REITs in general, which tends to exacerbate a market trend with respect to our shares; and

 

any negative change in the level of our dividend or the partial payment thereof in common shares.

We cannot assure you we will continue to pay dividends at historical rates.

Our ability to continue to pay dividends on our common shares at historical rates or to increase our common share dividend rate will depend on a number of factors, including, among others, the following:

 

our future financial condition and results of operations;

 

the performance of lease terms by tenants;

 

the terms of our loan covenants; and

 

our ability to acquire, finance, develop or redevelop and lease additional properties at attractive rates.

If we do not maintain or increase the dividend rate on our common shares in the future, it could have an adverse effect on the market price of our common shares.

Provisions of the Maryland General Corporation Law, or the MGCL, may limit a change in control.

There are several provisions of the Maryland General Corporation Law, or the MGCL, that may limit the ability of a third party to undertake a change in control, including:

 

a provision where a corporation is not permitted to engage in any business combination with any “interested stockholder,” defined as any holder or affiliate of any holder of 10% or more of the corporation’s stock, for a period of five years after that holder becomes an “interested stockholder;” and

 

a provision where the voting rights of “control shares” acquired in a “control share acquisition,” as defined in the MGCL, may be restricted, such that the “control shares” have no voting rights, except to the extent approved by a vote of holders of two-thirds of the common shares entitled to vote on the matter.

These provisions may delay, defer, or prevent a transaction or a change in control that may involve a premium price for holders of our shares or otherwise be in their best interests.

ITEM 1B:UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

ITEM 1B: UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

None.

ITEM 2:PROPERTIES

ITEM 2: PROPERTIES

The schedule on the following pages lists our real estate investment portfolio as of December 31, 2009,2010, which consisted of 9085 properties and land held for development.

As of December 31, 2009,2010, the percent leased is the percentage of net rentable area for which fully executed leases exist and may include signed leases for space not yet occupied by the tenant.

Cost information is included in Schedule III to our financial statements included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Schedule of Properties

 

Properties

  

Location

  Year
Acquired
  Year
Constructed
  Net Rentable
Square Feet
  Percent
Leased
12/31/09
   

Location

  Year
Acquired
   Year
Constructed
      Net Rentable
Square Feet
   Percent
Leased
12/31/10
 

Office Buildings

                      

1901 Pennsylvania Avenue

  Washington, D.C.  1977  1960  97,000  96  Washington, D.C.   1977     1960       97,000     81

51 Monroe Street

  Rockville, MD  1979  1975  210,000  91  Rockville, MD   1979     1975       210,000     88

515 King Street

  Alexandria, VA  1992  1966  76,000  97  Alexandria, VA   1992     1966       76,000     100

The Lexington Building

  Rockville, MD  1993  1970  46,000  55

The Saratoga Building

  Rockville, MD  1993  1977  58,000  72

6110 Executive Boulevard

  Rockville, MD  1995  1971  198,000  93  Rockville, MD   1995     1971       198,000     97

1220 19th Street

  Washington, D.C.  1995  1976  102,000  88  Washington, D.C.   1995     1976       102,000     88

1600 Wilson Boulevard

  Arlington, VA  1997  1973  166,000  100  Arlington, VA   1997     1973       166,000     95

7900 Westpark Drive

  McLean, VA  1997  1972/1986/1999  523,000  96  McLean, VA   1997     1972/1986/1999       523,000     92

600 Jefferson Plaza

  Rockville, MD  1999  1985  112,000  82  Rockville, MD   1999     1985       112,000     91

1700 Research Boulevard

  Rockville, MD  1999  1982  101,000  97  Rockville, MD   1999     1982       101,000     90

Parklawn Plaza

  Rockville, MD  1999  1986  40,000  80

Wayne Plaza

  Silver Spring, MD  2000  1970  91,000  94  Silver Spring, MD   2000     1970       91,000     87

Courthouse Square

  Alexandria, VA  2000  1979  113,000  98  Alexandria, VA   2000     1979       113,000     84

One Central Plaza

  Rockville, MD  2001  1974  267,000  77  Rockville, MD   2001     1974       267,000     92

The Atrium Building

  Rockville, MD  2002  1980  80,000  81  Rockville, MD   2002     1980       80,000     92

1776 G Street

  Washington, D.C.  2003  1979  263,000  100  Washington, D.C.   2003     1979       263,000     100

Albemarle Point

  Chantilly, VA  2005  2001  89,000  82  Chantilly, VA   2005     2001       89,000     80

6565 Arlington Blvd

  Falls Church, VA  2006  1967/1998  140,000  78  Falls Church, VA   2006     1967/1998       140,000     85

West Gude Drive

  Rockville, MD  2006  1984/1986/1988  276,000  93  Rockville, MD   2006     1984/1986/1988       276,000     88

The Ridges

  Gaithersburg, MD  2006  1990  104,000  100

The Crescent

  Gaithersburg, MD  2006  1989  49,000  100  Gaithersburg, MD   2006     1989       49,000     89

Monument II

  Herndon, VA  2007  2000  205,000  97  Herndon, VA   2007     2000       205,000     65

Woodholme Center

  Pikesville, MD  2007  1989  73,000  86  Pikesville, MD   2007     1989       73,000     81

2000 M Street

  Washington, D.C.  2007  1971  227,000  89  Washington, D.C.   2007     1971       227,000     87

Dulles Station

  Herndon, VA  2005  2007  180,000  91  Herndon, VA   2005     2007       180,000     94

2445 M Street

  Washington, D.C.  2008  1986  290,000  100  Washington, D.C.   2008     1986       290,000     100

925 Corporate Drive

  Stafford, VA   2010     2007       135,000     100

1000 Corporate Drive

  Stafford, VA   2010     2009       136,000     100
                             

Subtotal

        4,176,000  91           4,199,000     90
                
             

Medical Office Buildings

                      

Woodburn Medical Park I

  Annandale, VA  1998  1984  71,000  95  Annandale, VA   1998     1984       71,000     95

Woodburn Medical Park II

  Annandale, VA  1998  1988  96,000  100  Annandale, VA   1998     1988       96,000     99

Prosperity Medical Center I

  Merrifield, VA  2003  2000  92,000  100  Merrifield, VA   2003     2000       92,000     96

Prosperity Medical Center II

  Merrifield, VA  2003  2001  88,000  100  Merrifield, VA   2003     2001       88,000     100

Prosperity Medical Center III

  Merrifield, VA  2003  2002  75,000  100  Merrifield, VA   2003     2002       75,000     100

Shady Grove Medical Village II

  Rockville, MD  2004  1999  66,000  100  Rockville, MD   2004     1999       66,000     95

8301 Arlington Boulevard

  Fairfax, VA  2004  1965  49,000  70  Fairfax, VA   2004     1965       49,000     73

Alexandria Professional Center

  Alexandria, VA  2006  1968  113,000  96  Alexandria, VA   2006     1968       113,000     93

9707 Medical Center Drive

  Rockville, MD  2006  1994  38,000  100  Rockville, MD   2006     1994       38,000     96

15001 Shady Grove Road

  Rockville, MD  2006  1999  51,000  96  Rockville, MD   2006     1999       51,000��    100

Plumtree Medical Center

  Bel Air, MD  2006  1991  33,000  100  Bel Air, MD   2006     1991       33,000     95

SCHEDULE OF PROPERTIES (continued)

 

Properties

  

Location

  Year
Acquired
  Year
Constructed
    Net Rentable*
Square Feet
  Percent
Leased
12/31/09
 

15005 Shady Grove Road

  Rockville, MD  2006  2002   52,000  100

2440 M Street

  Washington, D.C.  2007  1986/2006   110,000  97

Woodholme Medical Office Bldg

  Pikesville, MD  2007  1996   125,000  99

Ashburn Farm Office Park

  Ashburn, VA  2007  1998/2000/2002   75,000  86

CentreMed I & II

  Centreville, VA  2007  1998   52,000  100

Sterling Medical Office Building1

  Sterling, VA  2008  1986/2000   36,000  68

Lansdowne Medical Office Building1

  Leesburg, VA  2009  2009   87,000  0
              

Subtotal

         1,309,000  89
              

Retail Centers

           

Takoma Park

  Takoma Park, MD  1963  1962   51,000  100

Westminster

  Westminster, MD  1972  1969   151,000  98

Concord Centre

  Springfield, VA  1973  1960   76,000  92

Wheaton Park

  Wheaton, MD  1977  1967   72,000  96

Bradlee

  Alexandria, VA  1984  1955   168,000  97

Chevy Chase Metro Plaza

  Washington, D.C.  1985  1975   49,000  100

Montgomery Village Center

  Gaithersburg, MD  1992  1969   198,000  94

Shoppes of Foxchase2

  Alexandria, VA  1994  1960/2006   134,000  95

Frederick County Square

  Frederick, MD  1995  1973   227,000  93

800 S. Washington Street

  Alexandria, VA  1998/2003  1955/1959   44,000  96

Centre at Hagerstown

  Hagerstown, MD  2002  2000   332,000  100

Frederick Crossing

  Frederick, MD  2005  1999/2003   295,000  98

Randolph Shopping Center

  Rockville, MD  2006  1972   82,000  98

Montrose Shopping Center

  Rockville, MD  2006  1970   143,000  83
              

Subtotal

         2,022,000  96
              

Multifamily Buildings

       # of units    

3801 Connecticut Avenue

  Washington, D.C.  1963  1951 308  179,000  92

Roosevelt Towers

  Falls Church, VA  1965  1964 191  170,000  95

Country Club Towers

  Arlington, VA  1969  1965 227  163,000  97

Park Adams

  Arlington, VA  1969  1959 200  173,000  98

Munson Hill Towers

  Falls Church, VA  1970  1963 279  259,000  98

The Ashby at McLean

  McLean, VA  1996  1982 256  252,000  98

Walker House Apartments

  Gaithersburg, MD  1996  1971/20033 212  159,000  94

Bethesda Hill Apartments

  Bethesda, MD  1997  1986 195  226,000  96

Bennett Park

  Arlington, VA  2007  2007 224  268,000  98

Clayborne

  Alexandria, VA  2008  2008 74  87,000  95

Kenmore

  Washington, D.C.  2008  1948 374  270,000  94
               

Subtotal

       2,540  2,206,000  96
               

Industrial/Flex Properties

           

Fullerton Business Center

  Springfield, VA  1985  1980   104,000  42

Charleston Business Center

  Rockville, MD  1993  1973   85,000  97

The Alban Business Center

  Springfield, VA  1996  1981/1982   87,000  84

Ammendale Technology Park I

  Beltsville, MD  1997  1985   167,000  79

Ammendale Technology Park II

  Beltsville, MD  1997  1986   107,000  70

Pickett Industrial Park

  Alexandria, VA  1997  1973   246,000  97

Northern Virginia Industrial Park

  Lorton, VA  1998  1968/1991   787,000  82

8900 Telegraph Road

  Lorton, VA  1998  1985   32,000  4

Dulles South IV

  Chantilly, VA  1999  1988   83,000  90

Sully Square

  Chantilly, VA  1999  1986   95,000  74

Properties

  

Location

  Year
Acquired
  Year
Constructed
     Net Rentable*
Square Feet
   Percent
Leased
12/31/10
 
15005 Shady Grove Road  Rockville, MD  2006  2002     52,000     100
2440 M Street  Washington, D.C.  2007  1986/2006     110,000     95
Woodholme Medical Office Bldg  Pikesville, MD  2007  1996     125,000     98
Ashburn Farm Office Park  Ashburn, VA  2007  1998/2000/2002     75,000     90
CentreMed I & II  Centreville, VA  2007  1998     52,000     95
Sterling Medical Office Building  Sterling, VA  2008  1986/2000     36,000     85
Lansdowne Medical Office Building  Leesburg, VA  2009  2009     87,000     20
                  
Subtotal           1,309,000     90
                  
Retail Centers            
Takoma Park  Takoma Park, MD  1963  1962     51,000     100
Westminster  Westminster, MD  1972  1969     151,000     95
Concord Centre  Springfield, VA  1973  1960     76,000     92
Wheaton Park  Wheaton, MD  1977  1967     72,000     85
Bradlee  Alexandria, VA  1984  1955     168,000     99
Chevy Chase Metro Plaza  Washington, D.C.  1985  1975     49,000     100
Montgomery Village Center  Gaithersburg, MD  1992  1969     198,000     82
Shoppes of Foxchase1  Alexandria, VA  1994  1960/2006     134,000     94
Frederick County Square  Frederick, MD  1995  1973     227,000     91
800 S. Washington Street  Alexandria, VA  1998/2003  1955/1959     44,000     96
Centre at Hagerstown  Hagerstown, MD  2002  2000     332,000     96
Frederick Crossing  Frederick, MD  2005  1999/2003     295,000     94
Randolph Shopping Center  Rockville, MD  2006  1972     82,000     95
Montrose Shopping Center  Rockville, MD  2006  1970     143,000     82
Gateway Overlook  Columbia, MD  2010  2007     223,000     90
                  
Subtotal           2,245,000     92
                  
Multifamily Buildings           

# of units

        
3801 Connecticut Avenue  Washington, D.C.  1963  1951  308   179,000     99
Roosevelt Towers  Falls Church, VA  1965  1964  191   170,000     99
Country Club Towers  Arlington, VA  1969  1965  227   163,000     99
Park Adams  Arlington, VA  1969  1959  200   173,000     96
Munson Hill Towers  Falls Church, VA  1970  1963  279   259,000     95
The Ashby at McLean  McLean, VA  1996  1982  256   252,000     97
Walker House Apartments  Gaithersburg, MD  1996  1971/2003  212   159,000     100
Bethesda Hill Apartments  Bethesda, MD  1997  1986  195   226,000     98
Bennett Park  Arlington, VA  2007  2007  224   268,000     92
Clayborne  Alexandria, VA  2008  2008  74   87,000     93
Kenmore  Washington, D.C.  2008  1948  374   270,000     99
                   
Subtotal        2,540   2,206,000     97
                   
Industrial/Flex Properties            
Fullerton Business Center  Springfield, VA  1985  1980     104,000     36
The Alban Business Center  Springfield, VA  1996  1981/1982     87,000     76
Pickett Industrial Park  Alexandria, VA  1997  1973     246,000     100
Northern Virginia Industrial Park  Lorton, VA  1998  1968/1991     787,000     71
8900 Telegraph Road  Lorton, VA  1998  1985     32,000     23
Dulles South IV  Chantilly, VA  1999  1988     83,000     90
Sully Square  Chantilly, VA  1999  1986     95,000     78

SCHEDULE OF PROPERTIES (continued)

 

Properties

  

Location

  Year
Acquired
  Year
Constructed
  Net Rentable
Square Feet
  Percent
Leased
12/31/09
   

Location

  Year
Acquired
   Year
Constructed
      Net Rentable
Square Feet
   Percent
Leased
12/31/10
 

Amvax

  Beltsville, MD  1999  1986  31,000  100

Fullerton Industrial Center

  Springfield, VA  2003  1980  137,000  74  Springfield, VA   2003     1980       137,000     60

8880 Gorman Road

  Laurel, MD  2004  2000  141,000  100  Laurel, MD   2004     2000       141,000     100

Dulles Business Park Portfolio

  Chantilly, VA  2004/2005  1999-2005  324,000  93  Chantilly, VA   2004/2005     1999-2005       324,000     84

Albemarle Point

  Chantilly, VA  2005  2001/2003/2005  207,000  86  Chantilly, VA   2005     2001/2003/2005       207,000     82

Hampton Overlook

  Capital Heights, MD  2006  1989/2005  302,000  92  Capital Heights, MD   2006     1989/2005       302,000     92

9950 Business Parkway

  Lanham, MD  2006  2005  102,000  100  Lanham, MD   2006     2005       102,000     100

270 Technology Park

  Frederick, MD  2007  1986-1987  157,000  73  Frederick, MD   2007     1986-1987       157,000     63

6100 Columbia Park Road

  Landover, MD  2008  1969  150,000  100  Landover, MD   2008     1969       150,000     100
                             

Subtotal

        3,344,000  85           2,954,000     80
                             

TOTAL

        13,057,000             12,913,000    
                         

 

1

The sellers of Sterling Medical Office Building agreed to lease 37% of the building’s space for a period of 12—18 months following the date of sale.

2

Development on approximately 60,000 square feet of the center was completed in December 2006.

3

A 16 unit addition referred to as The Gardens at Walker House was completed in October 2003.

*Multifamily buildings are presented in gross square feet.

ITEM 3:LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

ITEM 3: LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

None.

ITEM 4: (REMOVED AND RESERVED)SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS

No matters were submitted to a vote of security holders during the fourth quarter of 2009.

PART II

ITEM 5:MARKET FOR THE REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES

ITEM 5: MARKET FOR THE REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES

Our shares trade on the New York Stock Exchange. Currently, there are approximately 6,4846,130 shareholders of record.

The high and low sales price for our shares for 20092010 and 2008,2009, by quarter, and the amount of dividends we paid per share are as follows:

 

      Quarterly Share
Price Range

Quarter

  Dividends
Per Share
  High  Low

2009

      

Fourth

  $.4325  $29.00  $25.58

Third

  $.4325  $30.02  $21.17

Second

  $.4325  $23.05  $16.91

First

  $.4325  $27.48  $15.60

2008

      

Fourth

  $.4325  $36.39  $20.33

Third

  $.4325  $37.61  $28.98

Second

  $.4325  $36.07  $30.05

First

  $.4225  $34.38  $26.91
         Quarterly Share Price Range 

Quarter

    Dividends
Per Share
   High   Low 

2010

       
 Fourth  $.43375    $34.05    $29.25  
 Third  $.43250    $32.14    $26.67  
 Second  $.43250    $32.75    $27.32  
 First  $.43250    $30.77    $25.09  

2009

       
 Fourth  $.43250    $29.00    $25.58  
 Third  $.43250    $30.02    $21.17  
 Second  $.43250    $23.05    $16.91  
 First  $.43250    $27.48    $15.60  

We have historically paid dividends on a quarterly basis. Dividends are primarily paid from our cash flow from operating activities.

During the period covered by this report, we did not sell equity securities without registration under the Securities Act.

Neither we nor any affiliated purchaser (as that term is defined in Securities Exchange Act Rule 10b-18(a) (3)) made any repurchases of our shares during the fourth quarter of the fiscal year covered by this report.

ITEM 6:SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

ITEM 6: SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

The following table sets forth our selected financial data on a historical basis, which has been revised for properties disposed of or classified as held for sale (see note 3 to the consolidated financial statements). The following data should be read in conjunction with our financial statements and notes thereto and Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations included elsewhere in this Form 10-K.

 

  2009  2008(1)  2007(1)  2006(1)  2005(1)  2010   2009   2008   2007   2006 
  (in thousands, except per share data)  (in thousands, except per share data) 

Real estate rental revenue

  $306,929  $278,691  $248,899  $202,334  $174,092  $297,977    $298,161    $268,709    $238,854    $195,040  

Income from continuing operations

  $26,021  $7,889  $25,136  $32,477  $35,288  $13,131    $23,823    $4,807    $21,877    $29,749  

Discontinued operations:

                    

Income from operations of properties sold or held for sale

  $1,579  $4,129  $7,510  $5,780  $5,511  $2,829    $3,777    $7,211    $10,769    $8,508  

Gain on sale of real estate

  $13,348  $15,275  $25,022   —    $37,011  $21,599    $13,348    $15,275    $25,022     —    

Net income

  $40,948  $27,293  $57,668  $38,257  $77,810  $37,559    $40,948    $27,293    $57,668    $38,257  

Net income attributable to the controlling interests

  $40,745  $27,082  $57,451  $38,053  $77,638  $37,426    $40,745    $27,082    $57,451    $38,053  

Income from continuing operations attributable to the controlling interests per share – diluted

  $0.45  $0.15  $0.53  $0.73  $0.83  $0.21    $0.41    $0.09    $0.47    $0.67  

Net income attributable to the controlling interests per share – diluted

  $0.71  $0.55  $1.24  $0.87  $1.84  $0.60   ��$0.71    $0.55    $1.24    $0.87  

Total assets

  $2,045,225  $2,109,407  $1,897,018  $1,530,863  $1,139,159  $2,167,881    $2,045,225    $2,109,407    $1,897,018    $1,530,863  

Lines of credit payable

  $128,000  $67,000  $192,500  $61,000  $24,000  $100,000    $128,000    $67,000    $192,500    $61,000  

Mortgage notes payable

  $405,451  $421,286  $252,484  $229,240  $161,631  $380,171    $383,563    $399,009    $229,843    $206,253  

Notes payable

  $688,912  $890,679  $861,819  $719,862  $518,600  $753,587    $688,912    $890,679    $861,819    $719,862  

Shareholders’ equity

  $745,255  $636,630  $502,540  $449,922  $380,305  $857,080    $745,255    $636,630    $502,540    $449,922  

Cash dividends paid

  $100,221  $85,564  $78,050  $72,681  $67,322  $108,949    $100,221    $85,564    $78,050    $72,681  

Cash dividends declared and paid per share

  $1.73  $1.72  $1.68  $1.64  $1.60  $1.73    $1.73    $1.72    $1.68    $1.64  
(1)

As adjusted (see Current Report on Form 8-K filed July 10, 2009 and note 3 to the consolidated financial statements).

ITEM 7:MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

ITEM 7: MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

Our Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Conditions and Results of Operations (“MD&A”) is provided in addition to the accompanying consolidated financial statements and notes to assist readers in understanding our results of operations and financial condition. MD&A is organized as follows:

 

  

Overview. Discussion of our business, operating results, investment activity and cashcapital requirements, and summary of our significant transactions to provide context for the remainder of MD&A.

 

  

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates.Descriptions of accounting policies that reflect significant judgments and estimates used in the preparation of our consolidated financial statements.

 

  

Results of Operations. Discussion of our financial results comparing 2010 to 2009 and comparing 2009 to 2008 and comparing 2008 to 2007.2008.

 

  

Liquidity and Capital Resources. Discussion of our financial condition and analysis of changes in our capital structure and cash flows.

When evaluating our financial condition and operating performance, we focus on the following financial and non-financial indicators:

 

Net operating income (“NOI”), calculated as real estate rental revenue less real estate expenses excluding depreciation and amortization and general and administrative expenses. NOI is a non-GAAP supplemental measure to net income.

 

Funds From Operations (“FFO”), calculated as set forth below under the caption “Funds from Operations.” FFO is a non-GAAP supplemental measure to net income.

 

Economic occupancy (“occupancy”),Occupancy, calculated as actual real estate rental revenue recognized for the period indicatedoccupied square footage as a percentage of gross potential real estate rental revenue fortotal square footage as of the last day of that period. Percentage rents and expense reimbursements are not considered in computing economic occupancy percentages.

 

Leased percentage, calculated as the percentage of available physical net rentable area leased for our commercial segments and percentage of apartments leased for our multifamily segment.

 

Rental rates.

 

Leasing activity, including new leases, renewals and expirations.

Overview

Business

Our revenues are derived primarily from the ownership and operation of income-producing properties in the greater Washington metro region. As of December 31, 2009,2010, we owned a diversified portfolio of 9085 properties, totaling approximately 10.910.7 million square feet of commercial space and 2,540 multifamily units.units, and land held for development. These 9085 properties consisted of 2725 office properties, 2016 industrial/flex properties, 18 medical office properties, 1415 retail centers and 11 multifamily properties and land held for development.properties.

We have a fundamental strategy of regional focus and diversification by property type. In recent years we have sought to pursue a strategy of upgrading our portfolio by selling lower quality properties that do not fit our long-term strategy (generally assets in locations that we want to exit), and acquiring or developing higher quality and better located properties. We will seek to continue to upgrade our portfolio as opportunities arise. However, market conditions limited our acquisition opportunities during 2009arise, funding acquisitions with a combination of cash, equity, debt and may continue to limit our ability to acquire or sell properties at attractive prices in the future.proceeds from property sales.

Operating Results

Real estate rental revenue, NOI, net income attributable to the controlling interests and FFO for 20092010 and 20082009 were as follows (in thousands):

 

  2009  2008  Change  2010   2009   Change 

Real estate rental revenue

  $306,929  $278,691  $28,238  $297,977    $298,161    $(184

NOI (1)

  $202,356  $185,192  $17,164  $199,055    $196,857    $2,198  

Net income attributable to the controlling interests

  $40,745  $27,082  $13,663  $37,426    $40,745    $(3,319

FFO (2)

  $121,771  $98,688  $23,083  $111,566    $121,771    $(10,205

 

(1)

See pages 3132 and 3839 of the MD&A for reconciliations of NOI to net income.

(2)

See page 55 of the MD&A for reconciliations of FFO to net income.

Real estate rental revenues decreased by $0.2 million as lower occupancy in the commercial segments (i.e. office, medical office, retail and industrial) was substantially offset by higher occupancy in the multifamily segment and revenues from our 2010 acquisitions. Lower real estate expenses, primarily utilities and real estate taxes, caused the $2.2 million increase in NOI. Our multifamily segment performed well in 2010, as both occupancy and rental rates increased. However, we experienced a challenging market environment in our commercial segments. While the Washington metro region has emerged from recession, growth remains slow and we continued to have challenges in leasing vacant space, particularly in the office and industrial segments.

While we expect slow but steady improvement in the real estate market conditions in the region during 2011, we anticipate continued challenges in leasing vacant space. We also anticipate several instances where rents on new or renewal leases will be lower than the existing portfolio rents, putting further downward pressure on NOI. Additionally, we were successful in reducing our utilities and real estate taxes during 2010, but do not expect further reductions in 2011. We do plan to actively pursue property acquisitions throughout 2011, which may generate future NOI growth. However, any NOI growth in NOI,2011 from acquisitions would likely be offset by acquisition costs.

The large decreases in net income and FFO during 2009 is due2010 are primarily attributable to acquisitions made during 2008 and the lease-upa net loss on extinguishment of debt of $9.2 million from repurchases of our development properties.5.95% senior notes and 3.875% convertible notes. We currently do not expectincurred $8.9 million of this growth to continue in 2010, asloss during the current market for acquisitions is difficult and our development properties are now stabilized. NOI from our core portfolio, consistingfourth quarter of properties owned for the entirety of 2009 and the same time period in 2008, was $179.6 million for 2009 compared to $181.6 million for 2008, a decrease of 1.1%.

We believe the national economic recession was responsible for the lower NOI from our core portfolio. While the Washington metro region remains one of the best performing real estate markets in the nation according to Delta Associates/Transwestern Commercial Services (“Delta”), it still reflected the impact of the economic recession during 2009, with declining occupancy and rental rates across all commercial segments. The near-term outlook for recovery remains slow, as occupancy and rental rates are currently expected to continue to decline in 2010, according to the Center for Regional Analysis at George Mason University (“CRA”).2010.

The performance of our five operating segments and the market conditions in our region are discussed in greater detail below (industry data is as reported by Delta):

 

The region’s office market remained weakimproved during 2009,2010, with overall vacancy increasingdecreasing to 11.9% from 13.0% from 10.6% in 2008.the prior year. Vacancy in the submarkets was 14.0%13.2% for Northern Virginia, 14.8%14.1% for Suburban Maryland, and 10.5%8.5% in the District of Columbia. Net absorption (defined as the change in occupied, standing inventory from one year to the next) decreasedincreased to 6.4 million square feet from 0.6 million square feet from 3.4 million square feet in 2008, and2009, driven by large federal government leases within the pipelineDistrict of new office properties inColumbia. Despite the regionimproving market conditions, the region’s effective rents decreased by 6.5%. Delta does not expect overall rents to 5.7 million square feet from 15.4 million square feet in the prior year.begin increasing until 2012. Our office segment was 91.5%90.4% leased at year-end 2009,2010, a decrease from 94.0%92.1% leased at year-end 2008.2009. By submarket, our office segment was 93.8%89.0% leased in Northern Virginia, 87.0%89.6% leased in Suburban Maryland, and 95.8%93.9% leased in the District of Columbia at year end 2009.2010.

 

Our medical office segment was 89.4%90.2% leased at year-end 2009, a decrease2010, an increase from 97.0%89.4% at year-end 2008.2009. The decrease is due tosegment’s leased percentage reflects the 2009 acquisition of the vacantnewly-constructed Lansdowne Medical Office Building, duringwhich was 20.0% leased at year-end 2010. Excluding Lansdowne Medical Office Building, the third quarter of 2009.segment was 95.2% leased at year-end 2010.

 

The region’s retail market declined in 2009,2010, with vacancy rates increasing to 5.6% from 3.7%5.3% in 2008.2009. Rental rates at grocery-anchored centers decreased 2.4% in 2010, after a 5.8% decrease in 2009, as compared to a 1.7% increase in 2008.2009. Our retail segment was 96.0%92.2% leased at year-end 2009,2010, down from 97.8%96.0% at year-end 2008.2009.

 

The region’s multifamily market was more resilient than the commercial marketssignificantly improved during 2009.2010. The region’s vacancy rate for investment grade apartments remaineddecreased to 3.4%, down from 4.3% one year ago. During the same at 4.3%period rents increased by 8.2%, though rents did decrease by 2.0%.which is twice the long-term average. Our multifamily segment was 95.8%97.4% leased at year-end 2009,2010, up from 91.1%95.8% at year-end 2008.2009.

The region’s industrial market contractedbegan to recover during 2009. Rents2010. Vacancy decreased to 11.0% from 11.4% one year ago, while rents decreased by 4.3% and vacancy increased to 11.4%, compared to 10.1% one year ago.3.0%. Net absorption was a positive 1.2 million square feet, compared to a negative 2.3 million square feet compared to a positive 4.4 million square feet in 2008.one year ago. Our industrial segment was 84.6%79.7% leased at year-end 2009,2010, a decrease from 91.9%85.3% at year-end 2008.2009. The decrease in occupancy for our industrial properties is driven by evicting non-paying tenants from our buildings, evidenced by a $0.8 million decrease in provisions for bad debt in 2010 as compared to 2009 in our industrial segment.

Investment Activity

We sold four lower-performingeight properties during 2009 in order to improve the quality of our portfolio,2010, while executing only onethree property acquisition. This acquisition/disposition levelacquisitions. According to Delta, investment sales of real estate in the Washington metro region increased in 2010 compared to 2009, and this trend is expected to continue in contrast2011. We are continuing our stated acquisition strategy of focusing on properties inside the Washington metro region’s Beltway, near major transportation nodes and in areas with strong employment drivers and superior growth demographics. We intend to focus our future acquisition activity on the office, medical office, retail and multifamily segments.

We will seek to continue to recycle assets by disposing of properties that do not fit the above acquisition criteria. To that end, we are exploring the sale of all or a portion our industrial/flex segment and potentially using the sale proceeds to further our acquisition strategy. However, we may not receive acceptable offers for these properties. If we did receive an offer we considered acceptable, the completion of a definitive transaction with respect to such offer would still require the successful negotiation of a sale agreement and the approval of WRIT’s Board of Trustees. Lastly, if we identify a potential purchaser of all or a portion of the industrial/flex segment, negotiate an acceptable sale agreement and receive approval from the Board of Trustees to execute any such sale, there could still be conditions to the prior two years,closing of such transaction that may not be achieved, or we or the potential purchaser otherwise may not be successful in completing such transaction. If we do sell all or a portion of the industrial/flex segment during which we acquired or placed into service 15 properties and sold four properties. Our decrease in acquisition activity mirrors the overall market, as property investment transactions were down dramatically during 2009, according to Delta. For 2010, we currently expect a greater level of acquisitions in 2010 than in 2009. However,2011, we do not expect thesethe resulting decrease in 2011’s net income attributable to the controlling interest to be completely offset by income from potential acquisitions to provide any significant improvement to our operating performance in 2010 due to acquisition costs.acquisitions.

CashCapital Requirements

The current economic recession has generally made it challenging to secure debt financing. Over the past year, we have focusedcontinued to focus on strengthening our balance sheet in order to minimize our refinancing risk and prepare for future acquisitions as transaction volume increases. To this end we issued $250.0 million of 4.95% notes due in 2020, using a portion of the proceeds to repurchase $56.1 million of our 5.95% senior notes due in 2011 and $122.8 million of our 3.875% convertible notes which could be put to us at par in 2011. Additionally, we paid off a $23.1 million mortgage note and paid down $28.0 million on our unsecured lines of credit during 2010.

Our total debt maturities in 2010 and 2011 are $104.5unsecured lines of credit currently have $100.0 million outstanding, leaving a remaining borrowing capacity of $237.0 million, and $326.1mature in 2011. We currently expect to extend for one year our $75.0 million respectively.unsecured line of credit and enter into a new unsecured revolving credit facility at an amount at least equal to our $262.0 million unsecured line of credit during 2011.

We have a combined $105.9 million of unsecured and mortgage notes payable that mature in 2011. We currently expect to pay these maturities with some combination of proceeds from new debt, property sales and equity issuances.

Significant Transactions

We summarize below our significant transactions during the two years ended December 31, 2009:2010:

2010

The acquisition of two office buildings in Stafford, Virginia, 925 and 1000 Corporate Drive, for $68.0 million, adding approximately 271,000 square feet.

The acquisition of a retail property in Columbia, Maryland, Gateway Overlook, for $88.4 million, adding approximately 223,000 square feet.

The disposition of the Parklawn Portfolio, consisting of three office properties and one industrial property, for a contract sales price of $23.4 million and a gain on sale of $7.9 million.

The disposition of an office property, the Ridges, for a contract sales price of $27.5 million and a gain on sale of $4.5 million.

The disposition of three industrial properties, Ammendale I & II and Amvax, for a contract sales price of $23.0 million and a gain on sale of $9.2 million.

The issuance of $250.0 million of 4.95% unsecured notes due October 1, 2020, with net proceeds of $245.8 million. The notes bear an effective interest rate of 5.053%.

The repurchases by tender offer of $122.8 million of our 3.875% convertible notes at 102.8 % of par, resulting in a net loss on extinguishment of debt of $6.5 million. Prior to the tender offer, we had executed repurchases of our 3.875% convertible notes totaling $8.8 million at 100.1% of par, resulting in a net loss on extinguishment of debt of $0.3 million.

The repurchases by tender offer of $56.1 million of our 5.95% senior notes at 103.8% of par, resulting in a net loss on extinguishment of debt of $2.4 million.

The issuance of 5.6 million common shares at a weighted average price of $30.34 under our sales agency financing agreement, raising $168.9 million in net proceeds.

The execution of new leases for 1.6 million square feet of commercial space (excluding first generation leases at recently-built properties), with an average rental rate increase of 13.0% over expiring leases.

2009

 

The completion of a public offering of 5.25 million common shares priced at $21.40 per share, raising $107.5 million in net proceeds.

 

The disposition of one multifamily property, Avondale, for a contract sales price of $19.8 million and a gain on sale of $6.7 million.

 

The dispositions of two industrial properties, Tech 100 Industrial Park and Crossroads Distribution Center, for contract sales prices of $10.5 million and $4.4 million, respectively, and gains on sale of $4.1 million and $1.5 million, respectively.

 

The disposition of one office property, Brandywine Center, for a contract sales price of $3.3 million and a gain on sale of $1.0 million.

 

The acquisition of one newly constructed medical office building, Lansdowne Medical Office Building, for $19.9 million, adding approximately 87,40087,000 square feet, which was 0% leased at the end of 2009.

 

The execution of an agreement to modify our $100.0 million unsecured term loan with Wells Fargo Bank, National Association to extend the maturity date from February 19, 2010 to November 1, 2011. This agreement also increased the interest rate on the term loan from LIBOR plus 150 basis points to LIBOR plus 275 basis points. We also entered into a forward interest rate swap on a notional amount of $100.0 million, which had the effect of fixing the interest rate on the loan at 4.85% for the period from February 20, 2010 through the maturity date of November 1, 2011.

 

The prepayment of our $100.0 million unsecured term loan with Wells Fargo Bank, National Association on December 1, 2009 using borrowings from our unsecured lines of credit. The prepayment resulted in a $1.5 million loss on extinguishment of debt.

 

The issuance of 2.0 million common shares at a weighted average price of $27.37 under our sales agency financing agreement, raising $53.8 million in net proceeds.

 

The execution of one mortgage note of approximately $37.5 million at a fixed rate of 5.37%, secured by the Kenmore Apartments.

The prepayment of a $50.0 million mortgage note payable bearing interest at 7.14% per annum, secured by Munson Hill Towers, Country Club Towers, Roosevelt Towers, Park Adams Apartments and the Ashby of McLean, with no prepayment penalties.

 

The repurchases of $109.7 million of our 3.875% convertible notes at prices ranging from 80% to 97.63% of par, resulting in a net gain on extinguishment of debt of $6.8 million.

 

The execution of new leases for 1.4 million square feet of commercial space (excluding first generation leases at recently-built properties), with an average rental rate increase of 10.2% over expiring leases.

2008

The acquisition of one office property, 2445 M Street, for $181.4 million, adding approximately 290,000 square feet.

The acquisition of one 374 unit apartment building, Kenmore Apartments, for $58.3 million, adding approximately 270,000 square feet.

The acquisition of one medical office property, Sterling Medical Office Building, for $6.5 million, adding approximately 36,000 square feet.

The acquisition of one industrial/flex property, 6100 Columbia Park Road, for $11.2 million, adding approximately 150,000 square feet.

The disposition of two industrial/flex properties, Sullyfield Center and the Earhart Building, for a contract sales price of $41.1 million and a gain on sale of $15.3 million.

The agreement to acquire one medical office property, Lansdowne Medical Office Building, for $19.5 million. The purchase occurred during 2009, as noted in the fifth bullet under “2009” above.

The completion of a public offering of 2,600,000 common shares priced at $34.80 per share, raising $86.7 million in net proceeds during the second quarter of 2008.

The completion of a public offering of 1,725,000 common shares priced at $35.00 per share, raising $57.6 million in net proceeds during the fourth quarter of 2008.

The issuance of 1.1 million common shares at a weighted average price of $36.15 under our sales agency financing agreement, raising $40.7 million in net proceeds.

The execution of three mortgage notes totaling approximately $81.0 million at a fixed rate of 5.71%, secured by three multifamily properties.

The repayment of the $60 million outstanding principal balance under our 6.74% 10-year Mandatory Par Put Remarketed Securities (“MOPPRS”) notes. The total aggregate consideration paid to repurchase the notes was $70.8 million, which amount included the $8.7 million remarketing option value paid to the remarketing dealer and accrued interest paid to the holders. The loss on extinguishment of debt was $8.4 million, net of unamortized loan premium costs, upon settlement of these securities. We refinanced the repurchase of these notes, and refinanced a portion of line outstandings, by issuing a $100 million two-year term loan. We also entered into an interest rate swap on a notional amount of $100 million, which had the effect of fixing the interest rate on the term loan at 4.45%.

The repurchase of $16.0 million of our 3.875% convertible notes at a 25% discount to par value, resulting in a gain on extinguishment of debt of $2.9 million.

The increase in the capacity of our unsecured revolving credit facility with a syndicate of banks led by Wells Fargo Bank, National Association from $200 million to $262 million.

The execution of two leases totaling 154,000 square feet at the previously unleased Dulles Station, Phase I office building. In addition to those leases, we executed new leases for 1.5 million square feet of commercial space elsewhere in our portfolio, with an average rental rate increase of 19.4%.

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

TheWe base the discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are based upon our consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. The preparation of these financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses. On an on-going basis, we evaluate these estimates, including those related to estimated useful lives of real estate assets, estimated fair value of acquired leases, cost reimbursement income,

bad debts, contingencies and litigation. We base the estimates on historical experience and on various other assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. There can be no assuranceWe cannot assure you that actual results will not differ from those estimates.

We believe the following accounting estimates are the most critical accounting policies reflectto aid in fully understanding our reported financial results, and they require our most difficult, subjective or complex judgments, resulting from the significant judgments andneed to make estimates used inabout the preparationeffect of our consolidated financial statements. Our significant accounting policiesmatters that are also described in note 2 to the consolidated financial statements in Item 8 of this Form 10-K.inherently uncertain.

Revenue RecognitionAllowance for Doubtful Accounts

We lease multifamily properties under operating leases with terms of generally one year or less. We lease commercial properties (our office, medical office, retail and industrial segments) under operating leases with average terms of three to seven years. We recognize rental income and rental abatements from our multifamily and commercial leases when earned on a straight-line basis over the lease term. Recognition of rental income commences when control of the facility has been given to the tenant. We record a provision for losses on accounts receivable equal to the estimated uncollectible amounts. We base this estimate on our historical experience and a monthly review of the current status of our receivables. We recognize percentage rents, which represent additional rents based on gross tenant sales, when tenants’ sales exceed specified thresholds.

We recognize sales of real estate at closing only when sufficient down payments have been obtained, possession and other attributes of ownership have been transferred toconsider factors such as the buyer and we have no significant continuing involvement.

We recognize cost reimbursement income from pass-through expenses on an accrual basis over the periods in which the expenses were incurred. Pass-through expenses are comprised of real estate taxes, operating expenses and common area maintenance costs which are reimbursed by tenants in accordance with specific allowable costs per tenant lease agreements.

Accounts Receivable and Allowance for Doubtful Accounts

Accounts receivable primarily represents amounts accrued and unpaid from tenants in accordance with the terms of the respective leases, subject to our revenue recognition policy. We review receivables monthly and establish reserves when, in the opinion of management, collectionage of the receivable, is doubtful. We establish reserves for tenants whose rentthe payment history or financial condition casts doubt upon theof our tenants and our assessment of our tenants’ ability to perform under their lease obligations. When we deem the collection of a receivable to be doubtful in the same quarter that we established the receivable, then we recognize the allowance for that receivable as an offset to real estate revenues. When we deem a receivable that was initially established in a prior quarter to be doubtful, then we recognize the allowance as an operating expense.obligations, among other things. In addition to rents due currently, accounts receivable include amounts representing minimalminimum rental income accrued on a straight-line basis to be paid by tenants over the remaining term of their respective leases.

We include notes receivable balances Our estimate of $8.5 millionuncollectible accounts is subject to revision as these factors change and $8.6 million asis sensitive to the impact of December 31, 2009economic and 2008, respectively, in our accounts receivable balances.market conditions on tenants.

Accounting for Real Estate and DepreciationAcquisitions

We depreciate buildings on a straight-line basis over estimated useful lives ranging from 28 to 50 years. We capitalize all capital improvement expenditures associated with replacements, improvements or major repairs to real property that extend its useful life and depreciate them using the straight-line method over their estimated useful lives ranging from 3 to 30 years. We also capitalize costs incurred in connection with our development projects, including capitalizing interest and other internal costs during periods in which qualifying expenditures have been made and activities necessary to get the development projects ready for their intended use are in progress. In addition, we capitalize tenant leasehold improvements when certain criteria are met, including when we supervise construction and will own the improvements. We depreciate all tenant improvements over the shorter of the useful life of the improvements or the term of the related tenant lease. Real estate depreciation expense from continuing operations for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 was $75.8 million, $68.5 million and $55.0 million, respectively. We charge maintenance and repair costs that do not extend an asset’s life to expense as incurred.

We capitalize interest costs incurred on borrowing obligations while qualifying assets are being readied for their intended use. Total interest expense capitalized to real estate assets related to development and major renovation activities was $1.4 million, $2.3 million and $6.7 million for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. We amortize capitalized interest over the useful life of the related underlying assets upon those assets being placed into service.

We recognize impairment losses on long-lived assets used in operations and held for sale, development assets or land held for future development, if indicators of impairment are present and the net undiscounted cash flows estimated to be generated by those assets are less than the assets’ carrying amount and estimated undiscounted cash flows associated with future development expenditures. If such carrying amount is in excess of the estimated cash flows from the operation and disposal of the property, we would recognize an impairment loss equivalent to an amount required to adjust the carrying amount to the estimated fair value. The estimated fair value would be calculated in accordance with current GAAP fair value provisions. There were no property impairments recognized during the year ended December 31, 2007. During 2009 and 2008, we expensed $0.1 million and $0.6 million, respectively, included in general and administrative expenses, related to development projects no longer considered probable.

We record real estate acquisitions as business combinations in accordance with GAAP. We record acquired or assumed assets, including physical assets and in-place leases, and liabilities, based on their fair values. We record goodwill when the purchase price exceeds the fair value of the assets and liabilities acquired. We determine the estimated fair values of the assets and liabilities in accordance with current GAAP fair value provisions. We determine the fair values of acquired buildings on an “as-if-vacant” basis considering a variety of factors, including the physical condition and qualityreplacement cost of the buildings,property, estimated rental and absorption rates, estimated future cash flows and valuation assumptions consistent with current market conditions. We allocatedetermine the “as-if-vacant” fair value toof land building and tenant improvements based on property tax assessments and other relevant information obtained in connection with the acquisition of the property.comparisons to similar properties that have been recently marketed for sale or sold.

The fair value of in-place leases consists of the following components –components: (a) the estimated cost to us to replace the leases, including foregone rents during the period of finding a new tenant and foregone recovery of tenant pass-throughs (referred to as “absorption cost”), (b) the estimated cost of tenant improvements, and other direct costs associated with obtaining a new tenant (referred to as “tenant origination cost”); (c) estimated leasing commissions associated with obtaining a new tenant (referred to as “leasing commissions”); (d) the above/at/below market cash flow of the leases, determined by comparing the projected cash flows of the leases in place to projected cash flows of comparable market-rate leases (referred to as “net lease intangible”); and (e) the value, if any, of customer relationships, determined based on our evaluation of the specific characteristics of each tenant’s lease and our overall relationship with the tenant (referred to as “customer relationship value”). We have attributed no value to customer relationship value as of December 31, 2009 and 2008.

We discount the amounts used to calculate net lease intangibles using an interest rate which reflects the risks associated with the leases acquired. We include tenant origination costs in income producing property on our balance sheet and amortize the tenant origination costs as depreciation expense on a straight-line basis over the useful life of the asset,

which is typically the remaining life of the underlying leases. We classify leasing commissions and absorption costs as other assets and amortize leasing commissions and absorption costs as amortization expense on a straight-line basis over the remaining life of the underlying leases. We classify above market net lease intangible assets as other assets and amortize net lease intangible assets on a straight-line basis as a decrease to real estate rental revenue over the remaining term of the underlying leases. We classify below market net lease intangible liabilities as other liabilities and amortize net lease intangible liabilities on a straight-line basis as an increase to real estate rental revenue over the remaining term of the underlying leases. Should a tenant terminate its lease, we write off the unamortized portion of the tenant origination cost (if it has no future value), leasing commissions, absorption costs and net lease intangible associated with that lease.

Capitalized Interest

We capitalize interest costs incurred on borrowing obligations while qualifying assets are being readied for their intended use. We amortize capitalized interest over the useful life of the related underlying assets upon those assets being placed into service.

Real Estate Impairment

We recognize impairment losses on long-lived assets used in operations and held for sale, development assets or land held for future development, if indicators of impairment are present and the net undiscounted cash flows estimated to be generated by those assets are less than the assets' carrying amount and estimated undiscounted cash flows associated with future development expenditures. If such carrying amount is in excess of the estimated cash flows from the operation and disposal of the property, we would recognize an impairment loss equivalent to an amount required to adjust the carrying amount to the estimated fair value. The estimated fair value would be calculated in accordance with current GAAP fair value provisions.

Stock Based Compensation

We initially measure compensation expense for restricted performance-based share units at fair value at the grant date as payouts are probable, and we re-measure compensation expense at subsequent reporting dates until all of the award’s key terms and conditions are known and a vesting has occurred. The number of restricted performance-based share units that actually vest may differ significantly from our estimates. We amortize such performance-based share units to expense over the performance period.

We measure compensation expense for performance-based share units with market conditions based on the grant date fair value, as determined using a Monte Carlo simulation. We amortize the expense ratably over the requisite service period, regardless of whether the market conditions are achieved and the awards ultimately vest.

We estimate forfeitures for unvested stock based compensation based on historical pre-vesting employee forfeiture patterns. We ultimately adjust our pre-vesting forfeiture assumptions to actual forfeiture rates, so changes in forfeiture assumptions would not affect the total expense ultimately recognized over the vesting period. Estimated forfeitures are reassessed each reporting period based on historical experience and current projections for the future.

Federal Income Taxes

We believe that we qualifyGenerally, and subject to our ongoing qualification as a real estate investment trust (“REIT”) under Sections 856-860 of the Internal Revenue Code and intend to continue to qualify as such. To maintain our status as a REIT, we are required to distribute 90% of our ordinary taxable income to our shareholders. When selling properties, we have the option of (a) reinvesting the sale price of properties sold, allowing for a deferral of income taxes on the sale, (b) paying out capital gains to the shareholders with no tax to WRIT or (c) treating the capital gains as having been distributed to the shareholders, paying the tax on the gain deemed distributed and allocating the tax paid as a credit to the shareholders. In May 2009, we sold a multifamily property, Avondale, for a gain of $6.7 million. In July 2009, we sold an industrial property, Tech 100 Industrial Park, and an office property, Brandywine Center, for gains of $4.1 million and $1.0 million, respectively. In November 2009, we sold an industrial property, Crossroads Distribution Center, for a gain of $1.5 million. In June 2008, we sold two industrial properties, Sullyfield Center and The Earhart Building, for a gain of $15.3 million. The gains from the sales were paid out to the shareholders. Generally, no provisions for income taxes are necessary except for taxes on undistributed REIT taxable income and taxes on the income generated by our taxable REIT subsidiaries (“TRS”). AOur TRS is subject to corporate federal and state income tax on its taxable income at regular statutory rates. Certain of our taxable REIT subsidiaries haveOur TRS has net operating loss carryforwards available of approximately $5.3 million. These carryforwardsthat begin to expire in 2028. We have considered estimated future taxable income and have determined that a full valuation allowance for our net deferred tax assets is appropriate. Therethere were no material income tax provisions or material net deferred income tax items for our TRS for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007.TRS.

Results of Operations

The discussion that follows is based on our consolidated results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 2008 and 2007.2008. The ability to compare one period to another may beis significantly affected by acquisitions completed and dispositions made during those years.

For purposes of evaluating comparative operating performance, we categorize our properties as “core”“same-store”, “non-core”“non-same-store” or discontinued operations. A “core”“same-store” property is one that was owned for the entirety of the periods being evaluated and is included in continuing operations. A “non-core”“non-same-store” property is one that was acquired or

placed into service during either of the periods being evaluated and is included in continuing operations. ResultsWe classify results for properties sold or held for sale during any of the periods evaluated are classified as discontinued operations.

Properties we acquired during the years ending December 31, 2010, 2009 2008 and 20072008 are as follows:

 

Acquisition Date

  

Property

  

Type

  Rentable
Square
Feet
  Contract
Purchase Price
(In thousands)

August 13, 2009

  Lansdowne Medical Office Building  Medical Office  87,000  $19,900
           
    Total 2009  87,000  $19,900
           

February 22, 2008

  6100 Columbia Park Road  Industrial/Flex  150,000  $11,200

May 21, 2008

  Sterling Medical Office Building  Medical Office  36,000   6,500

September 3, 2008

  Kenmore Apartments (374 units)  Multifamily  270,000   58,300

December 2, 2008

  2445 M Street  Office  290,000   181,400
           
    Total 2008  746,000  $257,400
           

February 8, 2007

  270 Technology Park  Industrial/Flex  157,000  $26,500

March 1, 2007

  Monument II  Office  205,000   78,200

March 9, 2007

  2440 M Street  Medical Office  110,000   50,000

June 1, 2007

  Woodholme Medical Office Building  Medical Office  125,000   30,800

June 1, 2007

  Woodholme Center  Office  73,000   18,200

June 1, 2007

  Ashburn Farm Office Park  Medical Office  75,000   23,000

August 16, 2007

  CentreMed I & II  Medical Office  52,000   15,300

August 30, 2007

  4661 Kenmore Avenue  Land for Development  n/a   3,750

December 4, 2007

  2000 M Street  Office  227,000   73,500
           
    Total 2007  1,024,000  $319,250
           

Acquisition Date

  

Property

  

Type

  Rentable
Square
Feet
   Contract
Purchase  Price
(In thousands)
 
June 3, 2010  925 and 1000 Corporate Drive  Office   271,000    $68,000  
December 1, 2010  Gateway Overlook  Retail   223,000     88,400  
              
    Total 2010   494,000    $156,400  
August 13, 2009  Lansdowne Medical Office Building  Medical Office   87,000    $19,900  
              
    Total 2009   87,000    $19,900  
              
February 22, 2008  6100 Columbia Park Road  Industrial/Flex   150,000    $11,200  
May 21, 2008  Sterling Medical Office Building  Medical Office   36,000     6,500  
September 3, 2008  Kenmore Apartments (374 units)  Multifamily   270,000     58,300  
December 2, 2008  2445 M Street  Office   290,000     181,400  
              
    Total 2008   746,000    $257,400  
              

Properties we sold or classified as held for sale during the three years ending December 31, 20092010 are as follows:

 

Disposition Date

  

Property

  

Type

  Rentable
Square
Feet
  Contract
Purchase Price
(In thousands)
  

Property

  

Type

  Rentable
Square
Feet
   Contract
Purchase  Price
(In thousands)
 
June 18, 2010  Parklawn Portfolio(1)  Office/Industrial   229,000    $23,400  
December 21, 2010  The Ridges  Office   104,000     27,500  
December 22, 2010  Ammendale I&II/Amvax  Industrial   305,000     23,000  
            
    

Total 2010

   638,000    $73,900  
            

May 13, 2009

  Avondale  Multifamily  170,000  $19,800  Avondale  Multifamily   170,000    $19,800  

July 23, 2009

  Tech 100 Industrial Park  Industrial  166,000   10,500  Tech 100 Industrial Park  Industrial   166,000     10,500  

July 31, 2009

  Brandywine Center  Office  35,000   3,300  Brandywine Center  Office   35,000     3,300  

November 13, 2009

  Crossroads Distribution Center  Industrial  85,000   4,400  Crossroads Distribution Center  Industrial   85,000     4,400  
  Charleston Business Center  Industrial  85,000   Held for sale            
              

Total 2009

   456,000    $38,000  
    Total 2009  541,000  $38,000            
          

June 6, 2008

  Sullyfield Center/The Earhart Building  Industrial  336,000  $41,100  Sullyfield Center/The Earhart Building  Industrial   336,000    $41,100  
                      
    Total 2008  336,000  $41,100    

Total 2008

   336,000    $41,100  
                      

September 26, 2007

  Maryland Trade Center I & II  Office  342,000  $58,000
          
    Total 2007  342,000  $58,000
          

(1)

The Parklawn Portfolio consists of three office properties (Parklawn Plaza, Lexington Building and Saratoga Building) and one industrial property (Charleston Business Center).

We placed into service two development properties, Clayborne Apartments and Dulles Station, Phase I, in 2008, and one development property, Bennett Park, at2008. These properties were stabilized during the endsecond quarter of 2007.2009.

To provide more insight into our operating results, we divide our discussion into two main sections: (a) the consolidated results of operations section, in which we provide an overview analysis of results on a consolidated basis, and (b) the net operating income (“NOI”) section, in which we provide a detailed analysis of coresame-store versus non-corenon-same-store NOI results by segment. NOI is a non-GAAP measure calculated as real estate rental revenue less real estate expenses excluding depreciation and amortization and general and administrative expenses.

Consolidated Results of Operations

Real Estate Rental Revenue

Real estate rental revenue for properties classified as continuing operations is summarized as follows (all data in thousands except percentage amounts):

 

  2009 2008 2007 2009 vs
2008
 %
Change
 2008 vs
2007
 %
Change
   2010 2009 2008 2010 vs
2009
 %
Change
 2009 vs
2008
 %
Change
 

Minimum base rent

  $265,433   $242,477   $217,730   $22,956   9.5 $24,747   11.4  $260,860   $257,628   $234,288   $3,232    1.3 $23,340    10.0

Recoveries from tenants

   36,555    30,874    24,924    5,681   18.4  5,950   23.9   31,328    35,495    29,599    (4,167  (11.7%)   5,896    19.9

Provisions for doubtful accounts

   (6,232  (4,451  (1,931  (1,781 (40.0%)   (2,520 (130.5%)    (5,465  (6,069  (4,113  604    10.0  (1,956  (47.6%) 

Lease termination fees

   1,471    1,101    505    370   33.6  596   118.0   780    1,471    293    (691  (47.0%)   1,178    402.0

Parking and other tenant charges

   9,702    8,690    7,671    1,012   11.6  1,019   13.3   10,474    9,636    8,642    838    8.7  994    11.5
                                            
  $306,929   $278,691   $248,899   $28,238   10.1 $29,792   12.0  $297,977   $298,161   $268,709   $(184  (0.1%)   29,452    11.0
                                            

Real estate rental revenue is comprised of (a) minimum base rent, which includes rental revenues recognized on a straight-line basis, (b) revenue from the recovery of operating expenses from our tenants, (c) provisions for doubtful accounts, which includesinclude provisions for straight-line receivables, (d) revenue from the collection of lease termination fees and (e) parking and other tenant charges such as percentage rents.

Minimum Base Rent: Minimum base rent increased by $23.0$3.2 million in 2010 as compared to 2009 due to properties acquired or placed into service in 2010 and 2009 ($6.8 million). Minimum base rent from same-store properties decreased by $3.6 million due to lower occupancy ($6.9 million) and higher rent abatements ($0.4 million), partially offset by higher rental rates ($4.3 million).

Minimum base rent increased by $23.3 million in 2009 as compared to 2008 due primarily to properties acquired or placed into service in 2009 and 2008 ($21.0 million), combined with a $2.0$2.3 million increase in minimum base rent from coresame-store properties due to higher rental rates partially offset by higher vacancy.

Minimum base rent increased by $24.7 million in 2008 as compared to 2007 due primarily to properties acquired or placed into service in 2008($4.9 million) and 2007lower amortization of intangible lease assets ($22.50.8 million), combined with a $2.2 million increase in minimum base rent from core properties due to higher rental rates in all segments, partially offset by higher vacancy in the commercial segments.($3.4 million).

Recoveries from Tenants:Recoveries from tenants decreased by $4.2 million in 2010 as compared to 2009 due primarily to lower real estate tax recoveries ($2.8 million) caused by lower property tax assessments across the portfolio, as well as lower operating expense and electricity reimbursements ($1.4 million) driven by lower electricity rates and lower occupancy.

Recoveries from tenants increased by $5.7$5.9 million in 2009 as compared to 2008 due primarily to properties acquired or placed into service in 2009 and 2008 ($5.5 million), combined with a $0.2$0.4 million increase in recoveries from tenants from coresame-store properties primarily due to higher utilities reimbursements ($0.7 million) and real estate tax reimbursements ($0.30.4 million), offset by lower common area maintenance reimbursements ($0.90.7 million) due to lower occupancy in the retail and industrial segments.

Recoveries from tenants increased by $6.0 million in 2008 as compared to 2007 due primarily to properties acquired or placed into service in 2008 and 2007 ($4.0 million), combined with a $2.0 million increase in recoveries from tenants from core properties primarily due to higher real estate tax reimbursements ($1.6 million) and common area maintenance reimbursements ($0.3 million).occupancy.

Provisions for Doubtful Accounts:Provisions for doubtful accounts decreased by $0.6 million in 2010 as compared to 2009 due to lower provisions in the industrial segment ($0.7 million). This decrease in the industrial segment was due to evicting non-paying tenants from our buildings.

Provisions for doubtful accounts increased by $1.8$2.0 million in 2009 as compared to 2008 due to higher provisions in the office ($1.31.5 million) and retail ($0.7 million) segments, offset by lower provisions in the medical office segment ($0.3 million). The higher overall provision is reflective of the economic recession that began in 2008.

Provisions for doubtful accounts increased by $2.5 million in 2008 as compared to 2007 due to higher provisions in the retail ($1.0 million), industrial ($0.9 million) and office ($0.5 million) segments. Provisions for bad debt in the multifamily and medical office segments did not materially change. The higher overall provision is reflective of the economic recession that began in 2008.

Lease Termination Fees: Lease termination fees decreased by $0.7 million in 2010 as compared to 2009 due primarily to lower fees in the office ($0.3 million), retail ($0.3 million) and medical office ($0.1 million) segments.

Lease termination fees increased by $0.4$1.2 million in 2009 as compared to 2008 due primarily to higher fees in the office ($0.4 million), retail ($0.3 million) and industrial ($0.4 million) segments, partially offset by lower fees in the office segment ($0.4 million).segments.

Lease termination fees increased by $0.6 million in 2008 as compared to 2007 due primarily to higher fees in the office segment ($0.8 million), partially offset by lower fees in the retail segment ($0.2 million).

Parking and Other Tenant Charges: Parking and other tenant charges increased by $0.8 million in 2010 as compared to 2009 due primarily to an increase in antenna rent ($0.5 million) in the office and multifamily segments due to new antenna leases, as well as an increase in parking income ($0.4 million).

Parking and other tenant charges increased by $1.0 million in 2009 as compared to 2008 due primarily to properties acquired or placed into service in 2009 and 2008 ($0.8 million), combined with a $0.2 million increase in parking and other tenant charges from coresame-store properties primarily due to higher parking fees ($0.1 million) in the office segment.

Parking and other tenant charges increased by $1.0 million in 2008 as compared to 2007 due primarily to higher parking revenue and miscellaneous fees in the multifamily ($0.3 million), office ($0.4 million) and medical office ($0.2 million) segments.

A summary of economic occupancy for properties classified as continuing operations by segment follows:

Consolidated Economic

Consolidated Occupancy

  

Segment  2010  2009  2008  2010 vs
2009
  2009 vs
2008
 

Office

   89.4  91.4  91.8  (2.0%)   (0.4%) 

Medical Office

   88.5  87.9  94.0  0.6  (6.1%) 

Retail

   92.1  93.6  95.2  (1.5%)   (1.6%) 

Multifamily

   95.7  94.4  89.5  1.3  4.9

Industrial

   78.6  84.8  91.4  (6.2%)   (6.6%) 
                     

Total

   88.3  90.3  92.1  (2.0%)   (1.8%) 
                     

Occupancy

Segment

  2009  2008  2007  2009 vs
2008
  2008 vs
2007
 

Office

  92.6 93.2 94.6 (0.6%)  (1.4%) 

Medical Office

  95.2 96.5 98.3 (1.3%)  (1.8%) 

Retail

  94.6 94.9 95.2 (0.3%)  (0.3%) 

Multifamily

  91.5 83.0 89.2 8.5 (6.2%) 

Industrial

  89.6 93.8 95.2 (4.2%)  (1.4%) 
                

Total

  92.7 92.3 94.5 0.4 (2.2%) 
                

Economic occupancy represents actual real estate rental revenue recognized for the periodoccupied square footage indicated as a percentage of gross potential real estate rental revenue fortotal square footage as of the last day of that period. Percentage rents and expense reimbursements are not considered in computing economic occupancy percentages.

Our overall economic occupancy increaseddecreased to 92.7%88.3% in 2010 from 90.3% in 2009, as our portfolio experienced occupancy declines in the office, retail and industrial segments.

Our overall occupancy decreased to 90.3% in 2009 from 92.3%92.1% in 2008, primarily due to lower occupancy in the industrial and medical office segments. The lower industrial occupancy reflects weakness in that market segment, while the medical office decrease is due to the 2009 acquisition of the newly-built and vacant Lansdowne Medical Office Building. These were partially offset by the lease-up of our development properties in the office and multifamily segments. Our development propertiesduring 2009. Bennett Park, Clayborne Apartments and Dulles Station, Phase I were placed into service at the end of 2007 and during 2008, and were 98%, 95% and 91% leased at the end of 2009, respectively. The gains at these development properties were offset by lower occupancy across the rest of the portfolio, particularly in the industrial segment.

Our overall economic occupancy decreased to 92.3% in 2008 from 94.5% in 2007, driven primarily by the lease-up during 2008 of our development properties in the office and multifamily segments. Our development properties Bennett Park, Clayborne Apartments and Dulles Station, Phase I were placed into service at the end of 2007 and during 2008, and were 78%, 64% and 86% leased at the end of 2008, respectively.

A detailed discussion of occupancy by sector can be found in the Net Operating Income section.

Real Estate Expenses

Real estate expenses are summarized as follows (all data in thousands except percentage amounts):

 

  2009  2008  2007  2009 vs
2008
  %
Change
 2008 vs
2007
  %
Change
   2010   2009   2008   2010 vs
2009
 %
Change
 2009 vs
2008
   %
Change
 

Property operating expenses

  $71,839  $65,549  $55,668  $6,290  9.6 $9,881  17.7  $69,713    $69,404    $63,058    $309    0.4 $6,346     10.1

Real estate taxes

   32,734   27,950   21,691   4,784  17.1  6,259  28.9   29,209     31,900     27,164     (2,691  (8.4%)   4,736     17.4
                                                
  $104,573  $93,499  $77,359  $11,074  11.8 $16,140  20.9  $98,922    $101,304    $90,222    $(2,382  (2.4%)  $11,082     12.3
                                                

Real estate expenses as a percentage of revenue were 34.1%33.2% for 2010, 34.0% for 2009 33.5%and 33.6% for 2008 and 31.1% for 2007.2008.

Property Operating Expenses: Property operating expenses include utilities, repairs and maintenance, property administration and management, operating services, common area maintenance, property insurance, bad debt and other operating expenses.

Property operating expenses increased $0.3 million in 2010 as compared to 2009 due primarily to properties acquired and placed into service in 2010 and 2009, which contributed to a $1.6 million increase in expenses. Property operating expenses from same-store properties decreased by $1.3 million, caused by lower electricity costs ($1.2 million) due to decreased rates and lower occupancy.

Property operating expenses increased $6.3 million in 2009 as compared to 2008 due primarily to properties acquired and placed into service in 2009 and 2008, which accounted for $4.8 million of the increase. Property operating expenses from coresame-store properties increased by $1.5 million, drivencaused by higher electricityutilities costs ($0.6 million) due to increased

electricity rates and higher snow removal costs ($1.3 million, not including any tenant reimbursements) due to a severe snow storm in December 2009.

Property operating expenses increased $9.9 million in 2008 as compared to 2007 due primarily to properties acquired and placed into service in 2008 and 2007, which accounted for $9.0 million of the increase. Property operating expenses from core properties increased by $0.9 million, driven by higher repairs and maintenance costs ($0.5 million) and administrative costs ($0.5 million).

Real Estate Taxes: Real estate taxes decreased $2.7 million in 2010 as compared to 2009 due primarily to lower assessments across the portfolio.

Real estate taxes increased $4.8$4.7 million in 2009 as compared to 2008 due primarily to the properties acquired or placed into service in 2009 and 2008, which accounted for $3.4 million of the increase. Real estate taxes on coresame-store properties increased by $1.4 million due primarily to higher rates and assessments across the portfolio.

Real estate taxes increased $6.3 million in 2008 as compared to 2007 due primarily to the properties acquired or placed into service in 2008 and 2007, which accounted for $4.1 million of the increase. Real estate taxes on core properties increased by $2.2$1.3 million due primarily to higher rates and assessments across the portfolio.

Other Operating Expenses

Other operating expenses are summarized as follows (all data in thousands except percentage amounts):

 

  2009  2008  2007  2009 vs
2008
 %
Change
 2008 vs
2007
 %
Change
   2010   2009   2008   2010 vs
2009
 %
Change
 2009 vs
2008
 %
Change
 

Depreciation and amortization

  $94,042  $85,659  $68,364  $8,383   9.8 $17,295   25.3  $93,992    $91,668    $82,982    $2,324    2.5 $8,686    10.5

Interest expense

   75,001   75,041   66,336   (40 (0.1%)   8,705   13.1   68,389     74,074     74,095     (5,685  (7.7%)   (21  0.0

General and administrative

   13,906   12,110   14,882   1,796   14.8  (2,772 (18.6%)    14,406     13,118     12,110     1,288    9.8  1,008    8.3
                                               
  $182,949  $172,810  $149,582  $10,139   5.9 $23,228   15.5  $176,787    $178,860    $169,187    $(2,073  (1.2%)  $9,673    5.7
                                               

Depreciation and Amortization: Depreciation and amortization expense increased by $8.4$2.3 million in 2010 as compared to 2009 due primarily to properties acquired and placed into service of $156.4 million and $19.9 million in 2010 and 2009, respectively.

Depreciation and amortization expense increased by $8.7 million in 2009 as compared to 2008 due primarily to properties acquired and placed into service of $19.9 million and $340.3$257.4 million in 2009 and 2008, respectively.

Depreciation and amortization expense increased by $17.3 million in 2008 as compared to 2007 due primarily to properties acquired and placed into service of $340.3 million and $411.4 million in 2008 and 2007, respectively.

Interest Expense: A summary of interest expense for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 2008 and 20072008 appears below (in millions, except percentage amounts):

 

Debt Type

  2009 2008 2007 2009 vs.
2008
 %
Change
 2008 vs.
2007
 %
Change
   2010 2009 2008 2010 vs.
2009
 %
Change
 2009 vs.
2008
 %
Change
 

Notes payable

  $48.2   $53.2   $52.2   $(5.0 (9.4%)  $1.0   1.9  $41.7   $48.2   $53.2   $(6.5  (13.5%)  $(5.0  (9.4%) 

Mortgages

   26.7    18.4    14.5    8.3   45.1  3.9   26.9   23.7    25.8    17.5    (2.1  (8.1%)   8.3    47.4

Lines of credit/short-term note payable

   1.5    5.7    6.3    (4.2 (73.7%)   (0.6 (9.5%)    3.8    1.5    5.7    2.3    153.3  (4.2  (73.7%) 

Capitalized interest

   (1.4  (2.3  (6.7  0.9   39.1  4.4   65.7   (0.8  (1.4  (2.3  0.6    (42.9%)   0.9    (39.1%) 
                                            

Total

  $75.0   $75.0   $66.3   $—     —   $8.7   13.1  $68.4   $74.1   $74.1   $(5.7  (7.7%)  $—      —  
                                            

Interest expense decreased by $5.7 million in 2010 compared to 2009. We paid off a $100.0 million term loan in December 2009 using one of our lines of credit, resulting in a net interest expense decrease of $2.9 million during 2010. Additionally, we used the proceeds from the issuance of 4.95% senior notes to pay down significant portions of our 3.875% convertible notes and our 5.95% senior notes, resulting in a net interest expense decrease of $1.4 million. Mortgage interest expense decreased by $2.1 million due to the payoff of a $50.0 million mortgage note in July 2009. These were partially offset by a $0.6 million decrease in capitalized interest.

Interest expense was flatthe same in 2009 compared to 2008. An $8.3 million increase in mortgage interest due to entering into three new mortgage notes during the second quarter of 2008 and assuming the 2445 M Street mortgage in the fourth quarter of 2008 was offset by lower notes payable interest due to early paydowns of notes. Also, interest on our unsecured lines of credit decreased by $4.2 million due to lower balances outstanding and lower interest rates. The proceeds of the 2008 mortgage notes were used to pay down our unsecured lines of credit.

Interest expense increased $8.7 million in 2008 compared to 2007, reflecting a $4.4 million decrease in capitalized interest due to placing development projects into service at the end of 2007 and during 2008. Also, mortgage interest increased by $3.9 million due to entering into three new mortgage notes during the second quarter of 2008, as well as assuming a mortgage as part of the 2445 M Street acquisition in the fourth quarter of 2008. The proceeds of the new mortgage notes were used to pay down our unsecured lines of credit.

General and Administrative Expense: General and administrative expense increased by $1.8$1.3 million in 2010 as compared to 2009 due primarily to higher incentive compensation expense and the reorganization of the leasing department.

General and administrative expense increased by $1.0 million in 2009 as compared to 2008 due primarily to higher incentive compensation expense ($2.1 million) and the expensing of pre-acquisition costs ($0.8 million) related to the purchase of Lansdowne Medical Office Building in 2009. Pre-acquisition costs were capitalized prior to the January 1, 2009 adoption of current GAAP provisions regarding business combinations (see note 2 to the consolidated financial statements). These were, partially offset by an increase in the cash surrender value of officer life insurance policies ($0.6 million).

General and administrative expense decreased by $2.8 million in 2008 as compared to 2007 due primarily to lower incentive compensation expense ($3.1 million). This was partially offset by a decrease in the cash surrender value of officer life insurance policies ($0.3 million).

Discontinued Operations

We dispose of assets (sometimes using tax-deferred exchanges) that no longer meet our long-term strategy or return objectives and where market conditions for sale are favorable. The proceeds from the sales may be reinvested into other properties, used to fund development operations or to support other corporate needs, or distributed to our shareholders.

We sold fourthe following properties in 2009. We sold Avondale, a multifamily property, on May 13, 2009 for a contract sales price of $19.8 million that resulted in a gain on sale of $6.7 million. We sold Tech 100 Industrial Park, an industrial property, on July 23, 2009 for a contract sales price of $10.5 million that resulted in a gain on sale of $4.1 million. We sold Brandywine Center, an office property, on Julyduring the three years ended December 31, 2009 for a contract sales price of $3.3 million that resulted in a gain on sale of $1.0 million. We sold Crossroads Distribution Center, an industrial property, on November 13, 2009 for a contract sales price of $4.4 million that resulted in a gain on sale of $1.5 million.2010:

Charleston Business Center, an industrial property, met the criteria necessary for classification as held for sale as of March 31, 2009. Senior management has committed to, and actively embarked upon, a plan to sell this asset and the sale is expected to be completed within one year under terms usual and customary for such sales, with no indications that the plan will be significantly altered or abandoned. Depreciation on this property has been discontinued as of the date it was classified as held for sale, but operating revenues and expenses continue to be recognized until the date of sale. Under GAAP, revenues and expenses of properties that are classified as held for sale are treated as discontinued operations for all periods presented in the consolidated statements of income.

Disposition Date

  

Property

  

Type

  Rentable
Square Feet
(unaudited)
   Contract
Sales Price

(in thousands)
   Gain on Sale
(in thousands)
 

June 18, 2010

  Parklawn Portfolio(1)  Office/Industrial   229,000    $23,400    $7,900  

December 21, 2010

  The Ridges  Office   104,000     27,500     4,500  

December 22, 2010

  Ammendale I&II/ Amvax  Industrial   305,000     23,000     9,200  
                   
    

Total 2010

   638,000    $73,900    $21,600  
                   

May 13, 2009

  Avondale  Multifamily   170,000    $19,800    $6,700  

July 23, 2009

  Tech 100 Industrial Park  Industrial   166,000     10,500     4,100  

July 31, 2009

  Brandywine Center  Office   35,000     3,300     1,000  

November 13, 2009

  Crossroads Distribution Center  Industrial   85,000     4,400     1,500  
                   
    

Total 2009

   456,000    $38,000    $13,300  
                   

June 6, 2008

  Sullyfield Center/The Earhart Building  Industrial   336,000    $41,100    $15,300  
                   
    

Total 2008

   336,000    $41,100    $15,300  
                   

We sold Sullyfield Center and The Earhart Building, two industrial properties, on June 6, 2008 for a contract sales price of $41.1 million that resulted in a gain on sale of $15.3 million.

We sold Maryland Trade Centers I and II, two office properties, on September 26, 2007 for a contract sales price of $58.0 million that resulted in gain on sale of $25.0 million. We used $15.3 million of the proceeds from the sale to fund the purchase of CentreMed I & II on August 16, 2007 in a reverse tax free property exchange. We escrowed $40.1 million of the proceeds from the sale in a tax free property exchange account, and subsequently used these proceeds to fund a portion of the purchase price of 2000 M Street on December 4, 2007.
(1)

The Parklawn Portfolio consists of three office properties (Parklawn Plaza, Lexington Building and Saratoga Building) and one industrial property (Charleston Business Center).

Operating results of the properties classified as discontinued operations are summarized as follows (in thousands, except for percentages):

 

  2009 2008 2007 2009 vs.
2008
 %
Change
 2008 vs.
2007
 %
Change
   2010 2009 2008 2010 vs.
2009
 %
Change
 2009 vs.
2008
 %
Change
 

Revenues

  $3,346   $8,496   $16,111   $(5,150 (60.6%)  $(7,615 (47.3%)   $8,159   $12,114   $18,478   $(3,955  (32.6%)  $(6,364  (34.4%) 

Property expenses

   (1,362  (3,128  (5,948  1,766   56.5  2,820   47.4   (2,987  (4,631  (6,405  1,644    35.5  1,774    27.7

Depreciation and amortization

   (405  (1,239  (2,653  834   67.3  1,414   53.3   (1,754  (2,779  (3,916  1,025    36.9  1,137    29.0

Interest expense

   (589  (927  (946  338    36.5  19    2.0
                                            

Total

  $1,579   $4,129   $7,510   $(2,550 (61.8%)  $(3,381 (45.0%)   $2,829   $3,777   $7,211   $(948  (25.1%)  $(3,434  (47.6%) 
                            ��                

Income from operations of properties sold or held for sale decreased to $1.6by $0.9 million in 2010 compared to 2009 from $4.1 million in 2008 due to the sales of Sullyfield Centerthe Parklawn Portfolio, the Ridges, Ammendale I and The Earhart BuildingII and Amvax in 2010.

Income from operations of properties sold or held for sale decreased by $3.4 million in 2009 compared to 2008 anddue to the sales of Avondale, Tech 100 Industrial Park, Brandywine Center and Crossroads Distribution Center in 2009.

Income from operations of properties sold or held for sale decreased to $4.1 million in 2008 from $7.5 million in 2007 due to the sale of Maryland Trade Center I & II in 2007 and the sales of Sullyfield Center and The Earhart Building in 2008.

Net Operating Income

NOI is the primary performance measure we use to assess the results of our operations at the property level. We believe that NOI is useful as a performance measure because, when compared across periods, NOI reflects the impact on operations of trends in occupancy rates, rental rates and operating costs on an unleveraged basis, providing perspective not immediately apparent from net income. NOI excludes certain components from net income in order to provide results more closely related to a property’s results of operations. For example, interest expense is not necessarily linked to the operating performance of a real estate asset. In addition, depreciation and amortization, because of historical cost accounting and useful life estimates, may distort operating performance at the property level. As a result of the foregoing, we provide NOI as a supplement to net income calculated in accordance with GAAP. NOI does not represent net income calculated in accordance with GAAP. As such, it should not be considered an alternative to net income as an indication of our operating performance. NOI is calculated as real estate rental revenue less real estate expenses

excluding depreciation and amortization and general and administrative expenses. A reconciliation of NOI to net income follows.

2010 Compared to 2009

The following tables of selected operating data provide the basis for our discussion of NOI in 2010 compared to 2009. All amounts are in thousands except percentage amounts.

   Years Ended December 31, 
   2010  2009  $ Change  % Change 

Real Estate Rental Revenue

     

Same-store

  $279,865   $287,252   $(7,387  (2.6%) 

Non-same-store(1)

   18,112    10,909    7,203    66.0
                 

Total real estate rental revenue

  $297,977   $298,161   $(184  (0.1%) 

Real Estate Expenses

     

Same-store

  $91,649   $95,999   $(4,350  (4.5%) 

Non-same-store(1)

   7,273    5,305    1,968    37.1
                 

Total real estate expenses

  $98,922   $101,304   $(2,382  (2.4%) 

NOI

     

Same-store

  $188,216   $191,253   $(3,037  (1.6%) 

Non-same-store(1)

   10,839    5,604    5,235    93.4
                 

Total NOI

  $199,055   $196,857   $2,198    1.1
                 

Reconciliation to Net Income

     

NOI

  $199,055   $196,857    

Other income (expense)

   32    417    

Income from non-disposal activities

   7    73    

Interest expense

   (68,389  (74,074  

Depreciation and amortization

   (93,992  (91,668  

General and administrative expenses

   (14,406  (13,118  

Gain (loss) on extinguishment of debt

   (9,176  5,336    

Discontinued operations(2)

   2,829    3,777    

Gain on sale of real estate

   21,599    13,348    
           

Net income

   37,559    40,948    

Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests

   (133  (203  
           

Net income attributable to the controlling interests

  $37,426   $40,745    
           

Occupancy

  2010  2009 

Same-store

   88.4  90.9

Non-same-store(1)

   87.0  77.0
         

Total

   88.3  90.3
         

(1)

Non-same-store properties include:

Multifamily development properties – Clayborne Apartments and Bennett Park

Office development property – Dulles Station, Phase I

2010 Office acquisitions – 925 and 1000 Corporate Drive

2010 Retail acquisition – Gateway Overlook

2009 Medical Office acquisition – Lansdowne Medical Office Building

(2)

Discontinued operations include gain on disposals and income from operations for:

2010 dispositions –Parklawn Plaza, Lexington Building, Saratoga Building, Charleston Business Center, the Ridges, Ammendale I&II and Amvax
2009 dispositions –Avondale, Tech 100 Industrial Park, Brandywine Center and Crossroads Distribution Center

Real estate rental revenue decreased by $0.2 million in 2010 as compared to 2009 as lower real estate revenue from same-store properties was offset by acquisition and development properties. Real estate rental revenue from same-store properties decreased by $7.4 million due to lower occupancy ($6.9 million) and lower recoveries from tenants ($4.7 million), partially offset by higher rental rates ($4.3 million).

Real estate expenses decreased by $2.4 million in 2010 as compared to 2009 due primarily to lower real estate taxes ($3.0 million) and lower electricity expense ($1.2 million) in the same-store portfolio, partially offset by a $2.0 million increase in real estate expenses attributable to acquisition and development properties.

Same-store occupancy decreased to 88.4% in 2010 from 90.9% in 2009, with the most severe decreases in the industrial and office segments. Non-same-store occupancy increased to 87.0% in 2010 from 77.0% in 2009, driven by the acquisitions in 2010 of Quantico Corporate Center (925 and 1000 Corporate Drive) and Gateway Overlook, which were 100.0% and 88.2% occupied, respectively, at the end of 2010. During 2010, 59.0% of the commercial square footage expiring was renewed as compared to 68.2% in 2009, excluding properties sold or classified as held for sale. During 2010, 1.6 million commercial square feet were leased at an average rental rate of $23.09 per square foot, an increase of 13.0%, with average tenant improvements and leasing costs of $17.45 per square foot. These leasing statistics exclude first generation leases at development properties.

An analysis of NOI by segment follows.

Office Segment:

   Years Ended December 31, 
   2010   2009   $ Change  % Change 

Real Estate Rental Revenue

       

Same-store

  $121,783    $126,725    $(4,942  (3.9%) 

Non-same-store(1)

   9,374     3,946     5,428    137.6
                   

Total real estate rental revenue

  $131,157    $130,671    $486    0.4

Real Estate Expenses

       

Same-store

  $42,062    $44,997    $(2,935  (6.5%) 

Non-same-store(1)

   3,258     1,531     1,727    112.8
                   

Total real estate expenses

  $45,320    $46,528    $(1,208  (2.6%) 

NOI

       

Same-store

  $79,721    $81,728    $(2,007  (2.5%) 

Non-same-store(1)

   6,116     2,415     3,701    153.3
                   

Total NOI

  $85,837    $84,143    $1,694    2.0
                   

Occupancy

  2010  2009 

Same-store

   88.4  91.5

Non-same-store(1)

   97.5  89.4
         

Total

   89.4  91.4
         

(1)

Non-same-store properties include:

Development property – Dulles Station, Phase I

Acquisitions – 925 and 1000 Corporate Drive

Real estate rental revenue in the office segment increased by $0.5 million in 2010 as compared to 2009 due to acquisition and development properties, which contributed all of the increase. Real estate rental revenue from same-store properties decreased by $4.9 million primarily due to lower same-store occupancy ($3.8 million), lower recoveries from tenants ($2.8 million) and higher rent abatements ($0.5 million), partially offset by higher rental rates ($2.0 million) and antenna rent ($0.3 million).

Real estate expenses in the office segment decreased by $1.2 million in 2010 as compared to 2009 due primarily to lower real estate taxes ($1.5 million) caused by lower property assessments, recoveries of bad debt ($1.0 million) and lower utilities expense ($0.7 million) in the same-store portfolio. These were offset by higher real estate expenses attributable to acquisition ($1.3 million) and development ($0.4 million) properties.

Same-store occupancy decreased to 88.4% in 2010 from 91.5% in 2009, primarily caused by higher vacancy at Monument II due to the non-renewal of a major tenant. Non-same-store occupancy increased to 97.5% from 89.4%, reflecting the acquisition of the fully-leased 925 and 1000 Corporate Drive. During 2010, 48.9% of the square footage that expired was renewed compared to 61.9% in 2009, excluding properties sold or classified as held for sale. During 2010, we executed new leases for 577,000 square feet of office space at an average rental rate of $30.72 per square foot, an increase of 9.2%, with average tenant improvements and leasing costs of $33.60 per square foot. These leasing statistics exclude first generation leases at the development property, Dulles Station, Phase I.

Medical Office Segment:

   Years Ended December 31, 
   2010  2009  $ Change  % Change 

Real Estate Rental Revenue

     

Same-store

  $44,949   $44,911   $38    0.1

Non-same-store(1)

   79    —      79    —    
                 

Total real estate rental revenue

  $45,028   $44,911   $117    0.3

Real Estate Expenses

     

Same-store

  $14,205   $15,051   $(846  (5.6%) 

Non-same-store(1)

   510    167    343    205.4
                 

Total real estate expenses

  $14,715   $15,218   $(503  (3.3%) 

NOI

     

Same-store

  $30,744   $29,860   $884    3.0

Non-same-store(1)

   (431  (167  (264  (158.1%) 
                 

Total NOI

  $30,313   $29,693   $620    2.1
                 

Occupancy

  2010  2009 

Same-store

   93.8  94.2

Non-same-store(1)

   14.7  0.0
         

Total

   88.5  87.9
         

(1)

Non-same-store properties include:

2009 acquisition – Lansdowne Medical Office Building

Real estate rental revenue in the medical office segment increased by $0.1 million in 2010 as compared to 2009 due primarily to the acquisition of Lansdowne Medical Office Building. Real estate rental revenue from same-store properties slightly increased as higher rental rates ($1.3 million) were offset by higher vacancy ($0.4 million), lower tenant reimbursements for real estate taxes ($0.7 million) and higher bad debt ($0.1 million).

Real estate expenses in the medical office segment decreased by $0.5 million in 2010 as compared to 2009 due primarily to lower real estate taxes ($0.6 million) and lower utilities expense ($0.3 million) in the same-store portfolio. These were partially offset by higher real estate expenses ($0.3 million) from the acquisition property.

Same-store occupancy decreased to 93.8% in 2010 from 94.2% in 2009 due to small decreases in occupancy at several properties. Non-same-store occupancy increased to 14.7% from 0.0%, reflecting the limited progress made in the lease-up of Lansdowne Medical Office Building, which was vacant when acquired during the third quarter of 2009. This building was 20.0% leased as of the end of 2010. During 2010, 78.9% of the square footage that expired was renewed compared to 64.4% in 2009. During 2010, we executed new leases for 193,600 square feet of medical office space at an average rental rate of $37.78, an increase of 19.2%, with average tenant improvements and leasing costs of $25.30 per square foot. These leasing statistics exclude first generation leases at Lansdowne Medical Office Building, which was newly-constructed and vacant when acquired.

Retail Segment:

   Years Ended December 31, 
   2010   2009   $ Change  % Change 

Real Estate Rental Revenue

       

Same-store

  $40,376    $41,821    $(1,445  (3.5%) 

Non-same-store(1)

   627     —       627    —    
                   

Total real estate rental revenue

  $41,003    $41,821    $(818  (2.0%) 

Real Estate Expenses

       

Same-store

  $10,180    $10,680    $(500  (4.7%) 

Non-same-store(1)

   130     —       130    —    
                   

Total real estate expenses

  $10,310    $10,680    $(370  (3.5%) 

NOI

       

Same-store

  $30,196    $31,141    $(945  (3.0%) 

Non-same-store(1)

   497     —       497    —    
                   

Total NOI

  $30,693    $31,141     (448  (1.4%) 
                   

Occupancy

  2010  2009 

Same-store

   92.5  93.6

Non-same-store(1)

   88.2  —    
         

Total

   92.1  93.6
         

(1)

Non-same-store properties include:

2010 acquisition – Gateway Overlook

Real estate rental revenue in the retail segment decreased by $0.8 million in 2010 as compared to 2009 due to higher vacancy ($1.2 million) and lower tenant reimbursements for real estate taxes ($0.3 million) in the same-store portfolio. These were partially offset by real estate rental revenue from the 2010 acquisition of Gateway Overlook ($0.6 million).

Real estate expenses in the retail segment decreased by $0.4 million in 2010 as compared to 2009 due to lower legal fees ($0.5 million) related to litigation in 2009 concerning the remediation of an environmental condition at Westminster Shopping Center. This was partially offset by real estate expenses from the acquisition property ($0.1 million).

Same-store occupancy decreased to 92.5% in 2010 from 93.6% in 2009, driven by lower occupancy at Frederick Crossing and Wheaton Park, which was partially offset by higher occupancy at the Centre at Hagerstown. The non-same-store occupancy of 88.2% reflects the acquisition of Gateway Overlook during the fourth quarter of 2010. During 2010, 72.7% of the square footage that expired was renewed compared to 52.2% in 2009. During 2010, we executed new leases for 269,200 square feet of retail space at an average rental rate of $21.39, an increase of 18.6% from 2009, with average tenant improvements and leasing costs of $6.11 per square foot.

Multifamily Segment:

   Years Ended December 31, 
   2010   2009   $ Change  % Change 

Real Estate Rental Revenue

       

Same-store

  $40,567    $39,507    $1,060    2.7

Non-same-store(1)

   8,032     6,963     1,069    15.4
                   

Total

  $48,599    $46,470    $2,129    4.6

Real Estate Expenses

       

Same-store

  $15,868    $15,887    $(19  (0.1%) 

Non-same-store(1)

   3,375     3,607     (232  (6.4%) 
                   

Total real estate expenses

  $19,243    $19,494    $(251  (1.3%) 

NOI

       

Same-store

  $24,699    $23,620    $1,079    4.6

Non-same-store(1)

   4,657     3,356     1,301    38.8
                   

Total NOI

  $29,356    $26,976    $2,380    8.8
                   

Occupancy

  2010  2009 

Same-store

   96.3  94.5

Non-same-store(1)

   91.9  93.6
         

Total

   95.7  94.4
         

(1)

Non-same-store properties include:

Development properties – Clayborne Apartments and Bennett Park

Real estate rental revenue in the multifamily segment increased by $2.1 million in 2010 as compared to 2009 due primarily to higher occupancy ($0.8 million) and lower rent abatements ($0.2 million) in our same-store properties, as well as the lease-up of our development properties ($1.1 million).

Real estate expenses in the multifamily segment decreased by $0.3 million in 2010 as compared to 2009 due primarily to lower real estate tax assessments at our development properties.

Same-store occupancy increased to 96.3% in 2010 from 94.5% in 2009, driven by higher occupancy at our two Washington, DC properties, the Kenmore and 3801 Connecticut Avenue. These were partially offset by lower occupancy at Munson Hill Towers and the Ashby at McLean. Non-same-store occupancy decreased to 91.9% from 93.6%, reflecting lower occupancy at Bennett Park.

Industrial Segment:

   Years Ended December 31, 
   2010   2009   $ Change  % Change 

Real Estate Rental Revenue

       

Total

  $32,190    $34,288    $(2,098  (6.1%) 

Real Estate Expenses

       

Total

  $9,334    $9,384    $(50  (0.5%) 

NOI

       

Total

  $22,856    $24,904    $(2,048  (8.2%) 

Occupancy

  2010  2009 

Total

   78.6  84.8

Real estate rental revenue in the industrial segment decreased by $2.1 million in 2010 as compared to 2009 due primarily to lower occupancy ($2.3 million) and lower recoveries from tenants ($1.2 million), partially offset by higher rental rates ($0.6 million) and lower bad debt ($0.7 million). The decrease in recoveries from tenants is primarily attributable to lower occupancy and lower real estate taxes.

Real estate expenses in the industrial segment decreased slightly in 2010 as compared to 2009 as lower real estate taxes ($0.6 million) were offset by higher snow removal costs ($0.3 million) and higher legal costs ($0.1 million).

Occupancy decreased to 78.6% in 2010 from 84.8% in 2009, driven by higher vacancy at NVIP I & II, Dulles Business Park, Fullerton Business Center and Fullerton Industrial Center. This decline in occupancy continues a trend that began during the national economic recession in 2008. During 2010, 53.9% of the square footage that expired was renewed compared to 81.3% in 2009, excluding properties sold or classified as held for sale. During 2010, we executed new leases for 587,600 square feet of industrial space at an average rental rate of $11.53, an increase of 12.6% from 2009, with average tenant improvements and leasing costs of $4.19 per square foot.

2009 Compared to 2008

The following tables of selected operating data provide the basis for our discussion of NOI in 2009 compared to 2008. All amounts are in thousands except percentage amounts.

 

  Years Ended December 31,   Years Ended December 31, 
  2009 2008 $ Change % Change   2009 2008 $ Change % Change 

Real Estate Rental Revenue

          

Core

  $269,655   $268,781   $874   0.3

Non-core(1)

   37,274    9,910    27,364   276.1

Same-store

  $260,887   $258,799   $2,088    0.8

Non-same-store(1)

   37,274    9,910    27,364    276.1
                          

Total real estate rental revenue

  $306,929   $278,691   $28,238   10.1  $298,161   $268,709   $29,452    11.0

Real Estate Expenses

          

Core

  $90,047   $87,215   $2,832   3.2

Non-core(1)

   14,526    6,284    8,242   131.2

Same-store

  $86,778   $83,938   $2,840    3.4

Non-same-store(1)

   14,526    6,284    8,242    131.2
                          

Total real estate expenses

  $104,573   $93,499   $11,074   11.8  $101,304   $90,222   $11,082    12.3

NOI

          

Core

  $179,608   $181,566   $(1,958 (1.1%) 

Non-core(1)

   22,748    3,626    19,122   527.4

Same-store

  $174,109   $174,861   $(752  (0.4%) 

Non-same-store(1)

   22,748    3,626    19,122    527.4
                          

Total NOI

  $202,356   $185,192   $17,164   9.3  $196,857   $178,487   $18,370    10.3
                          

Reconciliation to Net Income

          

NOI

  $202,356   $185,192      $196,857   $178,487    

Other income

   1,205    1,073    

Other income (expense)

   417    1,073    

Income from non-disposal activities

   73    17       73    17    

Interest expense

   (75,001  (75,041     (74,074  (74,095  

Depreciation and amortization

   (94,042  (85,659     (91,668  (82,982  

General and administrative expenses

   (13,906  (12,110     (13,118  (12,110  

Gain (loss) on extinguishment of debt

   5,336    (5,583     5,336    (5,583  

Discontinued operations(2)

   1,579    4,129       3,777    7,211    

Gain on sale of real estate

   13,348    15,275       13,348    15,275    
                  

Net income

   40,948    27,293       40,948    27,293    

Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests

   (203  (211     (203  (211  
                  

Net income attributable to the controlling interests

  $40,745   $27,082      $40,745   $27,082    
                  

 

Economic Occupancy

  2009  2008 

Core

  93.0 94.4

Non-core(1)

  90.6 57.9
       

Total

  92.7 92.3
       

Occupancy

  2009  2008 

Same-store

   90.6  92.7

Non-same-store(1)

   87.8  86.2
         

Total

   90.3  92.1
         

 

(1)

Non-coreNon-same-store properties include:

Multifamily development properties – Clayborne Apartments and Bennett Park

Office development property – Dulles Station, Phase I

2009 Medical Office acquisition – Lansdowne Medical Office Building

2008 acquisitionsOffice acquisition – 2445 M Street

2008 Medical Office acquisition – Sterling Medical Office Building

2008 Multifamily acquisition – Kenmore Apartments

2008 Industrial acquisition – 6100 Columbia Park Road Sterling Medical Office Building, Kenmore Apartments and 2445 M Street

 

(2)

Discontinued operations include gain on disposals and income from operations for:

2009 dispositions – Avondale, Tech 100 Industrial Park, Brandywine Center and Crossroads Distribution Center

2008 disposals – Sullyfield Center and The Earhart Building

2009 held for sale – Charleston

2010 dispositions –Parklawn Plaza, Lexington Building, Saratoga Building, Charleston Business Center, the Ridges, Ammendale I&II and Amvax
2009 dispositions –Avondale, Tech 100 Industrial Park, Brandywine Center and Crossroads Distribution Center
2008 dispositions –Sullyfield Center and The Earhart Building

Real estate rental revenue increased by $28.2$29.5 million in 2009 as compared to 2008 due primarily to the acquisition or placing into service of one office property, two medical office properties, one medical office property, three multifamily properties and one industrial property in 2009 and 2008, which added approximately 1.3 million square feet of net rentable space. These acquisition and development properties contributed $27.4 million of the increase. Real estate rental revenue from the coresame-store properties increased by $0.9$2.1 million primarily due to higher rental rates ($6.04.9 million) in all segments and, higher lease termination fees ($1.2 million) and higher reimbursements for real estate taxes ($0.4 million) in the retail and industrial segments,utilities ($0.7 million), partially offset by lower coresame-store occupancy ($4.03.4 million) and higher bad debt expense ($1.82.0 million) in the commercial segments.

Real estate expenses increased by $11.1 million in 2009 as compared to 2008 due primarily to acquisition and development properties, which contributed $8.2 million of the increase. Real estate expenses from coresame-store properties increased by $2.8 million due primarily to higher real estate taxes ($1.41.3 million) caused by increased rates and assessments across the portfolio, higher snow removal costs ($1.3 million, not including any tenant reimbursements) caused by a severe snow storm in December 2009 and higher electricity costs ($0.60.5 million) caused by increased rates, partially offset by lower administrative expenses ($0.4 million).

Core economicSame-store occupancy decreased to 93.0%90.6% in 2009 from 94.4%92.7% in 2008, with the most severe decreases in the industrial and office segments. We believe this weakness in coresame-store occupancy iswas reflective of the national economic recession. Non-core economicNon-same-store occupancy increased to 90.6%87.8% in 2009 from 57.9%86.2% in 2008, driven byreflecting the completion of lease-up for our development properties in the office and multifamily segments. During 2009, 67.4%68.2% of the commercial square footage expiring was renewed as compared to 62.1%63.5% in 2008, excluding properties sold or classified as held for sale. During 2009, 1.4 million commercial square feet were leased at an average rental rate of $24.92 per square foot, an increase of 10.2%, with average tenant improvements and leasing costs of $13.95 per square foot. These leasing statistics exclude first generation leases at development properties.

An analysis of NOI by segment follows.

Office Segment:

 

  Years Ended December 31,   Years Ended December 31, 
  2009  2008  $ Change % Change   2009   2008   $ Change % Change 

Real Estate Rental Revenue

              

Core

  $114,944  $115,685  $(741 (0.6%) 

Non-core(1)

   21,513   2,608   18,905   724.9

Same-store

  $109,158    $108,823    $335    0.3

Non-same-store(1)

   21,513     2,608     18,905    724.9
                            

Total real estate rental revenue

  $136,457  $118,293  $18,164   15.4  $130,671    $111,431    $19,241    17.3

Real Estate Expenses

              

Core

  $41,462  $40,956  $506   1.2

Non-core(1)

   7,436   1,471   5,965   405.5

Same-store

  $39,092    $38,555    $537    1.4

Non-same-store(1)

   7,436     1,471     5,965    405.5
                            

Total real estate expenses

  $48,898  $42,427  $6,471   15.3  $46,528    $40,026    $6,502    16.2

NOI

              

Core

  $73,482  $74,729  $(1,247 (1.7%) 

Non-core(1)

   14,077   1,137   12,940   1,138.1

Same-store

  $70,066    $70,268    $(202  (0.3%) 

Non-same-store(1)

   14,077     1,137     12,940    1,138.1
                            

Total NOI

  $87,559  $75,866  $11,693   15.4  $84,143    $71,405    $12,738    17.8
                            

 

Economic Occupancy

  2009  2008 

Core

  92.2 93.9

Non-core(1)

  95.6 73.2
       

Total

  92.6 93.2
       

Occupancy

  2009  2008 

Same-store

   90.8  91.3

Non-same-store(1)

   96.0  94.9
         

Total

   91.4  91.8
         

 

(1)

Non-coreNon-same-store properties include:

Development property – Dulles Station, Phase I

2008 acquisition – 2445 M Street

Real estate rental revenue in the office segment increased by $18.2$19.2 million in 2009 as compared to 2008 due to acquisition and development properties, which contributed all$18.9 million of the increase. Real estate rental revenue from coresame-store properties decreasedincreased by $0.7$0.3 million primarily due to higher rental rates ($3.5 million), offset by lower core occupancy ($2.11.7 million), lower recovery income ($0.8 million), and higher bad debt ($1.3 million) and lower lease termination fees ($0.4 million), partially offset by higher rental rates ($3.61.5 million).

Real estate expenses in the office segment increased by $6.5 million in 2009 as compared to 2008 due primarily to acquisition and development properties, which contributed $6.0 million of the increase. Real estate expenses from coresame-store properties increased by $0.5 million primarily due to higher electricity costs ($0.3 million) caused by higher rates, higher snow removal costs ($0.2 million, not including any tenant reimbursements) caused by a severe snow storm in December 2009, and higher real estate taxes ($0.2 million) caused by higher rates and assessments. These were offset by lower property management payroll expense ($0.2 million) due to the elimination of several positions.

Core economicSame-store occupancy decreased to 92.2%90.8% in 2009 from 93.9%91.3% in 2008, drivenprimarily caused by higher vacancy at One Central Plaza, 6565 Arlington Boulevard and 1220 19th Street.the Atrium Building. These were partially offset by higher economic occupancy at The CrescentOne Central Plaza and 600 Jefferson Plaza. Non-core economic51 Monroe Street. Non-same-store occupancy increased to 95.6%96.0% from 73.2% due to the94.9%, reflecting lease-up of Dulles Station, Phase I, a development property. During 2009, 59.8%61.9% of the square footage that expired was renewed compared to 41.9%42.4% in 2008, excluding properties sold or classified as held for sale. During 2009, we executed new leases for 683,800 square feet of office space at an average rental rate of $31.14 per square foot, an increase of 11.6%, with average tenant improvements and leasing costs of $20.14 per square foot. These leasing statistics exclude first generation leases at the development property, Dulles Station, Phase I.

Medical Office Segment:

 

  Years Ended December 31,   Years Ended December 31, 
  2009  2008  $ Change % Change   2009   2008   $ Change % Change 

Real Estate Rental Revenue

              

Core

  $44,251  $43,210  $1,041   2.4

Non-core(1)

   660   384   276   71.9

Same-store

  $44,251    $43,210    $1,041    2.4

Non-same-store(1)

   660     384     276    71.9
                            

Total real estate rental revenue

  $44,911  $43,594  $1,317   3.0  $44,911    $43,594    $1,317    3.0

Real Estate Expenses

              

Core

  $14,674  $13,924  $750   5.4

Non-core(1)

   544   253   291   115.0

Same-store

  $14,674    $13,924    $750    5.4

Non-same-store(1)

   544     253     291    115.0
                            

Total real estate expenses

  $15,218  $14,177  $1,041   7.3  $15,218    $14,177    $1,041    7.3

NOI

              

Core

  $29,577  $29,286  $291   1.0

Non-core(1)

   116   131   (15 (11.5%) 

Same-store

  $29,577    $29,286    $291    1.0

Non-same-store(1)

   116     131     (15  (11.5%) 
                            

Total NOI

  $29,693  $29,417  $276   0.9  $29,693    $29,417    $276    0.9
                            

 

Economic Occupancy

  2009  2008 

Core

  96.6 97.0

Non-core(1)

  50.4 61.1
       

Total

  95.2 96.5
       

Occupancy

  2009  2008 

Same-store

   95.0  94.9

Non-same-store(1)

   19.8  62.9
         

Total

   87.9  94.0
         

 

(1)

Non-coreNon-same-store properties include:

2009 acquisition – Lansdowne Medical Office Building

2008 acquisition – Sterling Medical Office Building

Real estate rental revenue in the medical office segment increased by $1.3 million in 2009 as compared to 2008 due primarily to higher rental rates ($1.11.0 million) and lower bad debt ($0.3 million) on the coresame-store properties, offset by higher coresame-store vacancy ($0.2 million). The 2008 acquisition of Sterling Medical Office Building contributed $0.3 million to the increase.

Real estate expenses in the medical office segment increased by $1.0 million in 2009 as compared to 2008 due primarily to higher real estate taxes ($0.3 million) caused by higher rates and assessments on the coresame-store portfolio, an increase to our reserve for straight-line receivables ($0.2 million) and higher snow removal costs ($0.2 million, not including any tenant reimbursements). The acquisition properties contributed $0.3 million to the increase.

Core economicSame-store occupancy decreasedincreased to 96.6%95.0% in 2009 from 97.0%94.9% in 2008, driven by higher vacancyoccupancy at Woodburn I and 83018505 Arlington Boulevard. Non-core economicBoulevard, offset by lower occupancy at Ashburn Farm Office Park. Non-same-store occupancy decreased to 50.4%19.8% from 61.1%62.9% due to the acquisition of the vacant Lansdowne Medical Office Building during the third quarter of 2009. This building remainswas unleased as ofat the end of 2009. During 2009, 64.4% of the square footage that expired was renewed compared to 63.6% in 2008. During 2009, we executed new leases for 139,600 square feet of medical office space at an average rental rate of $36.80, an increase of 15.9%, with average tenant improvements and leasing costs of $24.28 per square foot.

Retail Segment:

 

   Years Ended December 31, 
   2009   2008   $ Change  % Change 

Real Estate Rental Revenue

       

Total

  $41,821    $40,987    $834    2.0

Real Estate Expenses

       

Total

  $10,680    $9,647    $1,033    10.7

NOI

       

Total

  $31,141    $31,340    $(199  (0.6%) 

 

Economic Occupancy

  2009 2008 

Occupancy

  2009 2008 

Total

  94.6 94.9   93.6  95.2

Real estate rental revenue in the retail segment increased by $0.8 million in 2009 as compared to 2008 due to higher rental rates ($0.90.4 million), higher lease termination fees ($0.3 million) and higher real estate tax reimbursements ($0.3 million), and common area maintenance ($0.3 million) reimbursements, offset by higher bad debt ($0.7 million).

Real estate expenses in the retail segment increased by $1.0 million in 2009 as compared to 2008 due to higher legal fees ($0.5 million) related to litigation concerning the remediation of an environmental condition at Westminster Shopping Center and higher real estate taxes ($0.4 million) caused by higher rates and assessments.

Economic occupancyOccupancy decreased to 94.6%93.6% in 2009 from 94.9%95.2% in 2008, driven by higher vacancy at the Centre at Hagerstown and Montrose Shopping Center. These were partially offset by lower vacancy at Foxchase Shopping Center and South Washington Street.Hagerstown. During 2009, 52.2% of the square footage that expired was renewed compared to 91.5% in 2008. During 2009, we executed new leases for 145,900 square feet of retail space at an average rental rate of $17.60, a decrease of 0.4%, with average tenant improvements and leasing costs of $9.08 per square foot.

Multifamily Segment:

 

  Years Ended December 31,   Years Ended December 31, 
  2009  2008  $ Change  % Change   2009   2008   $ Change   % Change 

Real Estate Rental Revenue

                

Core

  $32,909  $32,199  $710  2.2

Non-core(1)

   13,561   5,659   7,902  139.6

Same-store

  $32,909    $32,199    $710     2.2

Non-same-store(1)

   13,561     5,659     7,902     139.6
                             

Total real estate rental revenue

  $46,470  $37,858  $8,612  22.7  $46,470    $37,858    $8,612     22.7

Real Estate Expenses

                

Core

  $13,382  $13,315  $67  0.5

Non-core(1)

   6,112   4,121   1,991  48.3

Same-store

  $13,382    $13,315    $67     0.5

Non-same-store(1)

   6,112     4,121     1,991     48.3
                             

Total real estate expenses

  $19,494  $17,436  $2,058  11.8  $19,494    $17,436    $2,058     11.8

NOI

                

Core

  $19,527  $18,884  $643  3.4

Non-core(1)

   7,449   1,538   5,911  384.3

Same-store

  $19,527    $18,884    $643     3.4

Non-same-store(1)

   7,449     1,538     5,911     384.3
                             

Total NOI

  $26,976  $20,422  $6,554  32.1  $26,976    $20,422    $6,554     32.1
                             

 

Economic Occupancy

  2009  2008 

Core

  93.3 93.5

Non-core(1)

  87.3 49.6
       

Total

  91.5 83.0
       

Occupancy

  2009  2008 

Same-store

   94.9  94.0

Non-same-store(1)

   92.9  76.5
         

Total

   94.4  89.5
         

 

(1)

Non-coreNon-same-store properties include:

Development properties – Clayborne Apartments and Bennett Park

2008 acquisition – Kenmore Apartments

Real estate rental revenue in the multifamily segment increased by $8.6 million in 2009 as compared to 2008 due primarily to acquisition and development properties, which contributed $7.9 million of the increase. Real estate rental revenue from coresame-store properties increased by $0.7 million due primarily to lower rent abatements ($0.3 million) and higher utilities reimbursements ($0.3 million).

Real estate expenses in the multifamily segment increased by $2.1 million in 2009 as compared to 2008 due primarily to acquisition and development properties, which contributed $2.0 million of the increase. Real estate expenses from coresame-store properties increased by $0.1 million primarily due to higher snow removal costs, not including any tenant reimbursements, due to a severe snow storm in December 2009.

Core economicSame-store occupancy decreasedincreased to 93.3%94.9% in 2009 from 93.5%94.0% in 2008, driven by lowerhigher occupancy at Munson Hill Towers and Walker House. Non-core economicTowers. Non-same-store occupancy increased to 87.3%92.9% from 49.6%76.5%, reflecting the lease-up of Bennett Park and Clayborne Apartments.

Industrial Segment:

 

  Years Ended December 31,   Years Ended December 31, 
  2009  2008  $ Change % Change   2009   2008   $ Change % Change 

Real Estate Rental Revenue

              

Core

  $35,730  $36,700  $(970 (2.6%) 

Non-core(1)

   1,540   1,259   281   22.3

Same-store

  $32,748    $33,580    $(832  (2.5%) 

Non-same-store(1)

   1,540     1,259     281    22.3
                            

Total real estate rental revenue

  $37,270  $37,959  $(689 (1.8%)   $34,288    $34,839    $(551  (1.6%) 

Real Estate Expenses

              

Core

  $9,849  $9,373  $476   5.1

Non-core(1)

   434   439   (5 (1.1%) 

Same-store

  $8,950    $8,497    $453    5.3

Non-same-store(1)

   434     439     (5  (1.1%) 
                            

Total real estate expenses

  $10,283  $9,812  $471   4.8  $9,384    $8,936    $448    5.0

NOI

              

Core

  $25,881  $27,327  $(1,446 (5.3%) 

Non-core(1)

   1,106   820   286   34.9

Same-store

  $23,798    $25,083    $(1,285  (5.1%) 

Non-same-store(1)

   1,106     820     286    34.9
                            

Total NOI

  $26,987  $28,147  $(1,160 (4.1%)   $24,904    $25,903    $(999  (3.9%) 
                            

 

Economic Occupancy

  2009  2008 

Core

  89.2 93.8

Non-core(1)

  100.0 94.2
       

Total

  89.6 93.8
       

Occupancy

  2009  2008 

Same-store

   84.0  91.0

Non-same-store(1)

   100.0  100.0
         

Total

   84.8  91.4
         

 

(1)

Non-coreNon-same-store properties include:

2008 acquisition – 6100 Columbia Park Road

Real estate rental revenue in the industrial segment decreased by $0.7$0.6 million in 2009 as compared to 2008 due primarily to lower coresame-store occupancy ($1.51.3 million) and higher bad debt ($0.10.2 million), offset by higher lease termination fees ($0.4 million) and higher expense recoveriesreimbursements ($0.20.3 million). for common area maintenance. The 2008 acquisition of 6100 Columbia Park Road contributed $0.3 million of additional real estate revenue.

Real estate expenses in the industrial segment increased by $0.5$0.4 million in 2009 as compared to 2008 due primarily to higher snow removal costs ($0.5 million, not including any tenant reimbursements) caused by a severe snow storm in December 2009 and higher real estate taxes ($0.30.2 million) caused by higher rates and assessments. These were offset by higher recoveries of previously reserved bad debt ($0.2 million).

Core economicSame-store occupancy decreased to 89.2%84.0% in 2009 from 93.8%91.0% in 2008, driven by higher vacancylower occupancy at 270 Tech Park, Ammendale Technology Park and NVIP I & II. Non-core economicII, Fullerton Business Center and Albemarle Point. Non-same-store occupancy increased towas 100.0% from 94.2%,for both years, reflecting full occupancy at 6100 Columbia Park Road. During 2009, 81.0%81.3% of the square footage that expired was renewed compared to 62.0%64.1% in 2008, excluding properties sold or classified as held for sale. During 2009, we executed new leases for 453,400 square feet of industrial space at an average rental rate of $8.80, an increase of 3.2%, with average tenant improvements and leasing costs of $3.01 per square foot.

2008 Compared to 2007

The following tables of selected operating data provide the basis for our discussion of NOI in 2008 compared to 2007. All amounts are in thousands except percentage amounts.

   Years Ended December 31, 
   2008  2007  $ Change  % Change 

Real Estate Rental Revenue

     

Core

  $231,652   $229,565   $2,087   0.9

Non-core(1)

   47,039    19,334    27,705   143.3
                

Total real estate rental revenue

  $278,691   $248,899   $29,792   12.0

Real Estate Expenses

     

Core

  $73,600   $70,546   $3,054   4.3

Non-core(1)

   19,899    6,813    13,086   192.1
                

Total real estate expenses

  $93,499   $77,359   $16,140   20.9

NOI

     

Core

  $158,052   $159,019   $(967 (0.6%) 

Non-core(1)

   27,140    12,521    14,619   116.8
                

Total NOI

  $185,192   $171,540   $13,652   8.0
                

Reconciliation to Net Income

     

NOI

  $185,192   $171,540    

Other income

   1,073    1,875    

Income from non-disposal activities

   17    1,303    

Interest expense

   (75,041  (66,336  

Depreciation and amortization

   (85,659  (68,364  

General and administrative expenses

   (12,110  (14,882  

Loss on extinguishment of debt

   (5,583  —      

Discontinued operations(2)

   4,129    7,510    

Gain on sale of real estate

   15,275    25,022    
           

Net income

   27,293    57,668    

Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests

   (211  (217  
           

Net income attributable to the controlling interests

  $27,082   $57,451    
           

Economic Occupancy

  2008  2007 

Core

  94.5 94.7

Non-core(1)

  82.2 92.6
       

Total

  92.3 94.5
       

(1)

Non-core properties include:

Multifamily development properties – Clayborne Apartments and Bennett Park

Office development property – Dulles Station, Phase I

2008 office acquisition – 2445 M Street

2008 medical office acquisition – Sterling Medical Office Building

2008 multifamily acquisition – Kenmore Apartments

2008 industrial acquisition – 6100 Columbia Park Road

2007 office acquisitions – Monument II, Woodholme Center and 2000 M Street

2007 medical office acquisitions – 2440 M Street, Woodholme Medical Office Building, Ashburn Farm Office Park and CentreMed I & II

2007 industrial acquisition – 270 Technology Park

(2)

Discontinued operations include gain on disposals and income from operations for:

Held for sale – Charleston Business Center

2009 dispositions – Avondale, Tech 100 Industrial Park, Brandywine Center and Crossroads Distribution Center

2008 disposals – Sullyfield Center and The Earhart Building

2007 disposals – Maryland Trade Center I and II

Real estate rental revenue increased by $29.8 million in 2008 as compared to 2007 due primarily to the acquisition or placing into service of five office properties, five medical office properties, three multifamily properties and two industrial properties in 2007 and 2008, which added approximately 2.3 million square feet of net rentable space. These acquisition and development properties contributed $27.7 million of the increase. Real estate rental revenue from the core properties increased by $2.1 million primarily due to higher rental rates in all segments ($2.9 million) and higher expense recoveries ($2.0 million), partially offset by higher provisions for bad debt ($2.4 million) and lower core occupancy ($0.6 million) in the commercial segments.

Real estate expenses increased by $16.1 million in 2008 as compared to 2007 due primarily to acquisition and development properties, which contributed $13.1 million of the increase. Real estate expenses from core properties increased by $3.1 million due primarily to higher real estate taxes ($2.2 million), administrative expenses ($0.5 million) and repairs and maintenance ($0.5 million).

Core economic occupancy decreased to 94.5% in 2008 from 94.7% in 2007 due to lower core economic occupancy in the commercial property segments, partially offset by higher core economic occupancy in the multifamily segment. Non-core economic occupancy decreased to 82.2% in 2008 from 92.6% in 2007, driven by the lease-up of our development properties in the office and multifamily segments. During 2008, 62.1% of the commercial square footage expiring was renewed as compared to 79.6% in 2007. During 2008, 1.5 million commercial square feet were leased at an average rental rate of $24.68 per square foot, an increase of 19.4%, with average tenant improvements and leasing costs of $13.36 per square foot. These leasing statistics do not include leases executed during 2008 for Dulles Station, Phase I, a development property.

An analysis of NOI by segment follows.

Office Segment:

   Years Ended December 31, 
   2008  2007  $ Change  % Change 

Real Estate Rental Revenue

       

Core

  $94,802  $93,810  $992   1.1

Non-core(1)

   23,491   8,177   15,314   187.3
                

Total real estate rental revenue

  $118,293  $101,987  $16,306   16.0

Real Estate Expenses

       

Core

  $32,975  $31,927  $1,048   3.3

Non-core(1)

   9,452   2,641   6,811   257.9
                

Total real estate expenses

  $42,427  $34,568  $7,859   22.7

NOI

       

Core

  $61,827  $61,883  $(56 (0.1%) 

Non-core(1)

   14,039   5,536   8,503   153.6
                

Total NOI

  $75,866  $67,419  $8,447   12.5
                

Economic Occupancy

  2008  2007 

Core

  93.9 94.3

Non-core(1)

  90.4 97.9
       

Total

  93.2 94.6
       

(1)

Non-core properties include:

2008 in development – Dulles Station

2008 acquisition – 2445 M Street

2007 acquisitions – Monument II, Woodholme Center and 2000 M Street

Real estate rental revenue in the office segment increased by $16.3 million in 2008 as compared to 2007 due primarily to acquisition and development properties, which contributed $15.3 million of the increase. Real estate rental revenue from core properties increased by $1.0 million primarily due to higher rental rates ($1.1 million), lease termination fees ($0.6 million) and expense recoveries ($0.4 million), offset by lower core occupancy ($0.5 million) and higher bad debt ($0.5 million).

Real estate expenses in the office segment increased by $7.9 million in 2008 as compared to 2007 due primarily to acquisition and development properties, which contributed $6.8 million of the increase. Real estate expenses from core properties increased by $1.1 million primarily due to higher real estate taxes ($0.7 million) caused by higher rates and assessments, as well as higher repairs and maintenance expense ($0.4 million).

Core economic occupancy decreased to 93.9% in 2008 from 94.3% in 2007, driven by higher vacancy at One Central Plaza, 600 Jefferson Plaza and the Lexington. These were partially offset by higher economic occupancy at West Gude Drive, Wayne Plaza and 7900 Westpark. Non-core economic occupancy decreased to 90.4% from 97.9% due to the lease-up of Dulles Station, Phase I, a development property, as well as lower occupancy at 2000 M Street. During 2008, 41.9% of the square footage that expired was renewed compared to 82.1% in 2007, excluding properties sold or classified as held for sale. During 2008, we executed new leases for 567,700 square feet of office space at an average rental rate of $32.46 per square foot, an increase of 16.5%, with average tenant improvements and leasing costs of $20.90 per square foot. These leasing statistics do not include leases executed during 2008 for Dulles Station, Phase I, a development property.

Medical Office Segment:

   Years Ended December 31, 
   2008  2007  $ Change  % Change 

Real Estate Rental Revenue

       

Core

  $29,510  $29,314  $196   0.7

Non-core(1)

   14,084   8,533   5,551   65.1
                

Total real estate rental revenue

  $43,594  $37,847  $5,747   15.2

Real Estate Expenses

       

Core

  $8,897  $8,654  $243   2.8

Non-core(1)

   5,280   2,997   2,283   76.2
                

Total real estate expenses

  $14,177  $11,651  $2,526   21.7

NOI

       

Core

  $20,613  $20,660  $(47 (0.2%) 

Non-core(1)

   8,804   5,536   3,268   59.0
                

Total NOI

  $29,417  $26,196  $3,221   12.3
                

Economic Occupancy

  2008  2007 

Core

  97.7 98.9

Non-core(1)

  93.9 96.1
       

Total

  96.5 98.3
       

(1)

Non-core properties include:

2008 acquisition – Sterling Medical Office Building

2007 acquisitions – 2440 M Street, Woodholme Medical Office Building, Ashburn Farm Office Park and CentreMed I & II

Real estate rental revenue in the medical office segment increased by $5.7 million in 2008 as compared to 2007 due primarily to acquisition properties, which contributed $5.6 million of the increase. Real estate rental revenue from core properties increased by $0.2 million primarily due to higher rental rates ($0.3 million) and expense recoveries ($0.3 million), partially offset by lower core occupancy ($0.3 million).

Real estate expenses in the medical office segment increased by $2.5 million in 2008 as compared to 2007 due primarily to acquisition properties, which contributed $2.3 million of the increase. Real estate expenses from core properties increased by $0.2 million due to higher real estate taxes ($0.4 million) caused by higher rates and assessments, partially offset by lower operating services and supplies expense ($0.2 million).

Core economic occupancy decreased to 97.7% in 2008 from 98.9% in 2007, driven by higher vacancy at 8301 Arlington Boulevard and Alexandria Professional Center. Non-core economic occupancy decreased to 93.9% from 96.1% due to higher vacancy at Sterling Medical Office Building, Woodholme Medical Center and 2440 M Street. The sellers of Sterling Medical Office Building are reimbursing us for its vacant space for a period of 12 – 18 months from the acquisition date. During 2008, 63.6% of the square footage that expired was renewed compared to 50.0% in 2007. During 2008, we executed new leases for 183,300 square feet of medical office space at an average rental rate of $37.82, an increase of 23.4%, with average tenant improvements and leasing costs of $26.19 per square foot.

Retail Segment:

   Years Ended December 31, 
   2008  2007  $ Change  % Change 

Real Estate Rental Revenue

       

Total

  $40,987  $41,512  $(525 (1.3%) 

Real Estate Expenses

       

Total

  $9,646  $8,921  $725   8.1

NOI

       

Total

  $31,341  $32,591  $(1,250 (3.8%) 

Economic Occupancy

  2008  2007 

Total

  94.9 95.2

Real estate rental revenue in the retail segment decreased by $0.5 million in 2008 as compared to 2007 due to higher bad debt ($1.0 million) and lower occupancy ($0.1 million), partially offset by higher expense recoveries ($0.5 million) and rental rates ($0.2 million). The 2008 bad debt and amortization of intangible lease assets includes write-offs of $0.4 million and $0.4 million, respectively, caused by the bankruptcy of a major retail tenant.

Real estate expenses in the retail segment increased by $0.7 million in 2008 as compared to 2007 due to higher real estate taxes ($0.4 million) caused by higher rates and assessments, as well as the 2008 write-off of a straight-line receivable ($0.3 million) caused by the bankruptcy of a major retail tenant.

Economic occupancy decreased to 94.9% in 2008 from 95.2% in 2007, driven by higher vacancy at Westminster Shopping Center and Montgomery Village Center. This was partially offset by lower vacancy at Montrose Shopping Center and South Washington Street. During 2008, 91.5% of the square footage that expired was renewed compared to 82.1% in 2007. During 2008, we executed new leases for 186,200 square feet of retail space at an average rental rate of $26.27, an increase of 26.9%, with average tenant improvements and leasing costs of $7.91 per square foot.

Multifamily Segment:

   Years Ended December 31, 
   2008  2007  $ Change  % Change 

Real Estate Rental Revenue

       

Core

  $32,199  $31,089   $1,110  3.6

Non-core(1)

   5,659   275    5,384  1,957.8
                

Total real estate rental revenue

  $37,858  $31,364   $6,494  20.7

Real Estate Expenses

       

Core

  $13,315  $12,823   $492  3.8

Non-core(1)

   4,121   639    3,482  544.9
                

Total real estate expenses

  $17,436  $13,462   $3,974  29.5

NOI

       

Core

  $18,884  $18,266   $618  3.4

Non-core(1)

   1,538   (364  1,902  (522.5%) 
                

Total NOI

  $20,422  $17,902   $2,520  14.1
                

Economic Occupancy

  2008  2007 

Core

  93.5 91.3

Non-core(1)

  49.6 24.0
       

Total

  83.0 89.2
       

(1)

Non-core properties include:

2008 in development – Clayborne Apartments

2007 in development – Bennett Park

2008 acquisition – Kenmore Apartments

Real estate rental revenue in the multifamily segment increased by $6.5 million in 2008 as compared to 2007 due primarily to acquisition and development properties, which contributed $5.4 million of the increase. Real estate rental revenue from core properties increased by $1.1 million due primarily to higher rental rates ($0.3 million) and higher core occupancy ($0.7 million).

Real estate expenses in the multifamily segment increased by $4.0 million in 2008 as compared to 2007 due primarily to acquisition and development properties, which contributed $3.5 million of the increase. Real estate expenses from core properties increased by $0.5 million due primarily to higher administrative expenses ($0.3 million) driven by increased personnel and marketing costs, as well as higher real estate taxes ($0.1 million) caused by higher rates and assessments.

Core economic occupancy increased to 93.5% in 2008 from 91.3% in 2007, driven by higher occupancy at Roosevelt Towers and Bethesda Hill Apartments. Non-core economic occupancy increased to 49.6% from 24.0%, reflecting the continuing lease-up of Bennett Park and Clayborne Apartments.

Industrial Segment:

   Years Ended December 31, 
   2008  2007  $ Change  % Change 

Real Estate Rental Revenue

       

Core

  $34,154  $33,840  $314   0.9

Non-core(1)

   3,805   2,349   1,456   62.0
                

Total real estate rental revenue

  $37,959  $36,189  $1,770   4.9

Real Estate Expenses

       

Core

  $8,767  $8,221  $546   6.6

Non-core(1)

   1,046   536   510   95.1
                

Total real estate expenses

  $9,813  $8,757  $1,056   12.1

NOI

       

Core

  $25,387  $25,619  $(232 (0.9%) 

Non-core(1)

   2,759   1,813   946   52.2
                

Total NOI

  $28,146  $27,432  $714   2.6
                

Economic Occupancy

  2008  2007 

Core

  94.1 95.2

Non-core(1)

  90.9 96.2
       

Total

  93.8 95.2
       

(1)

Non-core properties include:

2008 acquisition – 6100 Columbia Park Road

2007 acquisition – 270 Technology Park

Real estate rental revenue in the industrial segment increased by $1.8 million in 2008 as compared to 2007 due primarily to acquisition properties, which contributed $1.5 million of the increase. Real estate rental revenue from core properties increased by $0.3 million due primarily to higher rental rates ($1.0 million), higher recoveries of operating expenses ($0.6 million), partially offset by higher bad debt ($0.9 million) and lower core occupancy ($0.4 million).

Real estate expenses in the industrial segment increased by $1.1 million in 2008 as compared to 2007 due primarily to acquisition and development properties, which contributed $0.5 million of the increase. Real estate expenses from core properties increased by $0.6 million due to higher real estate taxes caused by higher rates and assessments.

Core economic occupancy decreased to 94.1% in 2008 from 95.2% in 2007, driven by higher vacancy at Ammendale Technology Park and NVIP I & II. These were partially offset by higher economic occupancy at Sully Square and 9950 Business Parkway. Non-core economic occupancy decreased to 90.9% from 96.2% due to higher vacancy at 270 Tech Park and 6100 Columbia Park Drive. During 2008, 62.0% of the square footage that expired was renewed compared to 83.7% in 2007, excluding properties sold or classified as held for sale. During 2008, we executed new leases for 570,900 square feet of industrial space at an average rental rate of $12.19, an increase of 18.5%, with average tenant improvements and leasing costs of $3.53 per square foot.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Capital Structure

We manage our capital structure to reflect a long-term investment approach, generally seeking to match the cash flow of our assets with a mix of equity and various debt instruments. We expect that our capital structure will allow us to obtain additional capital from diverse sources that could include additional equity offerings of common shares, public and private secured and unsecured debt financings, and possible asset dispositions. Our ability to raise funds through the sale of debt and equity securities is dependent on, among other things, general economic conditions, general market conditions for REITs, our operating performance, our debt rating and the current trading price of our common shares. We analyze which source of capital we believe to be most advantageous to us at any particular point in time. However, the capital markets may not consistently be available on terms that we consider attractive. In particular, as a result ofWhile we have seen increased investor appetite for securities issued by REIT’s, we have learned from the recent economic downturn and turmoilthat investor appetite can change dramatically in a very short period of time. As a result, there can be no assurance that we will be able to access the capital markets, investor interest in securities issued by REIT’s, bothpublic or private debt and equity remains unpredictable. During certain periodsmarkets at a given point in the recent past, debt capital was essentially unavailable for extended periods of time. While debt markets have materially improved, we cannot predict if the improvement is sustainable.future.

We currently expect that our potential sources of liquidity for acquisitions, development, expansion and renovation of properties, and operating and administrative expenses, may include:

 

Cash flow from operations;

 

Borrowings under our unsecured credit facilities or other short-term facilities;

 

Issuances of our equity securities and/or common units in our operating partnership;

 

Proceeds from long-term secured or unsecured debt financings;

 

Investment from joint venture partners; and

 

Net proceeds from the sale of assets.

During 2010,2011, we expect that we will have modestsignificant capital requirements, including the following items. There can be no assurance that our capital requirements will not be materially higher or lower than these expectations.

 

Funding dividends on our common shares and noncontrolling interest distributions to third party unit holders;

 

Capital to refinance the $105.9 million of remaining 2011 maturities on our mortgage notes payable and unsecured notes payable;

Capital to refinance our $262.0 million unsecured line of credit which expires in 2011;

Approximately $35.0 - $45.0 million to invest in our existing portfolio of operating assets, including approximately $20.0 - $25.0 million to fund tenant-related capital requirements and leasing commissions;

 

Approximately $5.0$1.0 million to fund first generation tenant-related capital requirements and leasing commissions;

 

Approximately $3.0$1.0 - $5.0 million to invest in our development projects; and

 

Approximately $50.0 - $150.0$127.3 million to fund our known property acquisitions;

Funding for potential property acquisitions throughout the remainder of 2011, with a portion expected to be offset by proceeds from potential property acquisitions.dispositions.

We currently believe that we will generate sufficient cash flow from operations and have access to the capital resources necessary to fund our requirements.requirements in 2011. However, as a result of general market conditions in the greater Washington metro region, economic downturns affecting the ability to attract and retain tenants, unfavorable fluctuations in interest rates or our share price, unfavorable changes in the supply of competing properties, or our properties not performing as expected, we may not generate sufficient cash flow from operations or otherwise have access to capital on favorable terms, or at all. If we are unable to obtain capital from other sources, we may need to alter capital spending needs which may limit growth. If capital were not available, we may not be able to pay the dividend required to maintain our status as a REIT, make required principal and interest payments, make strategic acquisitions or make necessary routine capital improvements or undertake re-development opportunities with respect to our existing portfolio of operating assets.

Debt Financing

We generally use secured or unsecured, corporate-level debt, including mortgages, unsecured notes and our unsecured credit facilities, to meet our borrowing needs. Long-term, we generally use fixed rate debt instruments in order to match the returns from our real estate assets. We also utilize variable rate debt for short-term financing purposes. At times, our mix of variable and fixed rate debt may not suit our needs. At those times, we may use derivative financial instruments including interest rate swaps and caps, forward interest rate options or interest rate options in order to assist us in managing our debt mix. We may either hedge our variable rate debt to give it an effective fixed interest rate or hedge fixed rate debt to give it an effective variable interest rate.

Typically we have obtained the ratings of two credit rating agencies in the underwriting of our unsecured debt. As of December 31, 2009, Standard & Poor’s had assigned its BBB+ rating with a stable outlook, and Moody’s Investor Service had assigned its Baa1 rating with a stable outlook, to our unsecured notes. A downgrade in rating by either of these rating agencies could result from, among other things, a change in our financial position. Any such downgrade could adversely affect our ability to obtain future financing or could increase the interest rates on our existing debt. However, we have no debt instruments under which the principal maturity would be accelerated upon a downward change in our debt rating. A rating is not a recommendation to buy, sell or hold securities, and each rating is subject to revision or withdrawal at any time by the assigning rating organization.

Our total debt at December 31, 20092010 and 20082009 is summarized as follows (in thousands):

 

  2009  2008  2010   2009 

Fixed rate mortgages(1)

  $405,451  $421,486  $380,171    $383,563  

Unsecured credit facilities

   128,000   67,000   100,000     128,000  

Unsecured notes payable

   688,912   890,679   753,587     688,912  
              
  $1,222,363  $1,379,165  $1,233,758    $1,200,475  
              

(1)

A mortgage note payable secured by the Ridges with a balance of $21.9 million was included in “Other liabilities related to properties sold or held for sale” at December 31, 2009. This mortgage note payable was paid off during the third quarter of 2010.

If principal amounts due at maturity cannot be refinanced, extended or paid with proceeds of other capital transactions, such as new equity capital, our cash flow may be insufficient to repay all maturing debt. Prevailing interest rates or other factors at the time of a refinancing, such as possible reluctance of lenders to make commercial real estate loans, may result in higher interest rates and increased interest expense or inhibit our ability to finance our obligations.

Mortgage Debt

At December 31, 2009,2010, our $405.5$380.2 million in fixed rate mortgages, which includes a net $7.4$6.7 million in unamortized discounts due to fair value adjustments, bore an effective weighted average fair value interest rate of 5.9% and had a weighted average maturity of 6.84.9 years. We may either initiate secured mortgage debt or assume mortgage debt from time-to-time in conjunction with property acquisitions.

On February 17, 2009,July 12, 2010 we executedrepaid without penalty a $21.7 million mortgage note of $37.5 million at a fixed rate of 5.37% per annum for a term of ten years, supportedpayable secured by Kenmore Apartments. The proceeds from the note were used to pay down borrowings under our lines of creditCrescent and to repurchase a portion of our convertible notes.

On July 1, 2009, we used a portion of the proceeds of the May 2009 equity offering to prepay the $50 million mortgage that was to mature in October 2009 without any prepayment penalties.Ridges.

Unsecured Credit Facilities

Our primary source of liquidity is our two revolving credit facilities. We can borrow up to $337.0 million under these lines, which bear interest at an adjustable spread over LIBOR based on our public debt rating.

Credit Facility No. 1 is a four-year, $75.0 million unsecured credit facility expiring in June 2011, and may be extended for one year at our option. We had $28.0 millionno borrowings outstanding and $1.4$0.8 million in letters of credit issued as of December 31, 2009,2010, related to Credit Facility No. 1. Borrowings under the facility bear interest at our option of LIBOR plus a spread based on the credit rating on our publicly issued debt or the higher of SunTrust Bank’s prime rate and the Federal Funds Rate in effect plus 0.5%. The interest rate spread is currently 42.5 basis points. All outstanding advances are due and payable upon maturity in June 2011, and may be extended for one year at our option. Interest only payments are due and payable generally on a monthly basis. In addition, we pay a facility fee based on the credit rating of our publicly issued debt which currently equals 0.15% per annum of the $75.0 million committed capacity, without regard to usage. Rates and fees may be adjusted up or down based on changes in our senior unsecured credit ratings.

Credit Facility No. 2 is a four-year $262.0 million unsecured credit facility expiringoriginally set to expire in November 2010. In September 2010, and may be extended for one year atwe exercised our option.one-year extension option on Credit Facility No. 2, which now expires in November 2011. We had $100.0 million outstanding and $0.9 million in letters of credit issued as of December 31, 2009,2010, related to Credit Facility No. 2. Advances under this agreement bear interest at our option of LIBOR plus a spread based on the credit rating of our publicly issued debt or the higher of Wells Fargo Bank’s prime rate and the Federal Funds Rate in effect on that day plus 0.5%. The interest rate spread is currently 42.5 basis points. The $100.0 million outstanding balance was used to prepay the $100 million term loan, and the interest rate on this $100.0 million in borrowings is effectively fixed by interest rate swaps (see note 6 to the consolidated financial statements).swaps. An interest rate swap currently fixesfixed the interest rate at 3.375% (2.95% plus the 42.5 basis

point spread) through February 19, 2010, the terminal date for the swap. At thisthat point in time, a forward interest rate swap becomesbecame effective on February 20, 2010. We anticipate that theThe interest rate on the $100.0 million borrowing will beis currently 2.525% (2.10% plus the current interest rate spread of 42.5 basis points) through the forward interest rate swap’s maturity date of November 1, 2011.. All outstanding advances are due and payable upon maturity in November 2010, and may be extended for one year at our option.2011. Interest only payments are due and payable generally on a monthly basis. Credit Facility No. 2 requires us to pay the lender a facility fee on the total commitment of 0.15% per annum. These fees are payable quarterly.

We anticipate that, prior to the November 2011 expiration of Credit Facility No. 2, we will negotiate a replacement facility in the same or greater amount than the expiring facility. While we anticipate that the interest rate and facility fee of the replacement facility will be higher than the current facility, we do not expect the new terms to have a material adverse effect on our financial results.

Our unsecured credit facilities contain financial and other covenants with which we must comply. Some of these covenants include:

 

A minimum tangible net worth;

 

A maximum ratio of total liabilities to gross asset value, calculated using an estimate of fair market value of our assets;

 

A maximum ratio of secured indebtedness to gross asset value, calculated using an estimate of fair market value of our assets;

 

A minimum ratio of annual EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization) to fixed charges, including interest expense;

 

A minimum ratio of unencumbered asset value, calculated using aan estimate of fair value of our assets, to unsecured indebtedness;

 

A minimum ratio of net operating income from our unencumbered properties to unsecured interest expense; and

 

A maximum ratio of permitted investments to gross asset value, calculated using an estimate of fair market value of our assets.

Failure to comply with any of the covenants under our unsecured credit facilities or other debt instruments could result in a default under one or more of our debt instruments. This could cause our lenders to accelerate the timing of payments and would therefore have a material adverse effect on our business, operations, financial condition and liquidity. As of December 31, 2009,2010, we were in compliance with our loan covenants. In addition, our ability to draw on our unsecured credit facilities or incur other unsecured debt in the future could be restricted by the loan covenants.

We anticipate that in the near term we may rely to a greater extent upon our unsecured credit facilities and potentially maintain balances on our unsecured credit facilities for longer periods than has been our historical practice. To the extent that we maintain larger balances on our unsecured credit facilities or maintain balances on our unsecured credit facilities for longer periods, adverse fluctuations in interest rates could have a material adverse effect on earnings.

Unsecured Notes

We generally issue unsecured notes to fund our real estate assets long-term. In issuing future unsecured notes, we intend to ladder the maturities of our debt to mitigate exposure to interest rate risk in future years.

Depending upon market conditions, opportunities to issue unsecured notes on attractive terms may not be available. During periods in the recent past, debt capital was essentially unavailable for extended periods of time. While debt markets have materially improved, it is difficult to predict if the improvement is sustainable.

Our unsecured notes have maturities ranging from June 2011 through February 2028, as follows (in thousands):

 

  December 31,
2009

Note Principal
  December 31, 2010
Note Principal
 

5.95% notes due 2011

   150,000   $ 93,862  

5.05% notes due 2012

   50,000   50,000  

5.125% notes due 2013

   60,000   60,000  

5.25% notes due 2014

   100,000   100,000  

5.35% notes due 2015

   150,000   150,000  

4.95% notes due 2020

   250,000  

3.875% notes due 2026 (1)

   134,328   2,659  

7.25% notes due 2028

   50,000   50,000  
       
  $694,328  $756,521  
       

 

(1)

On or after September 20, 2011, we may redeem the convertible notes at a redemption price equal to the principal amount of the notes plus any accrued and unpaid interest, if any, up to, but excluding, the purchase date. In addition, on September 15, 2011, September 15, 2016 and September 15, 2021 or following the occurrence of certain change in control transactions prior to September 15, 2011, holders of these notes may require us to repurchase the notes for an amount equal to the principal amount of the notes plus any accrued and unpaid interest thereon.

Our unsecured notes contain covenants with which we must comply. These include:

 

Limits on our total indebtedness;

 

Limits on our secured indebtedness;

 

Limits on our required debt service payments; and

 

Maintenance of a minimum level of unencumbered assets.

Failure to comply with any of the covenants under our unsecured notes could result in a default under one or more of our debt instruments. This could cause our debt holders to accelerate the timing of payments and would therefore have a material adverse effect on our business, operations, financial condition and liquidity. As of December 31, 2009,2010, we were in compliance with our unsecured notes covenants.

During 2009,2010, we repurchased $109.7$131.7 million of our 3.875% convertible notes at an average price of 87.9%100.1% to 102.75% of par, resulting in a gainnet loss on extinguishment of debt of $6.8 million. During 2008, weWe also repurchased $16.0$56.1 million of our 3.87% convertible5.95% senior notes at 75.0%103.75% of par, resulting in a gainnet loss on extinguishment of debt of $2.9$2.4 million. We executed these repurchases using a portion of the proceeds from our issuance of $250.0 million of 4.95% notes due in 2020.

We may from time to time seek to repurchase and cancel our outstanding notes through open market purchases, privately negotiated transactions or otherwise. Such repurchases, if any, will depend on prevailing market conditions, our liquidity requirements, contractual restrictions and other factors. The amounts involved may be material.

Term Loan

On May 7, 2009, we entered into an agreement to modify our $100 million term loan with Wells Fargo, National Association to extend the maturity date from February 19, 2010 to November 1, 2011. This agreement also increased the interest rate on the $100 million term loan from LIBOR plus 1.50% to LIBOR plus 2.75%. To hedge our exposure to interest rate fluctuations on the $100 million term loan, we previously had entered into an interest rate swap on a notional amount of $100 million through the original maturity date of February 19, 2010. This interest rate swap had the effect of fixing the LIBOR portion of the interest rate on the $100 million term loan at 2.95% through February 2010. The interest rate after the agreement to extend the maturity date, taking into account the swap, was 5.70% (2.95% plus 275 basis points). On May 6, 2009, we entered into a forward interest rate swap on a notional amount of $100 million for the period from February 20, 2010 through the maturity date of November 1, 2011. This forward interest rate swap had the effect of fixing the LIBOR portion of the interest rate on the $100 million term loan at 2.10% from February 20, 2010 through November 1, 2011. The interest rate for that time period, taking into account the forward interest rate swap, would have been 4.85% (2.10% plus 275 basis points). The forward interest rate swap agreement is scheduled to settle contemporaneously with the maturity of the $100 million term loan.

On December 1, 2009, we prepaid the $100 million term loan using proceeds from our unsecured line of credit (see note 5 to the consolidated financial statements), incurring a loss on extinguishment of debt of $1.5 million. The interest rate swaps discussed in the preceding paragraph are now used to fix the current interest rate on the $100.0 million borrowing on our unsecured lines of credit at 3.375% (2.95% plus the 42.5 basis point spread on our unsecured lines of credit). When the forward interest rate swap becomes effective on February 20, 2010, we anticipate that the interest rate on the $100.0 million borrowing will be 2.525% (2.10% plus 42.5 basis points) through the forward interest rate swap’s maturity date of November 1, 2011.

Common Equity

We have authorized for issuance 100.0 million common shares, of which 59.865.9 million shares were outstanding at December 31, 2009.

During the second quarter of 2009, we completed a public offering of 5.25 million common shares priced at $21.40 per share, raising $107.5 million in net proceeds. The net proceeds were used to repay a mortgage note payable, borrowings under our unsecured lines of credit and for general corporate purposes.2010.

During the fourth quarter of 2009, we entered into a sales agency financing agreement with BNY Mellon Capital Markets, LLC relating to the issuance and sale of up to $250.0 million of the our common shares from time to time over a period of no more than 36 months, replacing a previous agreement made during the third quarter of 2008. Sales of our common shares are made at market prices prevailing at the time of sale. Net proceeds for the sale of common shares under this program are used for the repayment of borrowings under our lines of credit, acquisitions, and general corporate purposes. During 2009,2010, we issued 2.05.6 million common shares at a weighted average price of $27.37$30.34 under this program, raising $53.8 million in net proceeds. During 2008, we issued 1.1 million common shares at a weighted average price of $36.15 under this program, raising $40.7$168.9 million in net proceeds.

We have a dividend reinvestment program, whereby shareholders may use their dividends and optional cash payments to purchase common shares. The common shares sold under this program may either be common shares issued by us or common shares purchased in the open market. We used the net proceeds under this program for general corporate purposes. During 2009,2010, we issued 88,4600.2 million common shares at a weighted average price of $28.34$30.36 per share, raising $2.5$5.3 million in net proceeds.

Dividends

We pay dividends quarterly. The maintenance of these dividends is subject to various factors, including the discretion of our Board of Trustees, our results of operations, the ability to pay dividends under Maryland law, the availability of cash to make the necessary dividend payments and the effect of REIT distribution requirements, which require at least 90% of our taxable income to be distributed to shareholders. The table below details our dividend and distribution payments for 2010, 2009 2008 and 20072008 (in thousands).:

 

  2009  2008  2007  2010   2009   2008 

Common dividends

  $100,221  $85,564  $78,050  $108,949    $100,221    $85,564  

Noncontrolling interest distributions

   190   192   156   163     190     192  
                     
  $100,411  $85,756  $78,206  $109,112    $100,411    $85,756  
                     

Dividends paid for 2010 as compared to 2009 increased primarily due to our issuance of 5.6 million shares under our sales agency financing agreement during 2010.

Dividends paid for 2009 as compared to 2008 increased as a direct result of a dividend rate increase from $1.72 per share in 2008 to $1.73 per share in 2009. The dividends paid also increased due to our issuance of 5.25 million shares pursuant to a public offering and our issuance of 2.0 million under our sales agency financing agreement during 2009.

Dividends paid for 2008 as compared to 2007 increased as a direct result of a dividend rate increase from $1.68 per share in 2007 to $1.72 per share in 2008. The dividends paid also increased due to our issuance of 4.325 million shares pursuant to public offerings and our issuance of 1.1 million under our sales agency financing agreement during 2008.

Cash flows from operations are an important factor in our ability to sustain our dividend at its current rate. Cash flows from operations increased to $111.9 million in 2010 from $102.9 million in 2009, from $97.1 million in 2008, primarily due to higher income from real estate operations.lower interest payments. If our cash flows from operations were to decline significantly, we may have to borrow on our lines of credit to sustain the dividend rate or reduce our dividend.

Capital Commitments

We will require capital for development and redevelopment projects currently underway and in the future. As of December 31, 2009,2010, we had under development Dulles Station Phase II and 4661 Kenmore, in which we had invested $27.1$27.8 million and $5.2$5.5 million, respectively. We are also evaluating a number of potential redevelopment projects at properties such as Montgomery Village Center, Montrose Shopping Center and 7900 Westpark. There were no projects placed into service in 2009. As of December 31, 2009, we were committed to approximately $0.6 million of development spending during 2010, including $0.4 million of Dulles Station Phase I tenant related capital.2010.

We anticipate funding several major renovation projects in our portfolios during 2010,2011, as follows (in thousands):

 

Segment

  Project
Spending
  Project
Spending
 

Office buildings

  $4,361  $8,037  

Medical office buildings

   781   1,665  

Retail centers

   964   350  

Multifamily

   644   3,988  

Industrial

   62   —    
       

Total

  $6,812  $14,040  
       

These projects include elevator, restrooma new heating and air conditioning system at one of our multifamily properties, sprinkler system, heating and air conditioning and common area renovationsupgrades at several of our office and medical properties roof replacement projects at someand an installation of our retail properties, fire alarm and sprinkleran automated parking system upgrades at one of our multifamily properties and electrical upgrades at some of our industrialretail properties. Not all of the anticipated spending had been committed via executed construction contracts at December 31, 2009.2010. We expect to meet our requirements using cash generated by our real estate operations, through borrowings on our unsecured credit facilities, or raising additional debt or equity capital in the public market.

Contractual Obligations

Below is a summary of certain contractual obligations that will require significant capital (in thousands):

 

  Payments due by Period  Payments due by Period 
  Total  Less than
1 year
  1-3 years  4-5 years  After 5
years
  Total   Less than 1
year
   1-3 years   4-5 years   After 5
years
 

Long-term debt(1)

  $1,556,393  $165,417  $699,270  $324,368  $367,338  $1,602,779    $270,276    $480,793    $312,388    $539,322  

Purchase obligations(2)

   18,724   10,848   7,876   —     —     8,698     7,109     1,589     —       —    

Estimated development commitments(3)

   584   584   —     —     —     —       —       —       —       —    

Tenant-related capital(4)

   8,332   6,995   1,337   —     —     8,685     6,517     2,168     —       —    

Building capital(5)

   10,300   10,300   —     —     —     4,772     4,772     —       —       —    

Operating leases

   100   50   50   —     —     115     48     58     9     —    

 

(1)

See Notes 4, 5 and 6 of our consolidated financial statements. Amounts include principal, interest, unused commitment fees and facility fees.

(2)

Represents elevator maintenance contracts with terms through 2010,2011, electricity sales agreements with terms through 2012, and natural gas purchase agreements with terms through 2011.

(3)

Committed development obligations based on contracts in place as of December 31, 2009.2010.

(4)

Committed tenant-related capital based on executed leases as of December 31, 2009.2010.

(5)

Committed building capital additions based on contracts in place as of December 31, 2009.2010.

We have various standing or renewable contracts with vendors. The majority of these contracts are cancelable with immaterial or no cancellation penalties, with the exception of our elevator maintenance, electricity sales and natural gas purchase agreements, which are included above on the purchase obligations line. Contract terms on cancelable leases are generally one year or less. We are currently committed to fund tenant-related capital improvements as described in the table above for executed leases. However, expected leasing levels could require additional tenant-related capital improvements which are not currently committed. We expect that total tenant-related capital improvements, including those already committed, will be approximately $25.7$15.7 million in 2010.2011. Due to the competitive office leasing market we expect that tenant-related capital costs will continue at this level into 2011.2012.

Historical Cash Flows

Consolidated cash flow information is summarized as follows (in millions):

 

  For the year ended
December 31,
 Variance   For the year ended December 31, Variance 
  2009 2008 2007 2009 vs.
2008
 2008 vs.
2007
   2010 2009 2008 2010 vs.
2009
 2009 vs.
2008
 

Cash provided by operating activities

  $102.9   $97.1   $116.5   $5.8   $(19.4  $111.9   $102.9   $97.1   $9.0   $5.8  

Cash used in investing activities

  $(12.8 $(181.4 $(349.1 $168.6   $167.7    $(111.1 $(12.8 $(181.4 $(98.3 $168.6  

Cash provided by (used in) financing activities

  $(90.8 $74.7   $245.4   $(165.5 $(170.7  $66.8   $(90.8 $74.7   $157.6   $(165.5

Operations generated $111.9 million of net cash in 2010 compared to $102.9 million in 2009. The increase in cash provided by operating activities in 2010 as compared to 2009 was primarily due to lower interest payments.

Operations generated $102.9 million of net cash in 2009 compared to $97.1 million in 2008. The increase in cash provided by operating activities in 2009 as compared to 2008 was primarily due to higher income from real estate operations.

Operations generated $97.1 million ofOur investing activities used net cash in 2008 compared to $116.5of $111.1 million in 2007.2010 and $12.8 million in 2009. The decreaseincrease in cash providedused by operatinginvesting activities in 2008 as compared to 20072010 was primarily due to the increase in cash invested in acquisitions, net of assumed debt, throughout 2010, which was $136.1 million higher interest payments, lower prepaid rents and the payout of contractors’ retainage related to our development projects.than 2009.

Our investing activities used net cash of $12.8 million in 2009 and $181.4 million in 2008. The decrease in cash used by investing activities in 2009 was primarily due to the decrease in cash invested in acquisitions, net of assumed debt, throughout 2009, which was $148.4 million lower than 2008.

Our investingfinancing activities usedgenerated $66.8 million of net cash of $181.4in 2010 and used $90.8 million in 2008 and $349.1 million2009. The net increase in 2007. The decrease innet cash usedprovided by investingfinancing activities in 20082010 was primarily due to the $168.2 millionresult of cash invested in acquisitions, net of assumedthe proceeds from our debt throughout 2008, which was $125.9 million lower than 2007. In addition, cash spent onoffering and equity issued under our development projects decreased to $15.5 million from $67.0 million in 2007, as our three major development projects (Bennett Park, Clayborne Apartments and Dulles Station, Phase I) were completed and placed into service during 2007 and 2008.sales agency financing agreement.

Our financing activities used net cash of $90.8 million in 2009 and provided $74.7 million in 2008. The net increase in net cash used by financing activities in 2009 was primarily the result of using cash from operations and the proceeds from equity issuances, property sales and a new mortgage note to pay dividends, repurchase convertible notes and prepay a mortgage note.

Our financing activities provided net cash of $74.7 million in 2008 and $245.4 million in 2007. The decrease in net cash provided by financing activities in 2008 was primarily the result of using much of the borrowings and proceeds from equity issuances to pay down the lines of credit and to pay off the $60 million MOPPRS debt and the related $8.4 million loss on extinguishment. Also, on December 17, 2008 we repurchased $16.0 million of the convertible notes for $12.5 million. The 2007 borrowings and proceeds from equity issuance were primarily used for the acquisition of new properties.

Capital Improvements and Development Costs

Capital improvements and development costs of $29.5$26.4 million were completed in 2009,2010, including tenant improvements. CapitalThese improvements to our properties in 2009 and development costs in 2008 and 2007 were $52.8$29.5 million and $108.1$52.8 million, respectively. We consider capital improvements to be accretive to revenue butand not necessarily to net income.

Our capital improvement and development costs for the three years ending December 31, 20092010 were as follows (in thousands):

 

  Year Ended December 31,  Year Ended December 31, 
  2009  2008  2007  2010   2009   2008 

Accretive capital improvements:

            

Acquisition related

  $2,696  $6,012  $1,954  $1,007    $2,696    $6,012  

Expansions and major renovations

   5,557   9,591   10,684   3,180     5,557     9,591  

Development/redevelopment

   2,135   15,509   66,996   1,337     2,135     15,509  

Tenant improvements (including first generation leases)

   12,874   11,359   16,587   15,162     12,874     11,359  
                     

Total accretive capital improvements

   23,262   42,471   96,221   20,686     23,262     42,471  

Other:

   6,210   10,310   11,897

Other capital improvements:

   5,696     6,210     10,310  
                     

Total

  $29,472  $52,781  $108,118  $26,382    $29,472    $52,781  
                     

Accretive Capital Improvements

Acquisition Related Improvements:Acquisition related improvements are capital improvements to properties acquired during the preceding three years which were anticipated at the time we acquired the properties. These types of improvements were made in 20092010 to 6100 Columbia Park Drive,2445 M Street, 2440 M Street, NW, 2000 M Street, Sterling Medical and Alexandria Professional Center.Lansdowne Medical.

Expansions and Major Renovations:Expansion projects increase the rentable area of a property, while major renovation projects are improvements sufficient to increase the income otherwise achievable at a property. 20092010 expansions and major renovations included garage renovations at 7900 Westpark; elevator modernization and garage renovations at One Central Plaza; elevator modernization at Walker House apartments; common area and unit renovations for Bethesda Hill and Park Adams apartments; roof replacement at Montgomery Village Center; elevator and lobby modernization at Alexandria Professional Center; and lobby and corridor renovationsroof replacement at 8301 Arlington Boulevard.2000 M Street.

Development/Re-development:Development costs represent expenditures for ground up development of new operating properties. Re-development costs represent expenditures for improvements intended to re-position properties in their markets and increase income that would be otherwise be achievable. Development costs in each of the years presented include costs associated with the ground up development of Dulles Station, Bennett Park and Clayborne. Completion of Bennett Park, our residential project under development in Arlington, VA, occurred in the third quarter 2007 for the mid-rise building and fourth quarter 2007 for the high-rise building. Completion of Clayborne Apartments, our residential project under construction in Alexandria, VA, occurred in the first quarter 2008. Completion of Phase I of Dulles Station, our 540,000 square foot office project in Herndon, VA, of which Phase I represents 180,000 square feet, occurred in the third quarter of 2007 and the property was substantially leased in the third quarter of 2008. Additionally in 2007, we acquired land for future development of medical office space at 4661 Kenmore in Alexandria, VA. Development spending in 2009 and 2008 includes pre-development activities related to this project. In 2007, re-development costs were incurred for the Shoppes of Foxchase, which was substantially completed in 2006.Avenue.

Tenant Improvements: Tenant improvements are costs, such as space build-out, associated with commercial lease transactions. Our average Tenant Improvement Costsimprovement costs per square foot of space leased, excluding first generation leases, were as follows during the three years ended December 31, 2009:2010:

 

  Year Ended December 31, 
  Year Ended December 31,   2010     2009     2008  
  2009  2008  2007            

Office Buildings*

  $11.68  $13.03  $13.59  $19.95    $11.60    $13.15  

Medical Office Buildings

  $14.33  $19.12  $13.95  $16.24    $13.87    $19.12  

Retail Centers

  $3.91  $3.61  $1.84  $3.23    $3.91    $3.61  

Industrial/Flex Properties*

  $1.03  $1.71  $2.61  $1.45    $0.30    $1.68  

 

*Excludes properties sold or classified as held for sale.

The $1.35$8.35 increase in tenant improvement costs per square foot of space leased for office buildings in 2010 was primarily due to leases executed with single tenants in 2010 requiring $5.4 million in tenant improvements at Monument II, 2000 M Street, 7900 Westpark and 1600 Wilson Boulevard. The $1.55 decrease in tenant improvement costs per square foot of space leased for office buildings in 2009 was primarily due to a decrease in the per square foot costcosts associated with expansion leases due toand leases executed with a single tenant in 2008 requiring $1.1 million in tenant improvements. The $0.56$2.37 increase in 2010 and $5.25 decrease in tenant improvement costs per square foot of space leased for office buildings in 2008 was primarily due to leases executed at 6110 Executive Boulevard and 30 West Gude requiring $1.3 million and $0.7 million, respectively, in tenant improvements in 2007, including $1.1 million and $0.4 million, respectively, for a single tenant. The $4.79 decrease in 2009 and $5.17 increase in 2008 in tenant improvement costs per square foot of space leased for medical office buildings was primarily due to single tenant leases executed in 2010 at Woodburn II in 2008,Shady Grove Medical requiring $1.6$1.3 million in tenant improvements including $1.2and $1.7 million in single tenant improvements required for a single tenant;leases executed in 2008 at Woodburn II and at 8503 Arlington Boulevard, for leasesBoulevard. The $0.68 decrease in 2008 requiring $0.5 milliontenant improvement costs per square foot of retail space leased in improvements for a single tenant. The2010 and the $0.30 increase in tenant improvement costs per square foot of retail space leased in 2009 was primarily due to a single tenant lease executed at the Centre at Hagerstown in 2009 requiring $0.7 million in tenant improvements. The $1.77$1.15 increase in tenant improvement costs per square foot of retailindustrial space leased in 20082010 was primarily due to a single leasetenant leases executed in 2010 at Montrose Center,Fullerton Business, NVIP and 8900 Telegraph Road requiring $0.5 million in tenant improvements. The $0.68$1.38 decrease in tenant improvement costs per square foot of industrial space leased in 2009 was primarily due to an increase in the percentage of renewal, as opposed to new, leases executed, combined with a decrease in the averagesingle tenant size, requiring lower tenant improvement expenditures. The $0.90 decrease in tenant improvement costs per square foot of industrial space leased in 2008 was primarily due to leases executed in 20072008 at DullesPickett, Douglas Business Park and Gorman RoadAlbemarle requiring $0.8$0.5 million and $0.4 million, respectively, in tenant improvements, entirely for single tenants.improvements. The retail and industrial tenant improvement costs are substantially lower than office and medical office improvement costs due to the tenant improvements required in these property types being substantially less extensive than in office and medical.

Excluding properties sold or classified as held for sale, approximately 67%59% of our tenants renewed their leases with us in 2009,2010, compared to 62%69% in 20082009 and 80%63% in 2007.2008. Renewing tenants generally require minimal tenant improvements. In addition, lower tenant improvement costs are one of the many benefits of our focus on leasing to smaller office tenants. Smaller office suites have limited configuration alternatives. Therefore, we are often able to lease an existing suite with limited tenant improvements.

Other Capital Improvements

Other capital improvements are those not included in the above categories. These are also referred to as recurring capital improvements. Over time these costs will be recurring in nature to maintain a property’s income and value. In our multifamily properties, these include new appliances, flooring, cabinets and bathroom fixtures. These improvements, which are made as needed upon vacancy of an apartment, totaled $0.6$0.7 million in 2009,2010, and averaged $505$738 per apartment for the 46%39% of apartments turned over relative to our total portfolio of apartment units. In our commercial properties and multifamily properties aside from apartment turnover discussed above, improvements include installation of new heating and air conditioning equipment, asphalt replacement, new signage, permanent landscaping, window replacements, new lighting and new finishes. In addition, during 2009,2010, we incurred repair and maintenance expenses of $12.1$12.5 million that were not capitalized, to maintain the quality of our buildings.

Forward-Looking Statements

This Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements which involve risks and uncertainties. Such forward looking statements include each of the statements in “Item 1: Business” and “Item 7: Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Conditions and Results of Operations” concerning the Washington metro region’s economy, gross regional product, unemployment and job growth and real estate market performance. Such forward-looking statements also include the following statements with respect to WRIT: (a) our intention to invest in properties that we believe will increase in income and value; (b) our belief that external sources of capital will continue to be available and that additional sources of capital will be available from the sale of common shares or notes; and (c) our belief that we have the liquidity and capital resources necessary to meet our known obligations and to make additional property acquisitions

and capital improvements when appropriate to enhance long-term growth. Forward-looking statements also include other statements in this report preceded by, followed by or that include the words “believe,” ��expect,“expect,” “intend,” “anticipate,” “potential,” “project,” “will” and other similar expressions.

We claim the protection of the safe harbor for forward-looking statements contained in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 for the foregoing statements. The following important factors, in addition to those discussed elsewhere in this Form 10-K, could affect our future results and could cause those results to differ materially from those expressed in the forward-looking statements: (a) the effect of the recent credit and financial market conditions; (b) the availability and cost of capital; (c) fluctuations in interest rates; (d) the economic health of our tenants; (e) the timing and pricing of lease transactions; (f) the economic health of the greater Washington Metro region, or other markets we may enter; (g) the effects of changes in Federal government spending; (h) the supply of competing properties; (i) consumer confidence; (j) unemployment rates; (k) consumer tastes and preferences; (l) our future capital requirements; (m) inflation; (n) compliance with applicable laws, including those concerning the environment and access by persons with disabilities; (o) governmental or regulatory actions and initiatives; (p) changes in general economic and business conditions; (q) terrorist attacks or actions; (r) acts of war; (s) weather conditions; (t) the effects of changes in capital available to the technology and biotechnology sectors of the economy, and (u) other factors discussed under the caption “Risk Factors.” We undertake no obligation to update our forward-looking statements or risk factors to reflect new information, future events, or otherwise.

Ratios of Earnings to Fixed Charges and Debt Service Coverage

The following table sets forth our ratios of earnings to fixed charges and debt service coverage for the periods shown:

 

  Year Ended December 31,   Year Ended December 31, 
  2009 2008 2007   2010   2009   2008 

Earnings to fixed charges

  1.32 1.07 1.25   1.18x     1.30x     1.03x  

Debt service coverage

  2.49 2.21 2.42   2.60x     2.44x     2.30x  

We computed the ratio of earnings to fixed charges by dividing earnings by fixed charges. For this purpose, earnings consist of income from continuing operations attributable to the controlling interests plus fixed charges, less capitalized interest. Fixed charges consist of interest expense, including amortized costs of debt issuance, and interest costs capitalized.

We computed the debt service coverage ratio by dividing EBITDA (which is earnings before interest income and expense, taxes, depreciation, amortization and gain on sale of real estate) by interest expense and principal amortization.

Funds From Operations

FFO is a widely used measure of operating performance for real estate companies. We provide FFO as a supplemental measure to net income calculated in accordance with GAAP. Although FFO is a widely used measure of operating performance for REITs, FFO does not represent net income calculated in accordance with GAAP. As such, it should not be considered an alternative to net income as an indication of our operating performance. In addition, FFO does not represent cash generated from operating activities in accordance with GAAP, nor does it represent cash available to pay distributions and should not be considered as an alternative to cash flow from operating activities, determined in accordance with GAAP, as a measure of our liquidity. The National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts, Inc. (“NAREIT”) defines FFO (April, 2002 White Paper) as net income (computed in accordance with GAAP) excluding gains (or losses) from sales of property plus real estate depreciation and amortization. We consider FFO to be a standard supplemental measure for REITs because it facilitates an understanding of the operating performance of our properties without giving effect to real estate depreciation and amortization, which historically assumes that the value of real estate assets diminishes predictably over time. Since real estate values have instead historically risen or fallen with market conditions, we believe that FFO more accurately provides investors an indication of our ability to incur and service debt, make capital expenditures and fund other needs. Our FFO may not be comparable to FFO reported by other REITs. These other REITs may not define the term in accordance with the current NAREIT definition or may interpret the current NAREIT definition differently.

The following table provides the calculation of our FFO and a reconciliation of FFO to net income for the years presented (in thousands):

 

   2009  2008  2007 

Net income attributable to the controlling interests

  $40,745   $27,082   $57,451  

Adjustments

    

Depreciation and amortization

   94,042    85,659    68,364  

Gain on sale of real estate

   (13,348  (15,275  (25,022

Gain from non-disposal activities

   (73  (17  (1,303

Discontinued operations depreciation and amortization

   405    1,239    2,661  
             

FFO as defined by NAREIT

  $121,771   $98,688   $102,151  
             

   2010  2009  2008 

Net income attributable to the controlling interests

  $37,426   $40,745   $27,082  

Adjustments

    

Depreciation and amortization

   93,992    91,668    82,982  

Gain on sale of real estate

   (21,599  (13,348  (15,275

Gain from non-disposal activities

   (7  (73  (17

Discontinued operations depreciation and amortization

   1,754    2,779    3,916  
             

FFO as defined by NAREIT

  $111,566   $121,771   $98,688  
             
ITEM 7A:QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

ITEM 7A: QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

The principal material financial market risk to which we are exposed is interest rate risk. Our exposure to interest rate risk relates primarily to refinancing long-term fixed rate obligations, the opportunity cost of fixed rate obligations in a falling interest rate environment and our variable rate lines of credit. We primarily enter into debt obligations to support general corporate purposes, including acquisition of real estate properties, capital improvements and working capital needs. In the past we have used interest rate hedge agreements to hedge against rising interest rates in anticipation of imminent refinancing or new debt issuance.

The table below presents principal, interest and related weighted average fair value interest rates by year of maturity, with respect to debt outstanding on December 31, 2009.2010.

 

  2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Thereafter Total Fair Value  2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Thereafter Total Fair Value 

(In thousands)

          

Unsecured fixed rate debt

                  

Principal

   —     $284,328   $50,000   $60,000   $100,000   $200,000   $694,328   $693,620  $96,521   $50,000   $60,000   $100,000   $150,000   $300,000   $756,521   $785,637  

Interest payments

  $36,630   $32,168   $21,238   $18,438   $14,275   $52,949   $175,698     $37,770   $33,613   $30,812   $26,650   $20,012   $107,188   $256,045   

Interest rate on debt maturities

   —      5.91  5.06  5.23  5.34  5.85  5.69    5.94  5.06  5.23  5.34  5.35  5.44  5.43 

Unsecured variable rate debt

                  

Principal

  $100,000(a)  $28,000    —      —      —      —     $128,000   $128,000  $100,000(a)   —      —      —      —      —     $100,000   $100,000  

Variable interest rate on debt maturities(b)

   3.39  0.66  —      —      —      —      2.79    2.53   —      —      —      —      2.53 

Mortgages

                  

Principal amortization (30 year schedule)

  $4,510   $13,788   $21,823   $107,123   $2,038   $263,579   $412,861   $406,982  $13,349   $21,362   $106,630   $1,516   $20,041   $223,978   $386,876   $399,282  

Interest payments

  $23,869   $23,507   $22,203   $16,600   $15,011   $43,853   $145,043     $22,251   $20,971   $15,399   $13,841   $13,671   $16,820   $102,953   

Weighted average interest rate on principal amortization

   5.48  5.33  4.93  5.58  5.50  6.20  5.92    5.32  4.92  5.58  5.39  5.30  6.35  5.96 

 

(a)

This $100.0 million borrowing was made under a line of credit which matures in 20102011 and bears interest at a variable rate, which has been effectively fixed at 3.375% by an interest rate swap through February 19, 2010. The interest rate is effectively fixed at 2.525% through a forward interest rate swap from February 20, 2010 through November 1, 20112011. See note 5 to the consolidated financial statements for further discussion.

(b)

Variable interest rates based on LIBOR in effect on our borrowings outstanding at December 31, 2009.

2010.

ITEM 8:FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

ITEM 8:  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

The financial statements and supplementary data appearing on pages 6568 to 106107 are incorporated herein by reference.

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

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

None.

ITEM 9A:CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

ITEM 9A:  CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

We maintain disclosure controls and procedures that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed in our Securities Exchange Act reports is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms, and that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Executive Vice President of Accounting and Administration, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. In designing and evaluating the disclosure controls and procedures, management recognized 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.

We carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Executive Vice President of Accounting and Administration, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures as of December 31, 2009.2010. Based on the foregoing, our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Executive Vice President of Accounting and Administration concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective at a reasonable assurance level.

Internal Control over Financial Reporting

See the Report of Management in Item 8 of this Form 10-K.

See the Reports of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm in Item 8 of this Form 10-K.

During the three months ended December 31, 2009,2010, there was no change in our internal control over financial reporting that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

ITEM 9B:OTHER INFORMATION

ITEM 9B:  OTHER INFORMATION

None.

PART III

Certain information required by Part III is omitted from this Form 10-K in that we will file a definitive proxy statement pursuant to Regulation 14A with respect to our 20102011 Annual Meeting (the “Proxy Statement”) no later than 120 days after the end of the fiscal year covered by this Form 10-K, and certain information included therein is incorporated herein by reference. Only those sections of the Proxy Statement which specifically address the items set forth herein are incorporated by reference. In addition, we have adopted a code of ethics which can be reviewed and printed from our websitewww.writ.com.

ITEM 10:DIRECTORS AND EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

ITEM 10:  DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

The information required by this Item is hereby incorporated herein by reference to the Proxy Statement.

ITEM 11:EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

ITEM 11:  EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

The information required by this Item is hereby incorporated herein by reference to the Proxy Statement.

ITEM 12:SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS

ITEM 12:  SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS

The information required under this Item by Item 403 of Regulation S-K is hereby incorporated herein by reference to the Proxy Statement.

Equity Compensation Plan Information(1)

 

Plan Category

  Number of securities to be
issued upon exercise of
outstanding options, warrants
and rights
 Weighted-average exercise
price of outstanding options,
warrants and rights
  Number of securities remaining
available for future issuance
under equity compensation
plans (excluding securities
reflected in column (a))
  Number of securities to be
issued upon exercise of
outstanding options, warrants
and rights
 Weighted-average  exercise
price of outstanding options,
warrants and rights
   Number of securities  remaining
available for future issuance
under equity compensation
plans (excluding securities
reflected in column (a))
 
  (a) (b)   (c) 
  (a) (b)  (c)

Equity compensation plans approved by security holders

  282,289   25.03  1,685,354   115,985    26.15     1,529,301  

Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders

  32,000(2)  28.52  —     30,000(2)   29.00     —    
                    

Total

  314,289   25.39  1,685,354   145,985    26.74     1,529,301  

 

(1)

We previously maintained a Share Grant Plan for officers, trustees and non-officer employees, which expired on December 15, 2007. 322,325 shares and 27,675 restricted share units had been granted under this plan. We previously maintained a stock option plan for trustees which provided for the annual granting of 2,000 non-qualified stock options to trustees the last of which were granted in 2004. The plan expired on December 15, 2007, and 84,000 options had been granted. See note 7 to the consolidated financial statements for further discussion.

(2)

These securities are options issued under a Share Grant Plan for officers, trustees and non-officer employees. This plan expired on December 15, 2007 and options may no longer be issued thereafter.thereunder.

ITEM 13.:  CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE

ITEM 13.:CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE

The information required by this Item is hereby incorporated herein by reference to the Proxy Statement.

ITEM 14:PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES

ITEM 14:  PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES

The information required by this Item is hereby incorporated herein by reference to the Proxy Statement.

PART IV

ITEM 15:EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES

ITEM 15:  EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES

(A). The following documents are filed as part of this Form 10-K:

 

Page

1.

  Financial Statements  Page
  

Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

 65
  

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

 66
  

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

 67
  

Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 20092010 and 20082009

 68
  

Consolidated Statements of Income for the Years Ended December 31, 2010, 2009 2008 and 20072008

 69
  

Consolidated Statements of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity for the Years Ended December 31, 2010, 2009 2008 and 20072008

 70
  

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Years Ended December 31, 2010, 2009 2008 and 20072008

 73
  

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

 74

2.

  

Financial Statement Schedules

��   

Schedule III – Consolidated Real Estate and Accumulated Depreciation

  103104

3.

  

Exhibits:

  

 

      Incorporated by Reference    

Exhibit
Number

  

Exhibit Description

  Form  File
Number
  Exhibit  Filing Date  Filed
Herewith
 

3.1

  Declaration of Trust.  8-B  001-06622  3  7/10/1996  

3.2

  Amendment to Declaration of Trust dated September 21, 1998.  10-Q  001-06622  3  11/13/1998  

3.3

  Articles of Amendment to Declaration of Trust dated June 24, 1999.  S-3  333-81913  4(c)  7/14/1999  

3.4

  Articles of Amendment to Declaration of Trust dated June 1, 2006  S-3  333-136921  4(d)  8/28/2006  

3.5

  Amended and Restated Bylaws dated October 22, 2009  8-K  001-06622  3.1  10/27/2009  

4.1

  Indenture dated as of August 1, 1996 between WRIT and The First National Bank of Chicago  8-K  001-06622  (c)  8/13/1996  

4.2

  Form of 2028 Notes  8-K  001-06622  99.1  2/25/1998  

4.3

  Officer’s Certificate Establishing Terms of the 2013 Notes, dated March 12, 2003  8-K  001-06622  4(a)  3/17/2003  

4.4

  Form of 2013 Notes  8-K  001-06622  4(b)  3/17/2003  

      Incorporated by Reference   

Exhibit
Number

  

Exhibit Description

  Form  File
Number
  Exhibit  Filing Date  Filed
Herewith
4.5    Officers’ Certificate Establishing Terms of the 2014 Notes, dated December 8, 2003  8-K  001-06622  4(a)  12/11/2003  
4.6    Form of 2014 Notes  8-K  001-06622  4(b)  12/11/2003  
4.7    Form of 5.05% Senior Notes due May 1, 2012  8-K  001-06622  4.1  4/26/2005  
4.8    Form of 5.35% Senior Notes due May 1, 2015 dated April 26, 2005  8-K  001-06622  4.2  4/26/2005  
4.9    Officers Certificate establishing the terms of the 2012 and 2015 Notes, dated April 20, 2005  8-K  001-06622  4.3  4/26/2005  
4.10  Form of 5.35% Senior Notes due May 1, 2015 dated October 6, 2005  8-K  001-06622  4.1  10/6/2005  
4.11  Officers Certificate establishing the terms of the 2015 Notes, dated October 3, 2005  8-K  001-06622  4.2  10/6/2005  
4.12  Form of 5.95% Senior Notes due June 15, 2011  8-K  001-06622  4.1  6/6/2006  
4.13  Officers’ Certificate establishing the terms of the 2011 Notes, dated June 6, 2006  8-K  001-06622  4.2  6/6/2006  
4.14  Form of 3.875% Senior Convertible Notes due September 15, 2026  424B5  333-114410    9/11/2006  
4.15  Officers’ Certification establishing the terms of the Convertible Notes, dated September 11, 2006  424B5  333-114410    9/11/2006  
4.16  Form of additional 3.875% Senior Convertible Notes due September 15, 2026  8-K  001-06622  4.1  9/26/2006  
4.17  Form of 5.95% senior notes due June 15, 2011, dated July 21, 2006  424B5  333-114410    7/21/2006  
4.18  Officers’ Certification establishing the terms of the 2011 Notes, dated July 21, 2006  424B5  333-114410    7/21/2006  
4.19  Credit agreement dated November 2, 2006 between Washington Real Estate Investment Trust as borrower and a syndicate of banks as lender with The Bank of New York as documentation agent, The Royal Bank of Scotland, plc as syndication agent and Wells Fargo Bank, NA, as agent  8-K  001-06622  4.1  11/8/2006  
      Incorporated by Reference   

Exhibit
Number

  

Exhibit Description

  Form  File
Number
  Exhibit Filing Date  Filed
Herewith

4.5

  Officers’ Certificate Establishing Terms of the 2014 Notes, dated December 8, 2003  8-K  001-06622  4(a) 12/11/2003  

4.6

  Form of 2014 Notes  8-K  001-06622  4(b) 12/11/2003  

4.7

  Form of 5.05% Senior Notes due May 1, 2012  8-K  001-06622  4.1 4/26/2005  

4.8

  Form of 5.35% Senior Notes due May 1, 2015 dated April 26, 2005  8-K  001-06622  4.2 4/26/2005  

4.9

  Officers Certificate establishing the terms of the 2012 and 2015 Notes, dated April 20, 2005  8-K  001-06622  4.3 4/26/2005  

4.10

  Form of 5.35% Senior Notes due May 1, 2015 dated October 6, 2005  8-K  001-06622  4.1 10/6/2005  

4.11

  Officers Certificate establishing the terms of the 2015 Notes, dated October 3, 2005  8-K  001-06622  4.2 10/6/2005  

4.12

  Form of 5.95% Senior Notes due June 15, 2011  8-K  001-06622  4.1 6/6/2006  

4.13

  Officers’ Certificate establishing the terms of the 2011 Notes, dated June 6, 2006  8-K  001-06622  4.2 6/6/2006  

4.14

  Form of 3.875% Senior Convertible Notes due September 15, 2026  424B5  333-114410   9/11/2006  

4.15

  Officers’ Certification establishing the terms of the Convertible Notes, dated September 11, 2006  424B5  333-114410   9/11/2006  

4.16

  Form of additional 3.875% Senior Convertible Notes due September 15, 2026  8-K  001-06622  4.1 9/26/2006  

4.17

  Form of 5.95% senior notes due June 15, 2011, dated July 21, 2006  424B5  333-114410   7/21/2006  

4.18

  Officers’ Certification establishing the terms of the 2011 Notes, dated July 21, 2006  424B5  333-114410   7/21/2006  

  4.19

  Credit agreement dated November 2, 2006 between Washington Real Estate Investment Trust as borrower and a syndicate of banks as lender with The Bank of New York as documentation agent, The Royal Bank of Scotland, plc as syndication agent and Wells Fargo Bank, NA, as agent  8-K  001-06622  4.1 11/8/2006  

      Incorporated by Reference   

Exhibit
Number

  

Exhibit Description

  Form  File
Number
  Exhibit  Filing Date  Filed
Herewith
4.20    Form of 3.875% Convertible Senior Notes due September 15, 2026  8-K  001-06622  4.1  1/23/2007  
4.21    Officers’ Certificate establishing the terms of the 3.85% Convertible Senior Notes due September 15, 2026  8-K  001-06622  4.1  1/23/2007  
4.22    Form of additional 3.85% Convertible Senior Notes due September 15, 2026  8-K  001-06622  4.1  2/2/2007  
4.23    Supplemental Indenture by and between WRIT and the Bank of New York Trust Company, N.A. dated as of July 3, 2007  8-K  001-06622  4.1  7/5/2007  
4.24    Credit agreement dated June 29, 2007 by and among WRIT, as borrower, the financial institutions party thereto as lenders, and SunTrust Bank as agent  8-K  001-06622  4.1  7/6/2007  
4.25    Term Loan Agreement dated as of February 21, 2008, by and between WRIT and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association  8-K  001-06622  4.1  2/27/2008  
4.26    Multifamily Note Agreement (Walker House Apartments) dated as of May 29, 2008, by and between WRIT and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association  10-Q  001-06622  4  8/8/2008  
4.27    Multifamily Note Agreement (3801 Connecticut Avenue) dated as of May 29, 2008, by and between WRIT and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association  10-Q  001-06622  4  8/8/2008  
4.28    Multifamily Note Agreement (Bethesda Hill Apartments) dated as of May 29, 2008, by and between WRIT and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association  10-Q  001-06622  4  8/8/2008  
4.29    First Amendment to Term Loan Agreement dated as of May 7, 2009, by and between WRIT and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association  10-Q  001-06622  4(rr)  8/7/2009  
10.1    Purchase and Sale Agreement dated as of June 16, 2008, for 2445 M Street, NW, Washington, DC  10-Q  001-06622  10  8/8/2008  
10.2*  1991 Incentive Stock Option Plan, as amended  S-3  033-60581  10(b)  7/17/1995  
10.3*  Deferred Compensation Plan for Executives dated January 1, 2000  10-K  001-06622  10(g)  3/19/2001  
10.4*  Split-Dollar Agreement dated April 1, 2000  10-K  001-06622  10(h)  3/19/2001  
      Incorporated by Reference    

Exhibit
Number

  

Exhibit Description

  Form  File
Number
  Exhibit Filing Date  Filed
Herewith
 

4.20

  Form of 3.875% Convertible Senior Notes due September 15, 2026  8-K  001-06622  4.1 1/23/2007  

4.21

  Officers’ Certificate establishing the terms of the 3.85% Convertible Senior Notes due September 15, 2026  8-K  001-06622  4.1 1/23/2007  

4.22

  Form of additional 3.85% Convertible Senior Notes due September 15, 2026  8-K  001-06622  4.1 2/2/2007  

4.23

  Supplemental Indenture by and between WRIT and the Bank of New York Trust Company, N.A. dated as of July 3, 2007  8-K  001-06622  4.1 7/5/2007  

4.24

  Credit agreement dated June 29, 2007 by and among WRIT, as borrower, the financial institutions party thereto as lenders, and SunTrust Bank as agent  8-K  001-06622  4.1 7/6/2007  

4.25

  Term Loan Agreement dated as of February 21, 2008, by and between WRIT and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association  8-K  001-06622  4.1 2/27/2008  

4.26

  Multifamily Note Agreement (Walker House Apartments) dated as of May 29, 2008, by and between WRIT and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association  10-Q  001-06622  4 8/8/2008  

4.27

  Multifamily Note Agreement (3801 Connecticut Avenue) dated as of May 29, 2008, by and between WRIT and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association  10-Q  001-06622  4 8/8/2008  

4.28

  Multifamily Note Agreement (Bethesda Hill Apartments) dated as of May 29, 2008, by and between WRIT and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association  10-Q  001-06622  4 8/8/2008  

4.29

  First Amendment to Term Loan Agreement dated as of May 7, 2009, by and between WRIT and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association  10-Q  001-06622  4(rr) 8/7/2009  

4.30

  Form of 4.95% Senior Notes due October 1, 2020  8-K  001-06622  4.1 9/30/2010  

4.31

  Officers’ Certificate establishing the terms of the 4.95% Senior Notes due October 1, 2020  8-K  001-06622  4.2 9/30/2010  

10.1   

  Purchase and Sale Agreement dated as of June 16, 2008, for 2445 M Street, NW, Washington, DC  10-Q  001-06622  10 8/8/2008  

      Incorporated by Reference   

Exhibit
Number

  

Exhibit Description

  Form  File
Number
  Exhibit  Filing Date  Filed
Herewith

10.2*  

1991 Incentive Stock Option Plan, as amendedS-3033-6058110(b)7/17/1995

10.3*  

Deferred Compensation Plan for Executives dated January 1, 200010-K�� 001-0662210(g)3/19/2001

10.4*  

Split-Dollar Agreement dated April 1, 200010-K001-0662210(h)3/19/2001

10.5*  

  2001 Stock Option Plan  DEF 14A  001-06622  A  3/29/2001  

10.6*  

  Share Purchase Plan  10-Q  001-06622  10(j)  11/14/2002  

10.7*  

  Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan  10-Q  001-06622  10(k)  11/14/2002  

10.8*  

  Description of WRIT Short-term and Long-term Incentive Plan  10-K  001-06622  10(l)  3/16/2005  

10.9*  

  Description of WRIT Revised Trustee Compensation Plan  10-K  001-06622  10(m)  3/16/2005  

10.10*

  Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan  10-K  001-06622  10(p)  3/16/2006  

10.11*

  

Change in control Agreement dated May 22, 2003 with

Thomas L. Regnell

  10-K  001-06622  10(q)  3/16/2006  

10.12*

  

Change in control Agreement dated June 13, 2005 with

David A. DiNardo

  10-K  001-06622  10(r)  3/16/2006  

10.13*

  

Change in control Agreement dated May 22, 2003 with

Laura M. Franklin

  10-K  001-06622  10(t)  3/16/2006  

10.14*

  

Change in control Agreement dated January 1, 2006 with

James B. Cederdahl

  10-K  001-06622  10(w)  3/16/2006  

10.15*

  Long Term Incentive Plan, effective January 1, 2006  10-K  001-06622  10(aa)  3/1/2007  

10.16*

  Short Term Incentive Plan, effective January 1, 2006  10-K  001-06622  10(bb)  3/1/2007  

10.17*

  2007 Omnibus Long Term Incentive Plan  DEF 14A  001-06622  B  4/9/2007  

10.18*

  

Change in control Agreement dated June 1, 2007 with

George F. McKenzie

  10-Q  001-06622  10(dd)  8/9/2007  

10.19*

  

Change in control Agreement dated May 14, 2007 with

Michael S. Paukstitus

  10-Q  001-06622  10(ee)  8/9/2007  

10.20*

  Deferred Compensation Plan for Directors dated December 1, 2000  10-K  001-06622  10(ff)  2/29/2008  

10.21*

  Deferred Compensation Plan for Officers dated January 1, 2007  10-K  001-06622  10(gg)  2/29/2008  

Incorporated by Reference

Exhibit
Number

Exhibit Description

FormFile
Number
ExhibitFiling DateFiled
Herewith

10.22*

  Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan II dated May 23, 2007  10-K  001-06622  10(hh)  2/29/2008  

10.23*

Amended Long Term Incentive Plan, effective January 1, 200810-Q001-0662210(ii)5/9/2008

10.24*

Transition Agreement and General Release dated August 5, 2008 with Sara L. Grootwassink10-Q001-0662210(kk)11/10/2008

10.25*

Change in control Agreement dated November 11, 2008 with William T. Camp10-K001-0662210(mm)3/2/2009

10.26*

Change in control Agreement dated October 2, 2008 with

Thomas C. Morey

10-K001-0662210(mm)3/2/2009

10.27*

Form of Indemnification Agreement by and between WRIT and the indemnitee8-K001-0662210(nn)7/27/2009

10.28*

Short Term Incentive Plan, effective January 1, 200910-K001-0662210.282/26/2010

10.29*

Long Term Incentive Plan, effective January 1, 200910-K001-0662210.292/26/2010

10.30*

Amended and Restated Deferred Compensation Plan for Directors, adopted October 27, 201010-Q001-0662210.3011/4/2010

10.31*

Executive Stock Ownership Policy, adopted October 27, 20108-K001-0662210.3111/2/2010

10.32*

Amendment to Deferred Compensation Plan for Officers, adopted October 27, 20108-K001-0662210.3211/2/2010

12      

Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed ChargesX

21      

Subsidiaries of RegistrantX

23.1    

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting FirmX

24      

Power of AttorneyX

31.1    

Certification of the Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“the Exchange Act”)X

      Incorporated by Reference   

Exhibit
Number

  

Exhibit Description

  Form  File
Number
  Exhibit  Filing Date  Filed
Herewith
10.23*Amended Long Term Incentive Plan, effective January 1, 200810-Q001-0662210(ii)5/9/2008
10.24*Transition Agreement and General Release dated August 5, 2008 with Sara L. Grootwassink10-Q001-0662210(kk)11/10/2008
10.25*Change in control Agreement dated November 11, 2008 with William T. Camp10-K001-0662210(mm)3/2/2009
10.26*Change in control Agreement dated October 7, 2008 with Thomas C. Morey10-K001-0662210(ll)3/2/2009
10.27*Form of Indemnification Agreement by and between WRIT and the indemnitee8-K001-0662210(nn)7/27/2009
10.28*Short Term Incentive Plan, effective January 1, 2009X
10.29*Long Term Incentive Plan, effective July 1, 2009X
12       Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed ChargesX
21       Subsidiaries of RegistrantX
23.1    Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting FirmX
24       Power of AttorneyX
31.a    Certification of the Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“the Exchange Act”)X
31.b    

31.2

  Certification of the Executive Vice President – Accounting and Administration pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) of the Exchange Act          X
31.c    

31.3

  Certification of the Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) of the Exchange Act          X

32  

  Certification of the Chief Executive Officer, Executive Vice President – AccountAccounting and Administration and Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) of the Exchange Act and 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002          X

 

*Management contracts or compensation plans or arrangements in which trustees or executive officers are eligible to participate.

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

 

 WASHINGTON REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUST
Date: February 25, 2011
Date: February 26, 2010  By: 

/s/ George F. McKenzie

   

George F. McKenzie

President and Chief Executive Officer

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.

 

Signature

  

Title

 

Date

/s/ Edmund B. Cronin, Jr.*

Edmund B. Cronin, Jr.John P. McDaniel*

  

Chairman, Trustee

 February 26, 201025, 2011

John P. McDaniel

/s/ George F. McKenzie

George F. McKenzie

  

President, Chief Executive Officer and Trustee

 February 26, 201025, 2011
George F. McKenzie

/s/ John M. Derrick, Jr.*

TrusteeFebruary 25, 2011
John M. Derrick, Jr.

  

Trustee

 February 26, 2010

/s/ John P. McDaniel*

John P. McDaniel

Trustee

February 26, 2010

/s/ Charles T. Nason*

Charles T. Nason

  

Trustee

 February 26, 201025, 2011
Charles T. Nason

/s/ Edward S. Civera*

Edward S. Civera

  

Trustee

 February 26, 201025, 2011
Edward S. Civera

/s/ Thomas Edgie Russell, III*

TrusteeFebruary 25, 2011
Thomas Edgie Russell, III

  

Trustee

 February 26, 2010

/s/ Terence C. Golden*

Terence C. Golden

  

Trustee

 February 26, 201025, 2011
Terence C. Golden

/s/ Wendelin A. White*

Wendelin A. White

  

Trustee

 February 26, 201025, 2011
Wendelin A. White

/s/ William G. Byrnes*

TrusteeFebruary 25, 2011
William G. Byrnes

/s/ Laura M. Franklin

Laura M. Franklin

  

Executive Vice President Accounting, Administration and Corporate Secretary

 February 26, 201025, 2011
Laura M. Franklinand Corporate Secretary

/s/ William T. Camp

Executive Vice President andFebruary 25, 2011

William T. Camp

  

Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

February 26, 2010

*By:

/s/ Laura M Franklin

Laura M Franklin

through power of attorney

 

* By:/s/ Laura M Franklin through power of attorney

Laura M Franklin

MANAGEMENT’S REPORT ON

INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING

Management of Washington Real Estate Investment Trust (the “Trust”) is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting and for the assessment of the effectiveness of internal controls over financial reporting. The Trust’s internal control system over financial reporting is a process designed under the supervision of the Trust’s principal executive and principal financial officers to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of the consolidated financial statements in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.

All internal control systems, no matter how well designed, have inherent limitations. Therefore, even those systems determined to be effective can provide only reasonable assurance with respect to financial statement preparation and presentation. 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.

In connection with the preparation of the Trust’s annual consolidated financial statements, management has undertaken an assessment of the effectiveness of the Trust’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2009,2010, based on criteria established in Internal Control-Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (the COSO Framework). Management’s assessment included an evaluation of the design of the Trust’s internal control over financial reporting and testing of the operational effectiveness of those controls.

Based on this assessment, management has concluded that as of December 31, 2009,2010, the Trust’s internal control over financial reporting was effective at a reasonable assurance level regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.

Ernst & Young LLP, the independent registered public accounting firm that audited the Trust’s consolidated financial statements included in this report, have issued an unqualified opinion on the effectiveness of the Trust’s internal control over financial reporting, a copy of which appears on the next page of this annual report.

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Board of Trustees and Shareholders of

Washington Real Estate Investment Trust

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Washington Real Estate Investment Trust and Subsidiaries as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, and the related consolidated statements of income, shareholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2010. Our audits also included the financial statement schedule listed in the Index at Item 15(A). These financial statements and schedule are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements and 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 financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of Washington Real Estate Investment Trust and Subsidiaries at December 31, 2010 and 2009, and the consolidated results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2010, 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), Washington Real Estate Investment Trust and Subsidiaries’ internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2010, 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 25, 2011 expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.

/s/ Ernst & Young

McLean, Virginia

February 25, 2011

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Board of Trustees and Shareholders of

Washington Real Estate Investment Trust

We have audited Washington Real Estate Investment Trust and Subsidiaries’ internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2009,2010, based on criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (the COSO criteria). Washington Real Estate Investment Trust’s 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 Management’s Report on Internal Control Overover Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’scompany’s 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 company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s 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, Washington Real Estate Investment Trust and Subsidiaries maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2009,2010, based on theonthe COSO criteria.criteria.

We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheets of Washington Real Estate Investment Trust and Subsidiaries as ofat December 31, 20092010 and 20082009, and the related consolidated statements of income, shareholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 20092010 of Washington Real Estate Investment Trust and Subsidiaries and our report dated February 26, 201025, 2011 expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

McLean, Virginia

February 26, 201025, 2011

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Board of Trustees and Shareholders of

Washington Real Estate Investment Trust

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Washington Real Estate Investment Trust and Subsidiaries 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 are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements 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 financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of Washington Real Estate Investment Trust and Subsidiaries 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.

We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), Washington Real Estate Investment Trust and Subsidiaries’ 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.

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

McLean, Virginia

February 26, 2010

WASHINGTON REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUST AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2010 AND 2009

(IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE DATA)

   December 31,
2010
  December 31,
2009
 

Assets

   

Land

  $440,509   $402,277  

Income producing property

   1,976,378    1,848,129  
         
   2,416,887    2,250,406  

Accumulated depreciation and amortization

   (538,786  (457,858
         

Net income producing property

   1,878,101    1,792,548  

Development in progress

   26,240    25,031  
         

Total real estate held for investment, net

   1,904,341    1,817,579  

Investment in real estate sold or held for sale, net

   —      48,636  

Cash and cash equivalents

   78,767    11,203  

Restricted cash

   21,552    17,668  

Rents and other receivables, net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $8,394 and $6,412, respectively

   55,176    49,617  

Prepaid expenses and other assets

   108,045    95,986  

Other assets related to properties sold or held for sale

   —      4,536  
         

Total assets

  $2,167,881   $2,045,225  
         

Liabilities

   

Notes payable

  $753,587   $688,912  

Mortgage notes payable

   380,171    383,563  

Lines of credit

   100,000    128,000  

Accounts payable and other liabilities

   51,130    52,324  

Advance rents

   12,597    10,743  

Tenant security deposits

   9,538    9,512  

Other liabilities related to properties sold or held for sale

   —      23,108  
         

Total liabilities

   1,307,023    1,296,162  
         

Equity

   

Shareholders’ equity

   

Shares of beneficial interest; $0.01 par value; 100,000 shares authorized: 65,870 and 59,811 shares issued and outstanding, respectively

   659    599  

Additional paid in capital

   1,127,825    944,825  

Distributions in excess of net income

   (269,935  (198,412

Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)

   (1,469  (1,757
         

Total shareholders’ equity

   857,080    745,255  

Noncontrolling interests in subsidiaries

   3,778    3,808  
         

Total equity

   860,858    749,063  
         

Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity

  $2,167,881   $2,045,225  
         

See accompanying notes to the financial statements.

WASHINGTON REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUST AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME

FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2010, 2009 AND 2008

(IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE DATA)

 

   December 31,
2009
  December 31,
2008(1)
 

Assets

   

Land

  $412,137   $410,833  

Income producing property

   1,899,378    1,854,008  
         
   2,311,515    2,264,841  

Accumulated depreciation and amortization

   (474,171  (394,902
         

Net income producing property

   1,837,344    1,869,939  

Development in progress

   25,031    23,732  
         

Total real estate held for investment, net

   1,862,375    1,893,671  

Investment in real estate sold or held for sale, net

   3,841    26,734  

Cash and cash equivalents

   11,203    11,874  

Restricted cash

   19,170    18,823  

Rents and other receivables, net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $6,455 and $6,122, respectively

   50,525    44,675  

Prepaid expenses and other assets

   97,815    112,284  

Other assets related to properties sold or held for sale

   296    1,346  
         

Total assets

  $2,045,225   $2,109,407  
         

Liabilities

   

Notes payable

  $688,912   $890,679  

Mortgage notes payable

   405,451    421,286  

Lines of credit

   128,000    67,000  

Accounts payable and other liabilities

   52,649    70,538  

Advance rents

   11,211    8,926  

Tenant security deposits

   9,854    10,084  

Other liabilities related to properties sold or held for sale

   85    469  
         

Total liabilities

   1,296,162    1,468,982  
         

Equity

   

Shareholders’ equity

   

Shares of beneficial interest; $0.01 par value; 100,000 shares authorized:

   

59,811 and 52,434 shares issued and outstanding, respectively

   599    526  

Additional paid in capital

   944,825    777,375  

Distributions in excess of net income

   (198,412  (138,936

Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)

   (1,757  (2,335
         

Total shareholders’ equity

   745,255    636,630  

Noncontrolling interests in subsidiaries

   3,808    3,795  
         

Total equity

   749,063    640,425  
         

Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity

  $2,045,225   $2,109,407  
         

(1)

As adjusted (see Current Report on Form 8-K filed July 10, 2009 and note 3 to the consolidated financial statements)

   2010  2009  2008 

Revenue

    

Real estate rental revenue

  $297,977   $298,161   $268,709  

Expenses

    

Utilities

   20,043    20,572    18,411  

Real estate taxes

   29,209    31,900    27,164  

Repairs and maintenance

   12,496    11,618    10,518  

Property administration

   9,480    9,648    9,651  

Property management

   8,578    7,401    7,544  

Operating services and common area maintenance

   16,793    15,909    13,523  

Other real estate expenses

   2,323    4,256    3,411  

Depreciation and amortization

   93,992    91,668    82,982  

General and administrative

   14,406    13,118    12,110  
             
   207,320    206,090    185,314  
             

Real estate operating income

  ��90,657    92,071    83,395  
             

Other income (expense)

    

Interest expense

   (68,389  (74,074  (74,095

Other income

   32    417    1,073  

Gain (loss) on extinguishment of debt, net

   (9,176  5,336    (5,583

Gain from non-disposal activities

   7    73    17  
             
   (77,526  (68,248  (78,588
             

Income from continuing operations

   13,131    23,823    4,807  

Discontinued operations:

    

Income from operations of properties sold or held for sale

   2,829    3,777    7,211  

Gain on sale of real estate

   21,599    13,348    15,275  
             

Net income

   37,559    40,948    27,293  

Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests in
subsidiaries

   (133  (203  (211
             

Net income attributable to the controlling interests

  $37,426   $40,745   $27,082  
             

Basic net income attributable to the controlling interests per share

    

Continuing operations

  $0.21   $0.41   $0.09  

Discontinued operations, including gain on sale of real estate

   0.39    0.30    0.46  
             

Net income attributable to the controlling interests per share

  $0.60   $0.71   $0.55  
             

Diluted net income attributable to the controlling interests per share

    

Continuing operations

  $0.21   $0.41   $0.09  

Discontinued operations, including gain on sale of real estate

   0.39    0.30    0.46  
             

Net income attributable to the controlling interests per share

  $0.60   $0.71   $0.55  
             

Weighted average shares outstanding – basic

   62,140    56,894    49,138  
             

Weighted average shares outstanding – diluted

   62,264    56,968    49,217  
             

Dividends declared and paid per share

  $1.73   $1.73   $1.72  
             

See accompanying notes to the financial statements.

WASHINGTON REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUST AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME

FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2009, 2008, AND 2007

(IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE DATA)

   2009  2008  2007 

Revenue

    

Real estate rental revenue

  $306,929   $278,691   $248,899  

Expenses

    

Utilities

   21,484    19,288    16,383  

Real estate taxes

   32,734    27,950    21,691  

Repairs and maintenance

   12,064    11,003    9,147  

Property administration

   9,807    9,855    7,060  

Property management

   7,628    7,830    7,045  

Operating services and common area maintenance

   16,581    14,151    13,057  

Other real estate expenses

   4,275    3,422    2,976  

Depreciation and amortization

   94,042    85,659    68,364  

General and administrative

   13,906    12,110    14,882  
             
   212,521    191,268    160,605  
             

Real estate operating income

   94,408    87,423    88,294  
             

Other income (expense)

    

Interest expense

   (75,001  (75,041  (66,336

Other income

   1,205    1,073    1,875  

Gain (loss) on extinguishment of debt, net

   5,336    (5,583  —    

Gain from non-disposal activities

   73    17    1,303  
             
   (68,387  (79,534  (63,158
             

Income from continuing operations

   26,021    7,889    25,136  

Discontinued operations:

    

Income from operations of properties sold or held for sale

   1,579    4,129    7,510  

Gain on sale of real estate

   13,348    15,275    25,022  
             

Net income

   40,948    27,293    57,668  

Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests in subsidiaries

   (203  (211  (217
             

Net income attributable to the controlling interests

  $40,745   $27,082   $57,451  
             

Basic net income attributable to the controlling interests per share

    

Continuing operations

  $0.45   $0.15   $0.54  

Discontinued operations, including gain on sale of real estate

   0.26    0.40    0.71  
             

Net income attributable to the controlling interests per share

  $0.71   $0.55   $1.25  
             

Diluted net income attributable to the controlling interests per share

    

Continuing operations

  $0.45   $0.15   $0.53  

Discontinued operations, including gain on sale of real estate

   0.26    0.40    0.71  
             

Net income attributable to the controlling interests per share

  $0.71   $0.55   $1.24  
             

Weighted average shares outstanding – basic

   56,894    49,138    45,911  
             

Weighted average shares outstanding – diluted

   56,968    49,217    46,049  
             

Dividends declared and paid per share

  $1.73   $1.72   $1.68  
             

See accompanying notes to the financial statements.

WASHINGTON REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUST AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY

FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2009, 2008 AND 2007

(IN THOUSANDS)

  Shares Shares of
Beneficial
Interest at
Par Value
 Additional
Paid in
Capital
 Distributions in
Excess of Net Income
Attributable to the
Controlling Interests
  Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income
 Total
Shareholders’
Equity
  Noncontrolling
Interests in
Subsidiaries
  Total
Equity
 

Balance, December 31, 2006

 45,042 $451 $509,326 $(59,855 $—   $449,922   $1,739   $451,661  

Net income attributable to the controlling interests

 —    —    —    57,451    —    57,451    —      57,451  

Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests

 —    —    —    —      —    —      217    217  

Distributions to noncontrolling interests

 —    —    —    —      —    —      (156  (156

Issuance of units to noncontrolling interest holder

 —    —    —    —      —    —      1,976    1,976  

Dividends

 —    —    —    (78,050  —    (78,050  —      (78,050

Equity offering, net of issuance costs

 1,600  16  57,745  —      —    57,761    —      57,761  

Equity component of convertible notes, net of issuance costs

 —    —    12,435  —      —    12,435    —      12,435  

Share options exercised

 13  —    313  —      —    313    —      313  

Share grants, net of share grant amortization and forfeitures

 27  1  2,707  —      —    2,708    —      2,708  
                           

Balance, December 31, 2007

 46,682  468  582,526  (80,454  —    502,540    3,776    506,316  

WASHINGTON REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUST AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY

FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2010, 2009 2008 AND 20072008

(IN THOUSANDS)

 

 Shares Shares of
Beneficial
Interest at
Par Value
 Additional
Paid in
Capital
 Distributions in
Excess of Net Income
Attributable to the
Controlling Interests
 Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income
 Total
Shareholders’
Equity
 Noncontrolling
Interests in
Subsidiaries
 Total
Equity
   Shares   Shares of
Beneficial
Interest at
Par Value
   Additional
Paid in
Capital
   Distributions in
Excess of Net Income

Attributable to the
Controlling Interests
 Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income
 Total
Shareholders’
Equity
 Noncontrolling
Interests in
Subsidiaries
 Total
Equity
 

Balance, December 31, 2007

 46,682 468 582,526 (80,454 —     502,540   3,776   506,316     46,682     468     582,526     (80,454  —      502,540    3,776    506,316  

Comprehensive income:

                    

Net income attributable to the controlling interests

 —   —   —   27,082   —     27,082   —     27,082     —       —       —       27,082    —      27,082    —      27,082  

Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests

 —   —   —   —     —     —     211   211     —       —       —       —      —      —      211    211  

Change in fair value of interest rate hedge

 —   —   —    (2,335 (2,335 —     (2,335   —       —       —        (2,335  (2,335  —      (2,335
                                

Total comprehensive income

 —   —   —   —     —     24,747   211   24,958     —       —       —       —      —      24,747    211    24,958  

Distributions to noncontrolling interests

 —   —   —   —     —     —     (192 (192   —       —       —       —      —      —      (192  (192

Dividends

 —   —   —   (85,564 —     (85,564 —     (85,564   —       —       —       (85,564  —      (85,564  —      (85,564

Equity offerings, net of issuance costs

 5,466 55 184,878 —     —     184,933   —     184,933     5,466     55     184,878     —      —      184,933    —      184,933  

Shares issued under Dividend Reinvestment Program

 125 1 4,102 —     —     4,103   —     4,103     125     1     4,102     —      —      4,103    —      4,103  

Share options exercised

 120 1 2,642 —     —     2,643   —     2,643     120     1     2,642     —      —      2,643    —      2,643  

Share grants, net of share grant amortization and forfeitures

 41 1 3,227 —     —     3,228   —     3,228     41     1     3,227     —      —      3,228    —      3,228  
                                                 

Balance, December 31, 2008

 52,434 526 777,375 (138,936 (2,335 636,630   3,795   640,425     52,434     526     777,375     (138,936  (2,335  636,630    3,795    640,425  

WASHINGTON REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUST AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY

FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2010, 2009 2008 AND 20072008

(IN THOUSANDS)

 

 Shares Shares of
Beneficial
Interest at
Par Value
 Additional
Paid in
Capital
 Distributions in
Excess of Net Income
Attributable to the
Controlling Interests
 Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income
 Total
Shareholders’
Equity
 Noncontrolling
Interests in
Subsidiaries
 Total
Equity
   Shares   Shares of
Beneficial
Interest at
Par Value
   Additional
Paid in
Capital
   Distributions in
Excess of Net  Income
Attributable to the
Controlling Interests
 Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income
 Total
Shareholders’
Equity
 Noncontrolling
Interests in
Subsidiaries
 Total
Equity
 

Balance, December 31, 2008

 52,434  526  777,375  (138,936  (2,335  636,630    3,795    640,425     52,434     526     777,375     (138,936  (2,335  636,630    3,795    640,425  

Comprehensive income:

                    

Net income attributable to the controlling interests

 —    —    —    40,745    —      40,745    —      40,745     —       —       —       40,745    —      40,745    —      40,745  

Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests

 —    —    —    —      —      —      203    203     —       —       —       —      —      —      203    203  

Change in fair value of

interest rate hedge

 —    —    —     578    578    —      578     —       —       —        578    578    —      578  
                                

Total comprehensive income

 —    —    —    —      —      41,323    203    41,526     —       —       —       —      —      41,323    203    41,526  

Distributions to noncontrolling interests

 —    —    —    —      —      —      (190  (190   —       —       —       —      —      —      (190  (190

Dividends

 —    —    —    (100,221  —      (100,221  —      (100,221   —       —       —       (100,221  —      (100,221  —      (100,221

Equity offerings, net of issuance costs

 7,240  72  160,843  —      —      160,915    —      160,915     7,240     72     160,843     —      —      160,915    —      160,915  

Shares issued under Dividend Reinvestment Program

 88  1  2,478  —      —      2,479    —      2,479     88     1     2,478     —      —      2,479    —      2,479  

Share options exercised

 3  —    45  —      —      45    —      45     3     —       45     —      —      45    —      45  

Share grants, net of share grant amortization and forfeitures

 46  —    4,084  —      —      4,084    —      4,084     46     —       4,084     —      —      4,084    —      4,084  
                                                 

Balance, December 31, 2009

 59,811 $599 $944,825 $(198,412 $(1,757 $745,255   $3,808   $749,063     59,811    $599    $944,825    $(198,412 $(1,757 $745,255   $3,808   $749,063  
                                                 

See accompanying notes to the financial statements.

WASHINGTON REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUST AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY

FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2010, 2009 AND 2008

(IN THOUSANDS)

   Shares   Shares of
Beneficial
Interest at
Par Value
   Additional
Paid in
Capital
   Distributions in Excess
of Net Income
Attributable to the
Controlling Interests
  Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income
  Total
Shareholders’
Equity
  Noncontrolling
Interests in
Subsidiaries
  Total
Equity
 

Balance, December 31, 2009

   59,811    $599    $944,825    $(198,412 $(1,757 $745,255   $3,808   $749,063  

Comprehensive income:

            

Net income attributable to the controlling interests

   —       —       —       37,426    —      37,426    —      37,426  

Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests

   —       —       —       —      —      —      133    133  

Change in fair value of interest rate hedge

   —       —       —        288    288    —      288  
                     

Total comprehensive income

   —       —       —       —      —      37,714    133    37,847  

Distributions to noncontrolling interests

   —       —       —       —      —      —      (163  (163

Dividends

   —       —       —       (108,949  —      (108,949  —      (108,949

Equity offerings, net of issuance costs

   5,645     56     168,824     —      —      168,880    —      168,880  

Shares issued under Dividend Reinvestment Program

   175     2     5,284     —      —      5,286    —      5,286  

Share options exercised

   164     2     3,961     —      —      3,963    —      3,963  

Share grants, net of share grant amortization and forfeitures

   75     —       4,931     —      —      4,931    —      4,931  
                                    

Balance, December 31, 2010

   65,870    $659    $1,127,825    $(269,935 $(1,469 $857,080   $3,778   $860,858  
                                    

WASHINGTON REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUST AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2010, 2009 2008 AND 20072008

(IN THOUSANDS)

 

  2009 2008 2007   2010 2009 2008 

Cash flows from operating activities

        

Net income

  $40,948   $27,293   $57,668    $37,559   $40,948   $27,293  

Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by (used in) operating activities:

    

Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities:

    

Gain on sale of real estate

   (13,348  (15,275  (25,022   (21,599  (13,348  (15,275

Depreciation and amortization, including amounts in discontinued operations

   94,447    86,898    71,024     95,746    94,447    86,898  

Provision for losses on accounts receivable

   6,889    4,346    2,011     4,150    6,889    4,346  

Amortization of share grants, net

   3,085    3,228    2,707     4,931    3,085    3,228  

Amortization of debt premiums, discounts and related financing costs

   6,957    7,669    7,042     5,532    6,957    7,669  

Loss (gain) on extinguishment of debt, net

   (5,336  5,583    —       9,176    (5,336  5,583  

Changes in operating other assets

   (14,576  (13,648  (14,319   (20,053  (14,576  (13,648

Changes in operating other liabilities

   (16,165  (8,979  15,366     (3,509  (16,165  (8,979
                    

Net cash provided by operating activities

   102,901    97,115    116,477     111,933    102,901    97,115  
                    

Cash flows from investing activities

        

Real estate acquisitions, net*

   (19,828  (168,230  (294,166   (155,881  (19,828  (168,230

Capital improvements to real estate

   (27,337  (37,272  (41,122   (25,045  (27,337  (37,272

Development in progress

   (2,135  (15,509  (66,996   (1,337  (2,135  (15,509

Net cash received for sale of real estate

   36,842    40,231    56,344     71,505    36,842    40,231  

Non-real estate capital improvements

   (351  (642  (3,200   (392  (351  (642
                    

Net cash used in investing activities

   (12,809  (181,422  (349,140   (111,150  (12,809  (181,422
                    

Cash flows from financing activities

        

Line of credit borrowings

   214,500    165,000    258,200     68,800    214,500    165,000  

Line of credit repayments

   (153,500  (290,500  (126,700   (96,800  (153,500  (290,500

Dividends paid

   (100,221  (85,564  (78,050   (108,949  (100,221  (85,564

Distributions to noncontrolling interests

   (190  (192  (156   (163  (190  (192

Proceeds from equity offerings under dividend reinvestment program

   2,479    4,103    —       5,286    2,479    4,103  

Proceeds from mortgage notes payable

   37,500    81,029    —       —      37,500    81,029  

Principal payments – mortgage notes payable

   (54,030  (3,488  (10,797   (25,985  (54,030  (3,488

Proceeds from debt offering

   —      100,000    150,000     247,998    —      100,000  

Financing costs

   (847  (1,924  (5,144   (2,450  (847  (1,924

Net proceeds from equity offerings

   160,915    184,933    57,761     168,880    160,915    184,933  

Notes payable repayments, including penalties for early extinguishment

   (197,414  (81,344  —       (193,799  (197,414  (81,344

Net proceeds from exercise of share options

   45    2,643    313     3,963    45    2,643  
                    

Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities

   (90,763  74,696    245,427     66,781    (90,763  74,696  
                    

Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents

   (671  (9,611  12,764     67,564    (671  (9,611

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of year

   11,874    21,485    8,721     11,203    11,874    21,485  
                    

Cash and cash equivalents at end of year

  $11,203   $11,874   $21,485    $78,767   $11,203   $11,874  
                    

Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information:

        

Cash paid for interest, net of amounts capitalized

  $69,292   $68,616   $57,499    $60,622   $69,292   $68,616  
                    

 

*See note 3 to the consolidated financial statements for the supplemental discussiondisclosure of non-cash investing and financing activities, including the assumption of mortgage debt in conjunction with some of our real estate acquisitions.

See accompanying notes to the financial statements.

WASHINGTON REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUST AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2010, 2009 2008 AND 20072008

NOTE 1:  NATURE OF BUSINESS

Washington Real Estate Investment Trust (“We” or “WRIT”), a Maryland real estate investment trust, is a self-administered, self-managed equity real estate investment trust, successor to a trust organized in 1960. Our business consists of the ownership and developmentoperation of income-producing real estate properties in the greater Washington Metro region. We own a diversified portfolio of office buildings, medical office buildings, industrial/flex centers, multifamily buildings and retail centers.

Federal Income Taxes

We believe that we qualify as a real estate investment trust (“REIT”) under Sections 856-860 of the Internal Revenue Code and intend to continue to qualify as such. To maintain our status as a REIT, we are required to distribute 90% of our ordinary taxable income to our shareholders. When selling properties, we have the option of (a) reinvesting the sale price of properties sold, allowing for a deferral of income taxes on the sale, (b) paying out capital gains to the shareholders with no tax to WRIT or (c) treating the capital gains as having been distributed to the shareholders, paying the tax on the gain deemed distributed and allocating the tax paid as a credit to the shareholders. In May 2009,During the three years ended December 31, 2010, we sold a multifamily property, Avondale, for a gain of $6.7 million. In July 2009, we sold an industrial property, Tech 100 Industrial Park, and an office property, Brandywine Center, for gains of $4.1 million and $1.0 million, respectively. In November 2009, we sold an industrial property, Crossroads Distribution Center, for a gain of $1.5 million. In June 2008, we sold two industrial properties, Sullyfield Centerthe following properties:

Disposition Date

  

Property

  Type  Gain on Sale
(in  thousands)
 

June 18, 2010

  

Parklawn Portfolio(1)

  Office/Industrial  $7,900  

December 21, 2010

  

The Ridges

  Office   4,500  

December 22, 2010

  

Ammendale I&II/Amvax

  Industrial   9,200  
         
      $21,600  
         

May 13, 2009

  

Avondale

  Multifamily  $6,700  

July 23, 2009

  

Tech 100 Industrial Park

  Industrial   4,100  

July 31, 2009

  

Brandywine Center

  Office   1,000  

November 13, 2009

  

Crossroads Distribution Center

  Industrial   1,500  
         
    Total 2009  $13,300  
         

June 6, 2008

  

Sullyfield Center/The Earhart Building

  Industrial  $15,300  
         
    Total 2008  $15,300  
         

(1)

The Parklawn Portfolio consists of three office properties (Parklawn Plaza, Lexington Building and Saratoga Building) and one industrial property (Charleston Business Center).

The Earhart Building, for a gain of $15.3 million. Thecapital gains from the sales were paid out to the shareholders.

Generally, and subject to our ongoing qualification as a REIT, no provisions for income taxes are necessary except for taxes on undistributed REIT taxable income and taxes on the income generated by our taxable REIT subsidiaries (“TRS”). AOur TRS is subject to corporate federal and state income tax on its taxable income at regular statutory rates. Certain of our taxable REIT subsidiaries haveOur TRS has net operating loss carryforwards available of approximately $5.3$4.8 million. These carryforwards begin to expire in 2028. We have considered estimated future taxable income and have determined that a full valuation allowance for our net deferred tax assets is appropriate. Therethere were no material income tax provisions or material net deferred income tax items for our TRS for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 2008 and 2007.2008.

The following is a breakdown of the taxable percentage of our dividends for 2010, 2009 2008 and 2007,2008, respectively (unaudited):

 

  Ordinary
Income
 Return of
Capital
 Unrecaptured
Section 1250
Gain
 Capital
Gain
   Ordinary
Income
 Return of
Capital
 Unrecaptured
Section 1250
Gain
 Capital
Gain
 

2010

   55  31  11  3

2009

  75 17 7 1   75  17  7  1

2008

  60 18 6 16   60  18  6  16

2007

  90 10 0 0

NOTE 2: ACCOUNTING POLICIES

Basis of Presentation

The accompanying consolidated financial statements include the accounts of WRIT and its majority owned subsidiaries, after eliminating all intercompany transactions.

New Accounting Pronouncements

In June 2009,January 2010, the FASB issued FASB StatementASU No. 168,2010-06,The FASB Accounting Standards CodificationImproving Disclosures About Fair Value (“ASU 2010-06”), which requires new disclosures about fair value measurements. Specifically, a reporting entity should disclose separately the amounts of significant transfers in and out of Level 1 and Level 2 fair value measurements and describe the Hierarchyreasons for the transfers. Additionally, the reconciliation for Level 3 fair value measurements should present separately information about purchases, sales, issuances and settlements. To date, we have not had any transfers in and out of Generally Accepted Accounting Principals, a Replacement of FASB Statement No. 162(FASB Accounting Standards Codification section 105-10-65). This statement establishes the Codification as the source of authoritative GAAP recognized by the FASB to be applied by nongovernmental entities. The Codification is the culmination of a project to organizeLevel 1 and simplify authoritative GAAP literature by reorganizing the various and dispersed GAAP pronouncements within a consistent structure. This statement is effective for financial statements issued for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. The issuance of this statement and the Codification does not change GAAP and doesLevel 2 fair value measurements, nor do we have any Level 3 fair value measurements. Therefore, ASU 2010-06 did not have any impact on our consolidated financial statements.

In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 141(R),Business Combinations (FASB Accounting Standards Codification section 805-10-65), a revision of SFAS No. 141. This statement changes the accounting for acquisitions by specifically eliminating the step acquisition model, changing the recognition of contingent consideration from being recognized when it

was probable to being recognized at the time of acquisition, disallowing the capitalization of pre-acquisition and transaction costs, and delaying when restructuring related to acquisitions can be recognized. Our adoption of the standard for the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2009 resulted in a $0.8 million increase in general and administrative expense, as previously capitalized pre-acquisition costs were expensed as a period cost.

In March 2008 the FASB issued SFAS No. 161,Disclosures about Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, an Amendment of FASB Statement No. 133 (FASB Accounting Standards Codification section 815-10-65). This statement requires entities to provide greater transparency about how and why an entity uses derivative instruments, and how derivative instruments and related hedged items affect an entity’s financial position, results of operations, and cash flows. To meet these objectives, this statement requires (a) qualitative disclosures about objectives for using derivatives by primary underlying risk exposure and by purpose or strategy, (b) information about the volume of derivative activity, (c) tabular disclosures about balance sheet location and gross fair value amounts of derivative instruments, income statement and other comprehensive income location and amounts of gains and losses on derivative instruments by type of contract, and (d) disclosures about credit risk-related contingent featuresincluded in derivative agreements. We adopted this statement effective for the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2009. This statement required us to provide expanded disclosures of our interest rate hedge contract and to present certain disclosures in tabular format (See note 2 to the consolidated financial statements).

In September 2006, the FASB issued FASB Statement No. 157,Fair Value Measurements(FASB Accounting Standards Codification section 820-10-65). This statement defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value in accordance with GAAP, and expands disclosures about fair value measurements. On February 12, 2007, the FASB issued FASB Staff Position No. FAS 157-2,Effective Date of FASB Statement No. 157(FASB Accounting Standards Codification section 820-10-65), which amends FASB Statement No. 157 to delay the effective date for all non-financial assets and non-financial liabilities, except for those that are recognized or disclosed at fair value in the financial statements on a recurring basis (i.e. at least annually) to fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2008, and interim periods within those fiscal years. We do not have significant assets or liabilities recorded at fair value on a recurring basis, and therefore the adoption of this statement for non-financial assets and non-financial liabilities on January 1, 2009 did not have a material impact on our financial statements. However, starting in 2009 we apply FASB Statement No. 157 as a part of our fair value allocation to any properties acquired.

In May 2009, the FASB issued FASB Statement No. 165,Subsequent Events (FASB Accounting Standards Codification section 855-10-65). This statement requires disclosure of the date through which subsequent events have been evaluated, as well as whether that date is the date the financial statements were issued. We adopted this statement effective for the quarter ending June 30, 2009. The required disclosure is in note 16 to the consolidated financial statements.

Revenue Recognition

We lease multifamily properties under operating leases with terms of generally one year or less. We lease commercial properties (our office, medical office, retail and industrial segments) under operating leases with average terms of three to seven years. We recognize rental income and rental abatements from our multifamily and commercial leases when earned on a straight-line basis over the lease term. Recognition of rental income commences when control of the facility has been given to the tenant. We record a provision for losses on accounts receivable equal to the estimated uncollectible amounts. We base this estimate on our historical experience and a review of the current status of our receivables. We recognize percentage rents, which represent additional rents based on gross tenant sales, when tenants’ sales exceed specified thresholds.

We recognize sales of real estate at closing only when sufficient down payments have been obtained, possession and other attributes of ownership have been transferred to the buyer and we have no significant continuing involvement.

We recognize cost reimbursement income from pass-through expenses on an accrual basis over the periods in which the expenses were incurred. Pass-through expenses are comprised of real estate taxes, operating expenses and common area maintenance costs which are reimbursed by tenants in accordance with specific allowable costs per tenant lease agreements.

Accounts Receivable and Allowance for Doubtful Accounts

Accounts receivable primarily represents amounts accrued and unpaid from tenants in accordance with the terms of the respective leases, subject to our revenue recognition policy. We review receivables monthly and establish reserves when, in the opinion of management, collection of the receivable is doubtful. We establish reserves for tenants whose rent payment history or financial condition casts doubt upon the tenants’ ability to perform under their lease obligations. When we deem the collection of a receivable to be doubtful in the same quarter that we established the receivable, then we recognize the allowance for that receivable as an offset to real estate revenues. When we deem a receivable that was initially established in a prior quarter to be doubtful, then we recognize the allowance as an operating expense. In addition to rents due currently, accounts receivable include amounts representing minimal rental income accrued on a straight-line basis to be paid by tenants over the remaining term of their respective leases.

We include the following notes receivable balances of $8.5 million and $8.6 million as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively, in our accounts receivable balances.balances (in millions):

   December 31, 2010   December 31, 2009 

Notes receivable, net

  $8.8    $8.5  

Noncontrolling Interests in Subsidiaries

We entered into an operating partnership agreement with a member of the entity that previously owned Northern Virginia Industrial Park in conjunction with the acquisition of this property in May 1998. This resulted in a noncontrolling ownership interest in this property based upon defined company ownership units at the date of purchase. The operating partnership agreement was amended and restated in 2002 resulting in a reduced noncontrolling ownership percentage interest. We account for this activity by applying the noncontrolling owner’s percentage ownership interest to the net income of the property and reporting such amount in our net income attributable to noncontrolling interests.

In August 2007 we acquired a 0.8 acre parcel of land located at 4661 Kenmore Avenue, Alexandria, Virginia for future medical office development. The acquisition was funded by issuing operating partnership units in ouran operating partnership, which is a consolidated subsidiary of WRIT. This resulted in a noncontrolling ownership interest in this property based upon defined company operating partnership units at the date of purchase.

Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests was $202,700, $211,000 and $216,900 for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. as follows (in millions):

   2010   2009   2008 

Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests

  $0.1    $0.2    $0.2  

None of the income from noncontrolling interests is attributable to discontinued operations or accumulated other comprehensive income. Quarterly distributions are made to the noncontrolling owners equal to the quarterly dividend per share for each operating partnership unit.

Income attributable to the controlling interests from continuing operations was $25.8 million, $7.7 million and $24.9 million for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively.as follows (in millions):

   2010   2009   2008 

Income attributable to the controlling interests from continuing operations

  $13.0    $23.6    $4.6  

The operating partnership units could have a dilutive impact on our earnings per share calculation. They are not dilutive for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 2008 and 2007,2008, and are not included in our earnings per share calculations.

Deferred Financing Costs

ExternalWe capitalize and amortize external costs associated with the issuance or assumption of mortgages, notes payable and fees associated with the lines of credit are capitalized and amortized using the effective interest rate method or the straight-line method which approximates the effective interest rate method over the term of the related debt. As of December 31, 20092010 and 20082009 deferred financing costs of $18.1 million and $21.3 million, respectively, net of accumulated amortization of $10.3 million and $9.0 million, were included in prepaid expenses and other assets onas follows (in millions):

   December 31, 
   2010   2009 
   Gross Carrying
Value
   Accumulated
Amortization
   Net   Gross Carrying
Value
   Accumulated
Amortization
   Net 

Deferred financing costs

  $14.3    $7.2    $7.1    $17.9    $10.1    $7.8  

We record the balance sheets. The amortization is included in interest expense in the accompanying statements of income. The amortization of debtdeferred financing costs included inas interest expense totaled $3.1 million, $3.6 million and $3.5 millionexpense. Amortization of deferred financing costs for the three years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively.2010 was as follows (in millions):

   2010   2009   2008 

Deferred financing costs amortization

  $2.4    $3.1    $3.6  

Deferred Leasing Costs

We capitalize and amortize costs associated with the successful negotiation of leases, both external commissions and internal direct costs, on a straight-line basis over the terms of the respective leases. As of December 31, 2010 and 2009 deferred leasing costs were included in prepaid expenses and other assets as follows (in millions):

   December 31, 
   2010   2009 
   Gross Carrying
Value
   Accumulated
Amortization
   Net   Gross Carrying
Value
   Accumulated
Amortization
   Net 

Deferred leasing costs

  $37.6    $13.9    $23.7    $32.3    $11.3    $21.0  

We record the amortization of deferred leasing costs as amortization expense. If an applicable lease terminates prior to the expiration of its initial lease term, we write off the carrying amount of the costs to amortization expense. As of December 31, 2009Amortization and 2008, we included deferred leasing costs of $33.1 million and $31.0 million, respectively, net of accumulated amortization of $11.7 million and $10.2 million, in prepaid expenses and other assets on the balance sheets. The amortizationwrites-offs of deferred leasing costs included in amortization expense for properties classified as continuing operations totaled $4.8 million, $3.6 million and $2.9 million for the three years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively.2010 were as follows (in millions):

   2010   2009   2008 

Deferred leasing costs amortization

  $5.2    $4.7    $3.5  

We capitalize and amortize against revenue leasing incentives associated with the successful negotiation of leases on a straight-line basis over the terms of the respective leases. As of December 31, 2010 and 2009 deferred leasing incentives were included in prepaid expenses and other assets as follows (in millions):

   December 31, 
   2010   2009 
   Gross
Carrying
Value
   Accumulated
Amortization
   Net   Gross
Carrying
Value
   Accumulated
Amortization
   Net 

Deferred leasing incentives

  $14.5    $2.9    $11.6    $12.2    $1.6    $10.6  

If an applicable lease terminates prior to the expiration of its initial lease term, we write off the carrying amount of the costs as a reduction of revenue. As of December 31, 2009 and 2008, we included deferred leasing incentives of $12.2 million and $11.8 million, respectively, net of accumulated amortization of $1.6 million and $0.5 million, in prepaid expenses and other assets onWe record the balance sheets. The amortization of deferred leasing incentives included as a reduction of revenuerevenue. Amortization and writes-offs of deferred leasing costs for properties classified as continuing operations totaled $1.2 million, $0.4 million and $0.1 million, for the three years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively.

2010 were as follows (in millions):

   2010   2009   2008 

Deferred leasing incentives amortization

  $1.3    $1.2    $0.4  

Real Estate and Depreciation

We depreciate buildings on a straight-line basis over estimated useful lives ranging from 28 to 50 years. We capitalize all capital improvement expenditures associated with replacements, improvements or major repairs to real property that extend its useful life and depreciate them using the straight-line method over their estimated useful lives ranging from 3 to 30 years. We also capitalize costs incurred in connection with our development projects, including capitalizing interest and other internal costs during periods in which qualifying expenditures have been made and activities necessary to get the development projects ready for their intended use are in progress. In addition, we capitalize tenant leasehold improvements when certain criteria are met, including when we supervise construction and will own the improvements. We depreciate all tenant improvements over the shorter of the useful life of the improvements or the term of the related tenant lease. Real estate depreciation expense from continuing operations for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 and 2007 was $75.8 million, $68.5 million and $55.0 million, respectively. as follows (in millions):

   2010   2009   2008 

Real estate depreciation

  $76.5    $73.8    $66.5  

We charge maintenance and repair costs that do not extend an asset’s life to expense as incurred.

We capitalize interest costs incurred on borrowing obligations while qualifying assets are being readied for their intended use. Total interest expense capitalized to real estate assets related to development and major renovation activities was $1.4 million, $2.3 million and $6.7 million for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 and 2007, respectively. was as follows (in millions):

   2010   2009   2008 

Capitalized interest

  $0.9    $1.4    $2.3  

We amortize capitalized interest over the useful life of the related underlying assets upon those assets being placed into service.

We recognize impairment losses on long-lived assets used in operations and held for sale, development assets or land held for future development, if indicators of impairment are present and the net undiscounted cash flows estimated to be generated by those assets are less than the assets’assets' carrying amount and estimated undiscounted cash flows associated with future development expenditures. If such carrying amount is in excess of the estimated cash flows from the operation and disposal of the property, we would recognize an impairment loss equivalent to an amount required to adjust the carrying amount to the estimated fair value. The estimated fair value would be calculated in accordance with current GAAP fair value provisions. During 2009 and 2008, we expensed $0.1 million and $0.6 million, respectively, included in general and administrative expenses, related to development projects no longer considered probable. There were no property impairments recognized during the year ended December 31, 2007.2010.

We record real estate acquisitions as business combinations in accordance with GAAP. We record acquired or assumed assets, including physical assets and in-place leases, and liabilities, based on their fair values. We record goodwill when the purchase price exceeds the fair value of the assets and liabilities acquired. We determine the estimated fair values of the assets and liabilities in accordance with current GAAP fair value provisions. We determine the fair values of acquired buildings on an “as-if-vacant” basis considering a variety of factors, including the physical condition and qualityreplacement cost of the buildings,property, estimated rental and absorption rates, estimated future cash flows and valuation assumptions consistent with current market conditions. We allocatedetermine the “as-if-vacant” fair value toof land building and tenant improvements based on property tax assessments and other relevant information obtained in connection with the acquisition of the property.comparisons to similar properties that have been recently marketed for sale or sold.

The fair value of in-place leases consists of the following components – (a) the estimated cost to us to replace the leases, including foregone rents during the period of finding a new tenant and foregone recovery of tenant pass-throughs (referred to as “absorption cost”), (b) the estimated cost of tenant improvements, and other direct costs associated with obtaining a new tenant (referred to as “tenant origination cost”); (c) estimated leasing commissions associated with obtaining a new tenant (referred to as “leasing commissions”); (d) the above/at/below market cash flow of the leases, determined by comparing the projected cash flows of the leases in place to projected cash flows of comparable market-rate leases (referred to as “net lease intangible”); and (e) the value, if any, of customer relationships, determined based on our evaluation of the specific characteristics of each tenant’s lease and our overall relationship with the tenant (referred to as “customer relationship value”). We have attributed no value to customer relationship value as of December 31, 20092010 and 2008.2009.

We discount the amounts used to calculate net lease intangibles using an interest rate which reflects the risks associated with the leases acquired. We include tenant origination costs in income producing property on our balance sheet and amortize the tenant origination costs as depreciation expense on a straight-line basis over the remaining life of the underlying leases. We classify leasing commissions and absorption costs as other assets and amortize leasing commissions and absorption costs as amortization expense on a straight-line basis over the remaining life of the underlying leases. We classify net lease intangible assets as other assets and amortize net lease intangible assets on a straight-line basis as a decrease to real estate rental revenue over the remaining term of the underlying leases. We classify net lease intangible liabilities as other liabilities and amortize net lease intangible liabilities on a straight-line basis as an increase to real estate rental revenue over the remaining term of the underlying leases. Should a tenant terminate its lease, we write off the unamortized portion of the tenant origination cost, leasing commissions, absorption costs and net lease intangible associated with that lease.

Balances, net of accumulated depreciation or amortization, as appropriate, of the components of the fair value of in-place leases at December 31, 20092010 and 20082009 are as follows (in millions):

 

  December 31,  December 31, 
  2009  2008  2010   2009 
  Gross Carrying
Value
  Accumulated
Amortization
  Net  Gross Carrying
Value
  Accumulated
Amortization
  Net  Gross
Carrying
Value
   Accumulated
Amortization
   Net   Gross
Carrying
Value
   Accumulated
Amortization
   Net 

Tenant origination costs

  $39.8  $20.8  $19.0  $40.9  $16.1  $24.8  $47.7    $25.4    $22.3    $39.0    $20.4    $18.6  

Leasing commissions/absorption costs

  $49.6  $22.7  $26.9  $50.7  $16.3  $34.4  $63.3    $28.6    $34.7    $48.3    $22.1    $26.2  

Net lease intangible assets

  $9.7  $6.4  $3.3  $9.8  $5.4  $4.4  $10.6    $7.1    $3.5    $9.4    $6.3    $3.1  

Net lease intangible liabilities

  $32.2  $14.7  $17.5  $33.0  $10.3  $22.7  $33.2    $18.6    $14.6    $32.0    $14.6    $17.4  

Below-market ground lease intangible asset

  $12.1  $0.4  $11.7  $12.1  $0.2  $11.9  $12.1    $0.6    $11.5    $12.1    $0.4    $11.7  

Amortization of these components combined was $9.4 million, $11.2 million and $9.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. as follows (in millions):

   2010   2009   2008 

Amortization

  $8.9    $9.1    $10.7  

Amortization of these components combined over the next five years is projected to be $7.2 million, $5.2 million, $4.0 million, $3.6 million and $3.5 million for the years ending December 31, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014, respectively. No value had been assigned to customer relationship value at December 31, 2009 or 2008.as follows (in millions):

   Amortization 

2011

  $ 9.2  

2012

  $8.0  

2013

  $7.5  

2014

  $6.7  

2015

  $4.8  

Discontinued Operations

We classify properties as held for sale when they meet the necessary criteria, which include: (a) senior management commits to and actively embarks upon a plan to sell the assets, (b) the sale is expected to be completed within one year under terms usual and customary for such sales and (c) actions required to complete the plan indicate that it is unlikely that significant changes to the plan will be made or that the plan will be withdrawn. We generally consider that a property has met these criteria when a sale of the property has been approved by the Board of Trustees, or a committee with authorization from the Board, there are no known significant contingencies related to the sale and management believes it is probable that the sale will be completed within one year. Depreciation on these properties is discontinued, but operating revenues, operating expenses and interest expense continue to be recognized until the date of sale.

Revenues and expenses of properties that are either sold or classified as held for sale are presented as discontinued operations for all periods presented in the consolidated statements of income. Interest on debt that can be identified as specifically attributed to these properties is included in discontinued operations. We do not have significant continuing involvement in the operations of any of our disposed properties.

Cash and Cash Equivalents

Cash and cash equivalents include investments readily convertible to known amounts of cash with original maturities of 90 days or less.

Restricted Cash

Restricted cash at December 31, 20092010 and December 31, 20082009 consisted of $19.2$21.6 million and $18.8$17.7 million, respectively, in funds escrowed for tenant security deposits, real estate tax, insurance and mortgage escrows and escrow deposits required by lenders on certain of our properties to be used for future building renovations or tenant improvements.

Assets and Liabilities Measured at Fair Value

For assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis, quantitative disclosures about the fair value measurements are required to be disclosed separately for each major category of assets and liabilities. The only assets or liabilities we had at December 31, 2009 and 2008 that are recorded at fair value on a recurring basis are the assets held in the Supplemental Executive Retirement Program (“SERP”) and the interest rate hedge contracts. We base the valuations related to these items on assumptions derived from significant other observable inputs and accordingly these valuations fall into Level 2 in the fair value hierarchy. The fair values of these assets and liabilities at December 31, 2009 and 2008 are as follows (in millions):

   December 31, 2009  December 31, 2008
   Fair
Value
  Quoted
Prices in
Active
Markets
for
Identical
Assets
(Level 1)
  Significant
Other
Observable
Inputs
(Level 2)
  Significant
Unobservable
Inputs
(Level 3)
  Fair
Value
  Quoted
Prices in
Active
Markets
for
Identical
Assets
(Level 1)
  Significant
Other
Observable
Inputs
(Level 2)
  Significant
Unobservable
Inputs
(Level 3)

Assets:

                

SERP

  $1.1  $—    $1.1  $—    $0.6  $—    $0.6  $—  

Liabilities:

                

Derivatives

  $1.8  $—    $1.8  $—    $2.3  $—    $2.3  $—  

Derivative Instruments

In February 2008, we entered into an interest rate swap with a notional amount of $100 million that qualifies as a cash flow hedge. In May 2009, we entered into a forward interest rate swap with a notional amount of $100 million that qualifies as a cash flow hedge (see note 6 to the consolidated financial statements for further details). We enter into interest rate swaps to manage our exposure to variable rate interest risk. We do not purchase derivatives for speculation. Our cash flow hedges are recorded at fair value. We record the effective portion of changes in fair value of cash flow hedges in other comprehensive income. We record the ineffective portion of changes in fair value of cash flow hedges in earnings in the period affected. We assess the effectiveness of our cash flow hedges both at inception and on an ongoing basis. We deemed the hedges to be effective for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, as applicable.

The fair value and balance sheet locations of the interest rate swaps as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, are as follows (in millions):

   December 31,
2009
  December 31,
2008
   Fair Value  Fair Value

Accounts payable and other liabilities

  $1.8  $2.3

The interest rate swaps have been effective since inception. The gain or loss on the effective swaps is recognized in other comprehensive income, as follows (in millions):

   Years Ended December 31, 
   2009  2008 
   Fair Value  Fair Value 

Change in other comprehensive income (loss)

  $0.5  $(2.3

Derivative instruments expose us to credit risk in the event of non-performance by the counterparty under the terms of the interest rate hedge agreement. We believe that we minimize our credit risk on these transactions by dealing with major, creditworthy financial institutions. As part of our on-going control procedures, we monitor the credit ratings of counterparties and our exposure to any single entity, thus minimizing our credit risk concentration.

Stock Based Compensation

We currently maintain equity based compensation plans for trustees, officers and employees and previously also maintained option plans for trustees, officers and employees.

We recognizedrecognize compensation expense for time-based share units ratably over the period from the service inception date through the vesting period based on the fair market value of the shares on the date of grant. We initially measure compensation expense for restricted performance-based share units at fair value at the grant date as payouts are probable, and we remeasure compensation expense at subsequent reporting dates until all of the award’s key terms and conditions are known and a vesting has occurred. We amortize such performance-based share units to expense over the performance period. However, we measure compensation expense for performance-based share units with market conditions based on the grant date fair value, as determined using a Monte Carlo simulation, and we amortize the expense ratably over the requisite service period, regardless of whether the market conditions are achieved and the awards ultimately vest. Compensation expense for the trustee grants, which fully vest immediately, is fully recognized upon issuance based upon the fair market value of the shares on the date of grant.

We previously issued stock options to officers, non-officer key employees and trustees. We last issued stock options to officers in 2002, to non-officer key employees in 2003 and to trustees in 2004. We issued all stock options prior to the adoption of SFAS No. 123(R) and accounted for the stock options in accordance with APB No. 25, whereby if options are priced at fair market value or above at the date of grant and if other requirements are met then the plans are considered fixed and no compensation expense is recognized. Accordingly, we have recognized no compensation cost for stock options.

Earnings per Common Share

We determine “Basic earnings per share” using the two-class method as our unvested restricted share awards have non-forfeitable rights to dividends, and are therefore considered participating securities. We compute basic earnings per share by dividing net income attributable to the controlling interest less the allocation of undistributed earnings to unvested restricted share awards and units by the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding for the period.

We also determine “Diluted earnings per share” under the two-class method with respect to the unvested restricted share awards. We further evaluate any other potentially dilutive securities at the end of the period and adjust the basic earnings per share calculation for the impact of those securities that are dilutive. Our dilutive earnings per share calculation includes the dilutive impact of employee stock options based on the treasury stock method and our performance share units under the contingently issuable method. The dilutive earnings per share calculation also considers our operating partnership units and 3.875% convertible notes under the if-converted method. The operating partnership units and 3.875% convertible notes were anti-dilutive for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007.

The following table sets forth the computation of basic and diluted earnings per share (amounts in thousands; except per share data):

   Year Ended December 31, 2009 
   Income
(Numerator)
  Shares
(Denominator)
  Per Share
Amount
 

Basic earnings:

     

Income from continuing operations

  $26,021   56,894  $0.46  

Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests

   (203 56,894   (0.01

Allocation of undistributed earnings to unvested restricted share awards and units

   (111 56,894   —    
            

Adjusted income from continuing operations attributable to the controlling interests

   25,707   56,894   0.45  

Income from discontinued operations, including gain on sale of real estate

   14,927   56,894   0.26  
            

Adjusted net income attributable to the controlling interests

   40,634   56,894   0.71  

Effect of dilutive securities:

     

Employee stock options and performance share units

   —     74  

Diluted earnings:

     

Adjusted income from continuing operations attributable to the controlling interests

   25,707   56,968   0.45  

Income from discontinued operations, including gain on sale of real estate

   14,927   56,968   0.26  
            

Adjusted net income attributable to the controlling interests

  $40,634   56,968  $0.71  
            
   Year Ended December 31, 2008 
   Income
(Numerator)
  Shares
(Denominator)
  Per Share
Amount
 

Basic earnings:

     

Income from continuing operations

  $7,889   49,138  $0.16  

Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests

   (211 49,138   (0.01

Allocation of undistributed earnings to unvested restricted share awards and units

   (98 49,138   —    
            

Adjusted income from continuing operations attributable to the controlling interests

   7,580   49,138   0.15  

Income from discontinued operations, including gain on sale of real estate

   19,404   49,138   0.40  
            

Adjusted net income attributable to the controlling interests

   26,984   49,138   0.55  

Effect of dilutive securities:

     

Employee stock options and performance share units

   —     79  

Diluted earnings:

     

Adjusted income from continuing operations attributable to the controlling interests

   7,580   49,217   0.15  

Income from discontinued operations, including gain on sale of real estate

   19,404   49,217   0.40  
            

Adjusted net income attributable to the controlling interests

  $26,984   49,217  $0.55  
            

   Year Ended December 31, 2007 
   Income
(Numerator)
  Shares
(Denominator)
  Per Share
Amount
 

Basic earnings:

     

Income from continuing operations

  $25,136   45,911  $0.55  

Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests

   (217 45,911   —    

Allocation of undistributed earnings to unvested restricted share awards and units

   (256 45,911   (0.01
            

Adjusted income from continuing operations attributable to the controlling interests

   24,663   45,911  $0.54  

Income from discontinued operations, including gain on sale of real estate

   32,532   45,911   0.71  
            

Adjusted net income attributable to the controlling interests

   57,195   45,911   1.25  

Effect of dilutive securities:

     

Employee stock options and performance share units

   —     138  

Diluted earnings:

     

Adjusted income from continuing operations attributable to the controlling interests

   24,663   46,049   0.53  

Income from discontinued operations, including gain on sale of real estate

   32,532   46,049   0.71  
            

Adjusted net income attributable to the controlling interests

  $57,195   46,049  $1.24  
            

Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes

We can recognize a tax benefit only if it is “more likely than not” that a particular tax position will be sustained upon examination or audit. To the extent that the “more likely than not” standard has been satisfied, the benefit associated with a tax position is measured as the largest amount that is greater than 50% likely of being recognized upon settlement.

We are subject to U.S. federal income tax as well as income tax of the states of Maryland and Virginia, and the District of Columbia. However, as a REIT, we generally are not subject to income tax on our net income distributed as dividends to our shareholders.

Tax returns filed for 20062007 through 20092010 tax years are subject to examination by taxing authorities. We classify interest and penalties related to uncertain tax positions, if any, in our financial statements as a component of general and administrative expense.

Use of Estimates in the Financial Statements

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make certain estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Reclassifications

Certain prior year amounts have been reclassified from continuing operations to discontinued operations to conform to the current year presentation.

Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)

We recorded other comprehensive loss of $1.8$1.5 million and $2.3$1.8 million as of December 31, 20092010 and 2008,2009, respectively, to account for the changes in valuation of the interest rate swaps.

NOTE 3: REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS

Continuing Operations

Our real estate investment portfolio, at cost, consists of properties located in Maryland, Washington, D.C. and Virginia as follows (in thousands):

 

  December 31,  December 31, 
  2009  2008  2010   2009 

Office

  $1,024,938  $1,011,722  $1,060,288    $984,441  

Medical office

   394,804   367,651   398,559     394,804  

Retail

   267,932   266,897   351,395     267,932  

Multifamily

   319,375   316,837   321,719     319,375  

Industrial/flex

   304,466   301,734   284,926     283,854  
              
  $2,311,515  $2,264,841  $2,416,887    $2,250,406  
              

The amounts above reflect properties classified as continuing operations, which means they are to be held and used in rental operations (income producing property).

We have several properties in development. In the office segment, Dulles Station, Phase II remains in development. In the medical office segment, we have land under development at 4661 Kenmore Avenue. The cost of our real estate portfolio in development as of December 31, 20092010 and 20082009 is illustrated below (in thousands):

 

  December 31,  December 31, 
  2009  2008  2010   2009 

Office

  $19,442  $18,453  $20,172    $19,442  

Medical office

   5,153   4,815   5,463     5,153  

Retail

   371   239   546     371  

Multifamily

   65   225   59     65  

Industrial/flex

   —     —     —       —    
              
  $25,031  $23,732  $26,240    $25,031  
              

Our results of operations are dependent on the overall economic health of our markets, tenants and the specific segments in which we own properties. These segments include general purpose office, medical office, retail, multifamily and industrial. All segments are affected by external economic factors, such as inflation, consumer confidence, unemployment rates, etc. as well as changing tenant and consumer requirements. Because the properties are located in the Washington metro region, the Company is subject to a concentration of credit risk related to these properties.

As of December 31, 20092010 no single property or tenant accounted for more than 10% of total assets or total real estate rental revenue.

Properties we acquired during the years ending December 31, 2010, 2009 2008 and 20072008 are as follows:

 

Acquisition Date

  

Property

  Type  Rentable
Square
Feet
(unaudited)
  Contract
Purchase Price
(In thousands)

August 13, 2009

  Lansdowne Medical Office Building  Medical Office  87,000  $19,900
           
    Total 2009  87,000  $19,900
           

February 22, 2008

  6100 Columbia Park Road  Industrial/Flex  150,000  $11,200

May 21, 2008

  Sterling Medical Office Building  Medical Office  36,000   6,500

September 3, 2008

  Kenmore Apartments (374 units)  Multifamily  270,000   58,300

December 2, 2008

  2445 M Street  Office  290,000   181,400
           
    Total 2008  746,000  $257,400
           

February 8, 2007

  270 Technology Park  Industrial/Flex  157,000  $26,500

March 1, 2007

  Monument II  Office  205,000   78,200

March 9, 2007

  2440 M Street  Medical Office  110,000   50,000

June 1, 2007

  Woodholme Medical Office Building  Medical Office  125,000   30,800

June 1, 2007

  Woodholme Center  Office  73,000   18,200

June 1, 2007

  Ashburn Farm Office Park  Medical Office  75,000   23,000

August 16, 2007

  CentreMed I & II  Medical Office  52,000   15,300

August 30, 2007

  4661 Kenmore Avenue  Land for Development  n/a   3,750

December 4, 2007

  2000 M Street  Office  227,000   73,500
           
    Total 2007  1,024,000  $319,250
           

Acquisition Date

  

Property

  Type  Rentable
Square  Feet
(unaudited)
   Contract
Purchase  Price
(In thousands)
 

June 3, 2010

  925 and 1000 Corporate Drive  Office   271,000    $68,000  

December 1, 2010

  Gateway Overlook  Retail   223,000     88,400  
              
    Total 2010   494,000    $156,400  
              

August 13, 2009

  Lansdowne Medical Office Building  Medical Office   87,000    $19,900  
              
    Total 2009   87,000    $19,900  
              

February 22, 2008

  6100 Columbia Park Road  Industrial/Flex   150,000    $11,200  

May 21, 2008

  Sterling Medical Office Building  Medical Office   36,000     6,500  

September 3, 2008

  Kenmore Apartments (374 units)  Multifamily   270,000     58,300  

December 2, 2008

  2445 M Street  Office   290,000     181,400  
              
    Total 2008   746,000    $257,400  
              

As discussed in note 2 to the consolidated financial statements, we record the acquired physical assets (land, building and tenant improvements), in-place leases (absorption, tenant origination costs, leasing commissions, and net lease intangible assets/liabilities), and any other liabilities at their fair values. Our sole 2009 acquisition, Lansdowne Medical Office Building, was vacant as of the acquisition date, so we did not acquire any absorption costs, leasing commissions, tenant origination costs or net intangible lease assets/liabilities during 2009.

We have allocatedrecorded the total purchase price of the above acquisitions as follows (in millions):

 

  Allocation of Purchase Price   Recordation of Purchase Price 
  2009  2008 2007   2010 2009   2008 

Land

  $1.3  $80.8   $43.0    $38.2   $1.3    $80.8  

Buildings

   18.6   140.1    258.6     93.3    18.6     140.1  

Tenant origination costs

   —     10.4    11.8     9.1    —       10.4  

Leasing commissions/absorption costs

   —     18.2    17.7     15.4    —       18.2  

Net lease intangible assets

   —     1.8    0.4     1.4    —       1.8  

Net lease intangible liabilities

   —     (10.4  (10.5   (1.5  —       (10.4

Furniture, fixtures & equipment

   —     1.0    —       —      —       1.0  

Discount on assumed mortgage

   —     10.1    —       —      —       10.1  
                     

Total*

  $19.9  $252.0   $321.0    $155.9   $19.9    $252.0  
                     

 

*Additional settlement costs, closing costs and adjustments are included in the basis for 2008 and 2007.2008.

A note receivable with a fair value of $7.3 million was acquired in conjunction with 2445 M Street in 2008 and is recorded separately as a note receivable in accounts receivable and other assets on the consolidated balance sheets.sheets.

The weighted remaining average life in months for the components above, other than land and building, are 68 months for tenant origination costs, 86 months for leasing commissions/absorption costs, 65 months for net lease intangible assets and 112 months for net lease intangible liabilities.

The $0.5 million difference in total 2010 contract purchase price of $156.4 million and the recordation of purchase price of $155.9 million is due to a credit received at settlement for future tenant allowance obligations for Gateway Overlook.

The difference in total 2008 contract purchase price of properties acquired of $257.4 million and the acquisition cost per the consolidated statements of cash flows of $168.2 million is primarily the $101.9 million mortgage note assumed, offset by cash escrow accounts acquired totaling $11.4 million, both related to the 2445 M Street purchase. The remaining difference of $1.3 million is for additional settlement costs, closing costs and non-cash adjustments on all 2008 acquisitions.

The difference in total 2007 contract purchase pricefollowing unaudited pro-forma combined condensed statements of properties acquiredoperations set forth the consolidated results of $319.3 millionoperations for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009 as if the above described acquisitions had occurred at the beginning of the period of acquisition and the acquisition cost persame period in the consolidated statementsyear prior to the acquisition. The unaudited pro-forma

information does not purport to be indicative of cash flows of $294.2 million is the $26.8 million in mortgages assumed onresults that actually would have occurred if the acquisitions of Woodholme Medical Office Building, Woodholme Centerhad been in effect for the years ended December 31, 2010 and Ashburn Farm Office Park, offset by $1.7 million for additional settlement costs, closing costs and adjustments on all acquisitions.

December 31, 2009. The unaudited data presented is in thousands, except per share data.

   Year Ended December 31, 
   2010   2009 

Real estate revenues

  $308,309    $314,068  

Income from continuing operations

  $17,267    $29,351  

Net income

  $41,696    $46,474  

Diluted earnings per share

  $0.67    $0.81  

Discontinued Operations

We dispose of assets (sometimes using tax-deferred exchanges) that no longer meet our long-term strategy or return objectives and where market conditions for sale are favorable. The proceeds from the sales may be reinvested into other properties, used to fund development operations or to support other corporate needs, or distributed to our shareholders. Properties are considered held for sale when they meet specified criteria (see note 2 – Discontinued Operations). Depreciation on these properties is discontinued at that time, but operating revenues, other operating expenses and interest continue to be recognized until the date of sale. We have one propertyhad no properties classified as sold or held for sale at December 31, 2010 and eight as sold or held for sale at December 31, 2009, and five as held for sale at December 31, 2008, as follows (in thousands):

 

  December 31,   December 31, 
  2009 2008       2010       2009 

Office property

  $—     $3,050    $—      $40,497  

Multifamily property

   —      17,227  

Industrial/Flex properties

   4,915    17,796     —       25,526  
               

Total

  $4,915   $38,073    $—      $66,023  

Less accumulated depreciation

   (1,074  (11,339   —       (17,387
               
  $3,841   $26,734    $—      $48,636  
               

Properties that wereWe sold or classified as held for salethe following properties during the three years endingended December 31, 2009 are as follows:2010:

 

Disposition Date

  

Property

  Type  Rentable
Square Feet
(unaudited)
  Contract Sales
Price

(in thousands)
  Gain on Sale
(in thousands)
  

Property

  Type  Rentable
Square Feet
(unaudited)
   Contract
Sales Price

(in thousands)
   Gain on Sale
(in  thousands)
 

June 18, 2010

  Parklawn Portfolio(1)  Office/Industrial   229,000    $23,400    $7,900  

December 21, 2010

  The Ridges  Office   104,000     27,500     4,500  

December 22, 2010

  Ammendale I&II and Amvax  Industrial   305,000     23,000     9,200  
                
    Total 2010   638,000    $73,900    $21,600  
                

May 13, 2009

  Avondale  Multifamily  170,000  $19,800  $6,700  Avondale  Multifamily   170,000    $19,800    $6,700  

July 23, 2009

  Tech 100 Industrial Park  Industrial  166,000   10,500   4,100  Tech 100 Industrial Park  Industrial   166,000     10,500     4,100  

July 31, 2009

  Brandywine Center  Office  35,000   3,300   1,000  Brandywine Center  Office   35,000     3,300     1,000  

November 13, 2009

  Crossroads Distribution Center  Industrial  85,000   4,400   1,500  Crossroads Distribution Center  Industrial   85,000     4,400     1,500  
  Charleston Business Center  Industrial  85,000   Held for sale   n/a                
                 Total 2009   456,000    $38,000    $13,300  
    Total 2009  541,000  $38,000  $13,300                
             

June 6, 2008

  Sullyfield Center/The Earhart Building  Industrial  336,000  $41,100  $15,300  Sullyfield Center/The Earhart Building  Industrial   336,000    $41,100    $15,300  
                             
    Total 2008  336,000  $41,100  $15,300    Total 2008   336,000    $41,100    $15,300  
                             

September 26, 2007

  Maryland Trade Center I & II  Office  342,000  $58,000  $25,000
             
    Total 2007  342,000  $58,000  $25,000
             

Charleston Business Center, an industrial property, met the criteria necessary for classification as held for sale as of March 31, 2009. Senior management has committed to, and actively embarked upon, a plan to sell this asset and the sale is expected to be completed within one year under terms usual and customary for such sales, with no indications that the plan will be significantly altered or abandoned. Depreciation on this property has been discontinued as of the date it was classified as held for sale, but operating revenues and expenses continue to be recognized until the date of sale. Under GAAP, revenues and expenses of properties that are classified as held for sale are treated as discontinued operations for all periods presented in the consolidated statements of income.

(1)

The Parklawn Portfolio consists of three office properties (Parklawn Plaza, Lexington Building and Saratoga Building) and one industrial property (Charleston Business Center).

Operating results of the properties classified as discontinued operations are summarized as follows (in thousands):

 

  Operating Income For the Year Ending
December 31,
   Operating Income For the Year Ending
December 31,
 
  2009 2008 2007   2010 2009 2008 

Revenues

  $3,346   $8,496   $16,111    $8,159   $ 12,114   $ 18,478  

Property expenses

   (1,362  (3,128  (5,940   (2,987  (4,631  (6,405

Depreciation and amortization

   (405  (1,239  (2,661   (1,754  (2,779  (3,916

Interest expense

   (589  (927  (946
                    
  $1,579   $4,129   $7,510    $2,829   $3,777   $7,211  
                    

Operating income by each property classified as discontinued operations is summarized below (in thousands):

 

     Operating Income For the Year Ending
December 31,
     Operating Income For the Year Ending
December 31,
 

Property

  Segment  2009  2008  2007  

Segment

  2010   2009   2008 

Maryland Trade Center I & II

  Office  $—    $—    $2,474

Sullyfield Center

  Industrial   —     1,070   1,492  Industrial  $—      $—      $1,070  

The Earhart Building

  Industrial   —     421   754  Industrial   —       —       421  

Avondale

  Multifamily   392   861   784  Multifamily   —       392     861  

Charleston Business Center

  Industrial   688   718   710

Tech 100 Industrial Park

  Industrial   261   668   807  Industrial   —       261     668  

Brandywine Center

  Office   85   192   195  Office   —       85     192  

Crossroads Distribution Center

  Industrial   153   199   294  Industrial   —       153     199  

Parklawn Plaza

  Office   132     147     135  

Lexington Building

  Office   65     127     428  

Saratoga Building

  Office   225     436     546  

Charleston Business Center

  Industrial   370     688     718  

The Ridges

  Office   678     175     563  

Ammendale I&II

  Industrial   1,023     986     1,180  

Amvax

  Industrial   336     327     230  
                         
    $1,579  $4,129  $7,510    $2,829    $3,777    $7,211  
                         

NOTE 4: MORTAGEMORTGAGE NOTES PAYABLE

 

  December 31,  December 31, 
  2009  2008  2010   2009 

On September 27, 1999, we executed a $50.0 million mortgage note payable secured by Munson Hill Towers, Country Club Towers, Roosevelt Towers, Park Adams Apartments and the Ashby of McLean. The mortgage bore interest at 7.14% per annum and interest only was payable monthly until October 1, 2009, at which time all unpaid principal and interest would have been payable in full. On July 1, 2009, we prepaid this mortgage note payable in its entirety without any prepayment penalties.

  $—    $50,000

On October 9, 2003, we assumed a $36.1 million mortgage note payable and a $13.7 million mortgage note payable as partial consideration for our acquisition of Prosperity Medical Center. The mortgages bear interest at 5.36% per annum and 5.34% per annum respectively. Principal and interest are payable monthly until May 1, 2013, at which time all unpaid principal and interest are payable in full.

   44,975   45,811   43,987     44,975  

On August 12, 2004, we assumed a $10.1 million mortgage note payable with an estimated fair value* of $11.2 million, as partial consideration for our acquisition of Shady Grove Medical Village II. The mortgage bears interest at 6.98% per annum. Principal and interest are payable monthly until December 1, 2011, at which time all unpaid principal and interest are payable in full.

   9,688   9,992   9,375     9,688  
On December 22, 2004, we assumed a $15.6 million mortgage note payable with an estimated fair value* of $17.8 million, and a $3.9 million mortgage note payable with an estimated fair value* of $4.2 million as partial consideration for our acquisition of Dulles Business Park. The mortgages bear interest at 7.09% per annum and 5.94% per annum, respectively. Principal and interest are payable monthly until August 10, 2012, at which time all unpaid principal and interest are payable in full.   18,311     18,969  
On March 23, 2005, we assumed a $24.3 million mortgage note payable with an estimated fair value* of $25.0 million as partial consideration for our acquisition of Frederick Crossing. The mortgage bears interest at 5.95% per annum. Principal and interest are payable monthly until January 1, 2013, at which time all unpaid principal and interest are payable in full.   22,268     22,798  

On December 22, 2004, we assumed a $15.6 million mortgage note payable with an estimated fair value* of $17.8 million, and a $3.9 million mortgage note payable with an estimated fair value* of $4.2 million as partial consideration for our acquisition of Dulles Business Park. The mortgages bear interest at 7.09% per annum and 5.94% per annum, respectively. Principal and interest are payable monthly until August 10, 2012, at which time all unpaid principal and interest are payable in full.

   18,969   19,610

On March 23, 2005, we assumed a $24.3 million mortgage note payable with an estimated fair value* of $25.0 million as partial consideration for our acquisition of Frederick Crossing. The mortgage bears interest at 5.95% per annum. Principal and interest are payable monthly until January 1, 2013, at which time all unpaid principal and interest are payable in full.

   22,798   23,304

On April 13, 2006, we assumed a $5.7 million mortgage note payable as partial consideration for the acquisition of 9707 Medical Center Drive. The mortgage bears interest at 5.32% per annum. Principal and interest are payable monthly until July 1, 2028, at which time all unpaid principal and interest are payable in full.

   5,121   5,278   4,955     5,121  

On June 22, 2006, we assumed a $4.9 million mortgage note payable as partial consideration for the acquisition of Plumtree Medical Center. The mortgage bears interest at 5.68% per annum. Principal and interest are payable monthly until March 11, 2013, at which time all unpaid principal and interest are payable in full.

   4,601   4,684   4,512     4,601  

On July 12, 2006, we assumed an $8.8 million mortgage note payable as partial consideration for the acquisition of 15005 Shady Grove Road. The mortgage bears interest at 5.73% per annum. Principal and interest are payable monthly until March 11, 2013, at which time all unpaid principal and interest are payable in full.

   8,313   8,468   8,149     8,313  

On August 25, 2006, we assumed a $34.2 million mortgage note payable as partial consideration for the acquisition of 20-50 West Gude Drive. The mortgage bears interest at 5.86% per annum. Principal and interest are payable monthly until February 11, 2013, at which time all unpaid principal and interest are payable in full.

   32,170   32,815   31,486     32,170  

On August 25, 2006, we assumed a $23.1 million mortgage note payable as partial consideration for the acquisition of The Crescent and The Ridges. The mortgage bears interest at 5.82%** per annum. Principal and interest are payable monthly until August 11, 2033** at which time all unpaid principal and interest are payable in full. The note may be repaid without penalty on August 11, 2010.

   21,888   22,277

On June 1, 2007, we assumed a $21.2 million mortgage note payable as partial consideration for the acquisition of Woodholme Medical Office Building. The mortgage bears interest at 5.29% per annum. Principal and interest are payable monthly until November 1, 2015, at which time all unpaid principal and interest are payable in full.

   20,599   20,897   20,285     20,599  

On June 1, 2007, we assumed a $3.1 million mortgage note payable and a $3.0 million mortgage note payable as partial consideration for our acquisition of the Ashburn Farm Office Park. The mortgages bear interest at 5.56% per annum and 5.69% per annum, respectively. Principal and interest are payable monthly until May 31, 2025 and July 31, 2023, respectively, at which time all unpaid principal and interest are payable in full.

   5,073   5,291   4,841     5,073  

On May 29, 2008, we executed three mortgage notes payable totaling $81.0 million secured by 3801 Connecticut Avenue, Walker House and Bethesda Hill. The mortgages bear interest at 5.71% per annum and interest only is payable monthly until May 31, 2016, at which time all unpaid principal and interest are payable in full.

   81,029   81,029   81,029     81,029  

On December 2, 2008, we assumed a $101.9 million mortgage note payable with an estimated fair value* of $91.7 million as partial consideration for the acquisition of 2445 M Street. The mortgage bears interest at 5.62% per annum. Interest is payable monthly until January 6, 2017, at which time all unpaid principal and interest are payable in full.

   93,084   91,830   94,339     93,084  

On February 2, 2009, we executed a $37.5 million mortgage note payable secured by Kenmore Apartments. The mortgage bears interest at 5.37% per annum. Principal and interest are payable monthly until March 1, 2019, at which time all unpaid principal and interest are payable in full.

   37,143   —     36,634     37,143  
              
  $405,451  $421,286  $380,171    $383,563  
              

*The fair value of the mortgage notes payable was estimated upon acquisition by WRIT based upon market information and data, such as dealer or banker quotes for instruments with similar terms and maturities. There is no notation when the fair value at the inception of the mortgage is the same as the carrying value.

**If the loan is not repaid on August 11, 2010, from and after August 11, 2010, the interest rate adjusts to one of the following rates: (i) the greater of (A) 10.82% or (B) the Treasury Rate (determined as of August 11, 2010, and defined as the yield calculated using linear interpolation approximating the period from August 11, 2010 to August 11, 2033 on the basis of Federal Reserve Stat. Release H.15-Selected Interest Rates under the heading U.S. Governmental Security/Treasury Constant Maturities) plus 5%; or (ii) if the Note is an asset of an entity formed for purposes of securitization and pursuant thereto securities rated by a rating agency have been issued, then the rate will equal: the greater of (A) 7.82% or (B) the Treasury Rate plus 2%. Due to the probability that the mortgage will not be paid off on August 11, 2010, the date reflected in the future maturities schedule is August 11, 2033.

Total carrying amount of the above mortgaged properties was $645.2$623.6 million and $666.0$621.0 million at December 31, 20092010 and 2008,2009, respectively. Scheduled principal payments during the five years subsequent to December 31, 20092010 and thereafter are as follows (in thousands):

 

  Principal Payments   Principal Payments 

2010

  $4,510  

2011

   13,788    $13,349  

2012

   21,823     21,362  

2013

   107,123     106,630  

2014

   2,038     1,516  

2015

   20,041  

Thereafter

   263,579     223,978  
        
   412,861     386,876  

Net discounts/premiums

   (7,410   (6,705
        

Total

  $405,451    $380,171  
        

As of December 31, 2009, “Other liabilities related to properties sold or held for sale” includes a $21.9 million mortgage note payable secured by the Ridges, a property sold during the fourth quarter of 2010. We had repaid this mortgage note payable without penalty on July 12, 2010.

NOTE 5: UNSECURED LINES OF CREDIT PAYABLE

As of December 31, 2009,2010, we maintained a $75.0 million unsecured line of credit maturing in June 2011 (“Credit Facility No. 1”) and a $262.0 million unsecured line of credit maturing in November 20102011 (“Credit Facility No. 2”).

Credit Facility No. 1

We had $28.0 million outstanding as The amounts of these lines of credit unused and available at December 31, 2009 related to2010 are as follows (in millions):

   Credit Facility
No. 1
  Credit Facility
No. 2
 

Committed capacity

  $75.0   $262.0  

Borrowings outstanding

   —      (100.0

Letters of credit issued

   (0.8  (0.9
         

Unused and available

  $74.2   $161.1  
         

We executed borrowings and repayments on the unsecured lines of credit during 2010 as follows (in millions):

   Credit Facility
No. 1
  Credit Facility
No. 2
 

Balance at December 31, 2009

  $28.0   $100.0  

Borrowings

   68.8    —    

Repayments

   (96.8  —    
         

Balance at December 31, 2010

  $—     $100.0  
         

We made borrowings under Credit Facility No. 1 and $1.4 million in letters of credit issued, with $45.6 million unused and available for subsequent acquisitions, capital improvements or general corporate purposes. We had no balance outstanding under this facility at December 31, 2008. During 2009, we borrowed $64.5 millionthroughout 2010 to fund repurchasesour acquisitions of convertible debt, fund the acquisition Lansdowne Medical Office BuildingQuantico Corporate Center and pay dividends.Gateway Overlook and to repay a mortgage note payable. We repaid 36.5 millionthese borrowings using proceeds from the May 2009 equity offering, equity issued under our sales agency financing agreement and property sales.agreement.

Borrowings under the facilityCredit Facility No. 1 bear interest at our option of LIBOR plus a spread based on the credit rating on our publicly issued debt or the higher of SunTrust Bank’s prime rate and the Federal Funds Rate in effect plus 0.5%. The interest rate spread is currently 42.5 basis points. All outstanding advances are due and payable upon maturity in June 2011. Interest only payments are due and payable generally on a monthly basis. For the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, we recognized interest expense (excluding facility fees) of $40,300, $1,603,900 and $807,200, respectively, representing an average interest rate of 0.70%, 5.16% and 5.52%, respectively.

In addition, we pay a facility fee based on the credit rating of our publicly issued debt which currently equals 0.15% per annum of the $75.0 million committed capacity, without regard to usage. Rates and fees may be adjusted up or down based on changes in our senior unsecured credit ratings. For the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, we incurred facility fees of $114,100, $103,800 and $53,700, respectively.

Borrowings under Credit Facility No. 2

We had $100.0 million outstanding as of December 31, 2009 related to Credit Facility No. 2, and $0.9 million in letters of credit issued, with $161.1 million unused and available for subsequent acquisitions, capital improvements or general corporate purposes. $67.0 million was outstanding under this facility at December 31, 2008. During 2009, we borrowed $150.0 million to fund the repurchases of convertible debt, prepay a mortgage note payable and prepay the $100.0 million term loan. We repaid $117.0 million using proceeds from the May 2009 equity offering, equity issued under our sales agency financing agreement and property sales.

Advances under this agreement bear interest at our option of LIBOR plus a spread based on the credit rating of our publicly issued debt or the higher of Wells Fargo Bank’s prime rate and the Federal Funds Rate in effect plus 0.5%. The interest rate spread for both credit facilities is currently 42.5 basis points. However,

For Credit Facility No. 2, the interest rate on the $100.0 million in outstanding borrowings used to prepay the term

loan is effectively fixed by a forward interest rate swapsswap (see note 610 to the consolidated financial statements). An interest rate swap currently fixesWith the interest rate at 3.375% (2.95% plus the 42.5 basis point spread) through February 19, 2010. When a forward interest rate swap, becomesthe effective on February 20, 2010, we anticipate that the interest rate on the $100.0 million borrowing will beis currently 2.525% (2.10% plus the current interest rate spread of 42.5 basis points) through the forward interest rate swap’s maturity date of November 1, 2011. .

All outstanding advances for Credit Facilities No. 1 and 2 are due and payable upon maturity in June 2011 and November 2010.2011, respectively. Credit Facility No. 1 may be extended for one year at our option. Interest only payments are due and payable generally on a monthly basis. For the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 2008 and 2007,2008, we recognized interest expense (excluding facility fees) of $513,500, $3,049,000 and $4,579,000 representing anas follows (in millions):

   2010   2009   2008 

Credit Facility No. 1

  $0.1    $0.0    $1.6  

Credit Facility No.2

  $2.7    $0.5    $3.0  

The average interest rate of 1.81%, 4.94%on borrowings for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 5.77%, respectively.2008 was as follows:

Currently, Credit Facility No. 2 requires us to

   2010  2009  2008 

Credit Facility No. 1

   0.71  0.70  5.16

Credit Facility No.2

   2.65  1.81  4.94

In addition, we pay the lender a facility fee based on the total commitmentcredit rating of our publicly issued debt which currently equals 0.15% per annum. Theseannum of the committed capacity of each credit facility, without regard to usage. Rates and fees are payable quarterly.may be adjusted up or down based on changes in our senior unsecured credit ratings. For the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 2008 and 2007,2008, we incurred facility fees of $396,900, $393,400 and $304,200, respectively.as follows (in millions):

Credit Facility No. 3

Credit Facility No. 3 was a $70.0 million line of credit that was terminated on June 29, 2007 and replaced by Credit Facility No. 1. At December 31, 2006, $28.0 million was outstanding under this facility, which was repaid during the first quarter of 2007 with proceeds from the $150 million 3.875% convertible notes issued in January 2007. Advances under this agreement bore interest at LIBOR plus a spread based on the credit rating on our publicly issued debt. Interest only payments were due and payable on a monthly basis. For the year ended December 31, 2007, we recognized interest expense (excluding facility fees) of $96,400, representing an average interest rate of 5.90% per annum.

From July 2005 through June 2007, Credit Facility No. 3 required us to pay the lender an annual facility fee on the total commitment of 0.15%, per annum. These fees were payable quarterly. For the year ended December 31, 2007, we incurred facility fees of $52,800.

   2010   2009   2008 

Credit Facility No. 1

  $0.1    $0.1    $0.1  

Credit Facility No.2

  $0.4    $0.4    $0.4  

Credit Facility No. 1 and No. 2 contain certain financial and non-financial covenants, all of which we have met as of December 31, 2009.2010.

Information related to revolving credit facilities is as follows (in thousands):

 

  2009 2008 2007   2010 2009 2008 

Total revolving credit facilities at December 31

  $337,000   $337,000   $275,000    $337,000   $337,000   $337,000  

Borrowings outstanding at December 31

   128,000    67,000    192,500     100,000    128,000    67,000  

Weighted average daily borrowings during the year

   33,656    91,262    95,642     112,573    33,656    91,262  

Maximum daily borrowings during the year

   128,000    192,500    192,500     141,000    128,000    192,500  

Weighted average interest rate during the year

   1.62  5.01  5.73   2.43  1.62  5.01

Weighted average interest rate at December 31

   2.79  1.48  5.41   2.53  2.79  1.48

NOTE 6: NOTES PAYABLE

On February 20, 1998, we issued $50.0 million of 7.25% unsecured notes due February 25, 2028 at 98.653% to yield approximately 7.36%.

On March 17, 2003, we issued $60.0 million of 5.125% unsecured notes due March 2013. The notes bear an effective interest rate of 5.23%. Our total proceeds, net of underwriting fees, were $59.1 million. We used portions of the proceeds of these notes to repay advances on our lines of credit and to fund general corporate purposes.

On December 11, 2003, we issued $100.0 million of 5.25% unsecured notes due January 2014. The notes bear an effective interest rate of 5.34%. Our total proceeds, net of underwriting fees, were $99.3 million. We used portions of the proceeds of these notes to repay advances on our lines of credit.

On April 26, 2005, we issued $50.0 million of 5.05% unsecured notes due May 1, 2012 and $50.0 million of 5.35% unsecured notes due May 1, 2015, at effective yields of 5.064% and 5.359% respectively. The net proceeds from the sale of the notes of $99.1 million were used to repay borrowings under our lines of credit totaling $90.5 million and the remainder was used for general corporate purposes.

On October 6, 2005, we issued an additional $100.0 million of the series of 5.35% unsecured notes due May 1, 2015, at an effective yield of 5.49%. $93.5 million of the $98.1 million net proceeds from the sale of these notes was used to repay borrowings under our lines of credit and the remainder was used to fund general corporate purposes.

On June 6, 2006, we issued $100.0 million of 5.95% unsecured notes due June 15, 2011 at 99.951% of par, resulting in an effective interest rate of 5.96%. Our total proceeds, net of underwriting fees, were $99.4 million. We used the proceeds of these notes to repay advances on one of our lines of credit.

On July 26, 2006, we issued an additional $50.0 million of the series of 5.95% unsecured notes due June 15, 2011 at 100.127% of par, resulting in an effective yield of 5.92%. Our total proceeds, net of underwriting fees, were $50.2 million. We used the proceeds of these notes to repay borrowings under our lines of credit and to fund general corporate purposes.

On October 1, 2010 we repurchased $56.1 million of the 5.95% unsecured notes due June 15, 2011 at 103.8% of par, resulting in a net loss on extinguishment of debt of $2.4 million, net of unamortized debt costs and debt discounts. As of December 31, 2010, $93.9 million of the 5.95% unsecured notes due June 15, 2011 was outstanding.

On September 30, 2010, we issued $250.0 million of 4.95% unsecured notes due October 1, 2020, at an effective interest rate of 5.053%. Our total proceeds, net of underwriting fees, were $245.8 million. We used a portion of the proceeds to repurchase $122.8 million of our outstanding 3.875% convertible notes due in 2026 and $56.1 million of our 5.95% senior notes due in 2011, and used the remaining proceeds to repay borrowings under our lines of credit and for general corporate purposes.

On September 11, 2006, we issued $100.0 million of 3.875% convertible notes due September 15, 2026. On September 22, 2006, we issued an additional $10.0 million of the 3.875% convertible notes due September 15, 2026, upon the exercise by the underwriter of an over-allotment option granted by WRIT. The notes were issued at 99.5% of par. Our total proceeds, net of underwriting fees, were $106.7 million. We used the proceeds of these notes to repay borrowings under our lines of credit and to fund general corporate purposes.

On January 22, 2007, we issued an additional $135.0 million of the 3.875% convertible notes due September 15, 2026. On January 30, 2007, we issued an additional $15.0 million of the 3.875% convertible notes due September 15, 2026, upon the exercise by the underwriter of an over-allotment option granted by WRIT. The notes were issued at 100.5% of par. Our total proceeds, net of underwriting fees, were $146.0 million. We used the proceeds of these notes to fund the acquisition of 270 Technology Park and a portion of the acquisition of Monument II, to repay borrowings under our lines of credit and to fund general corporate purposes.

We recorded the 3.875% convertible notes in the consolidated balance sheets as notes payable less a component of the total debt, representing the conversion feature, which is bifurcated and recorded in equity. As a result, as of the inception of the 3.875% convertible notes, we classified $21.0 million of the 3.875% convertible notes’ original carrying amount into shareholders’ equity. We accrete to interest expense the resulting discount on the debt3.875% convertible notes over the expected life of the debt. The effective rate on the 3.875% convertible notesdebt after bifurcating the equity component reflects our nonconvertible debt borrowing rate at the inception of the 3.875% convertible notes, which was 5.875%.

The convertible notes are convertible into our common shares at the option of the holder, under specific circumstances or on or after July 15, 2026, at an initial exchange rate of 20.090 common shares per $1,000 principal amount of notes. This is equivalent to an initial conversion price of $49.78 per common share, which represents a 22% premium over the $40.80 closing price of our common shares at the time the September 2006 transaction was priced and a 21% premium over the $41.17 closing price of our common shares at the time the January 2007 transaction was priced. Holders may convert their notes into our common shares prior to the maturity date based on the applicable conversion rate during any fiscal quarter if the closing price of our common shares for at least 20 trading days in the 30 consecutive trading day period ending on the last trading day of the immediate preceding fiscal quarter is more than 130% of the conversion price per common share on the last day of such preceding fiscal quarter. The initial conversion rate is subject to adjustment in certain circumstances including an adjustment to the rate if the quarterly dividend rate to common shareholders is in excess of $0.4125 per share. In addition, the conversion rate will be adjusted if we make distributions of cash or other consideration by us or any of our subsidiaries in respect of a tender offer or exchange offer for our common shares, to the extent such cash and the value of any such other consideration per common share validly tendered or exchanged exceeds the closing price of our common shares as defined in the note offering. Upon an exchange of notes, we will settle any amounts up to the principal amount of the notes in cash and the remaining exchange value, if any, will be settled, at our option, in cash, common shares or a combination thereof. The convertible notes could have a dilutive impact on our earnings per share calculation in the future. However, these convertible notes are not dilutive for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 2008 and 2007,2008, and are not included in our earnings per share calculations.

On or after September 20, 2011, we may redeem the convertible notes at a redemption price equal to the principal amount of the convertible notes plus any accrued and unpaid interest, if any, up to, but excluding, the purchase date. In addition, on September 15, 2011, September 15, 2016 and September 15, 2021 or following the occurrence of certain change in control transactions prior to September 15, 2011, holders of these notes may require us to repurchase the convertible notes for an amount equal to the principal amount of the convertible notes plus any accrued and unpaid interest thereon.

During 2009,the three years ended December 31, 2010 we repurchased $109.7 millionportions of the 3.875% convertible notes, at an average of 87.9% of par, resulting in a net gainas follows (in millions, except for %):

   Years Ended December 31, 
   2010  2009  2008 

Principal amount repurchased

  $131.7   $109.7   $16.0  

Average repurchase price

(as a % of par value)

   102.6  87.9  75.0

Net gain (loss) on extinguishment of debt

  $(6.8 $6.8   $2.9  

All gains or losses on extinguishment of debt of $6.8 million,are net of unamortized debt costs and debt discounts. During 2008, we repurchased $16.0 million

The net carrying amount of the convertible notes at 75.0% of par, resulting in a net gain on extinguishment of debt of $2.9 million, net of unamortized debt costs and debt discounts. No repurchases were made during 2007. As of December 31, 2009 and 2008, the amount outstandingprincipal is as follows (in thousands):

   December 31, 
   2010  2009 

Principal, gross

  $2,659   $134,328  

Unamortized discount

   (36  (4,307
         

Principal, net

   $2,623    $130,021  
         

The remaining discount is being amortized through September, 2011, on the convertible notes was $134.3 million and $244.0 million, respectively.effective interest method.

The interest expense recognized relating to the contractual interest coupon and relating to the amortization of the discount was as follows (in millions):

 

   Years Ended December 31,
   2009  2008  2007

Contractual interest coupon

  $6.6  $10.1  $9.7

Amortization of the discount

  $2.9  $4.3  $3.9

The carrying amount of the equity component as of December 31, 2009 and 2008 is $21.0 million. The net carrying amount of the principal is as follows (in thousands):

   December 31, 
   2009  2008 

Principal, gross

  $134,328   $244,000  

Unamortized discount

   (4,307  (12,047
         

Principal, net

  $130,021   $231,953  
         

The remaining discount is being amortized through September, 2011, on the effective interest method.

   Years Ended December 31, 
   2010   2009   2008 

Contractual interest coupon

  $4.2    $6.6    $10.1  

Amortization of the discount

  $2.0    $2.9    $4.3  

During the first quarter of 2008, we repaid the $60 million outstanding principal balance under our 6.74% 10-year Mandatory Par Put Remarketed Securities (“MOPPRS”) notes. The total aggregate consideration paid to repurchase the notes was $70.8 million, which amount included the $8.7 million remarketing option value paid to the remarketing dealer and accrued interest paid to the holders. The loss on extinguishment of debt was $8.4 million, net of unamortized loan premium costs, upon settlement of these securities.

On February 21, 2008, we entered into a $100 million unsecured term loan (the “Term Loan”) with Wells Fargo Bank, National Association. The Term Loan had a maturity date of February 19, 2010 and bore interest at our option of LIBOR plus 1.50% or Wells Fargo’s prime rate.

On May 7, 2009, we entered into an agreement to modify the Term Loan with Wells Fargo, National Association to extend the maturity date from February 19, 2010 to November 1, 2011. This agreement also increased the interest rate on the Term Loan from LIBOR plus 1.50% to LIBOR plus 2.75%. To hedge our exposure to interest rate fluctuations on the Term Loan, we previously had entered into an interest rate swap on a notional amount of $100 million through the original maturity date of February 19, 2010. This interest rate swap had the effect of fixing the LIBOR portion of the interest rate on the term loanvariable rate debt at 2.95% through February 2010. The interest rate after the agreement to extend the maturity date, taking into account the swap, was 5.70% (2.95% plus 275 basis points). On May 6, 2009, we entered into a forward interest rate swap on a notional amount of $100 million for the period from February 20, 2010 through the maturity date of November 1, 2011. This forward interest rate swap would have had the effect of fixing the LIBOR portion of the interest rate on the term loan at 2.10% from February 20, 2010 through November 1, 2011. The interest rate for that time period, taking into account the forward interest rate swap, would have been 4.85% (2.10% plus 275 basis points). The forward interest rate swap agreement is scheduled to settle contemporaneously with the maturity of the loan. These swaps qualify as cash flow hedges as discussed in(see note 210 to the consolidated financial statements.statements).

OnHowever, on December 1, 2009 we prepaid the $100 million unsecured term loan using proceeds from our unsecured line of credit (see note 5 to the consolidated financial statements), incurring a loss on extinguishment of debt of $1.5 million. TheWe used the forward interest rate swapsswap discussed in the preceding paragraph are now used to fix the current interest rate on the $100.0 million borrowing on our unsecured lines of credit at 3.375% (2.95%2.525% (2.10% plus the 42.5 basis point spread on our unsecured lines of credit). When the forward interest rate swap becomes effective on February 20, 2010, we anticipate that the interest rate on the $100.0 million borrowing will be 2.525% (2.10% plusspread, currently 42.5 basis points) through. These swaps qualify as cash flow hedges as discussed in note 10 to the forward interest rate swap’s maturity date of November 1, 2011.consolidated financial statements.

The following is a summary of our unsecured note and term loan borrowings (in thousands):

 

  December 31,
2009
 December 31,
2008
   December 31,
2010
 December 31,
2009
 

5.70% term loan due 2011

  $—     $100,000  

5.95% notes due 2011

   150,000    150,000    $93,862   $150,000  

5.05% notes due 2012

   50,000    50,000     50,000    50,000  

5.125% notes due 2013

   60,000    60,000     60,000    60,000  

5.25% notes due 2014

   100,000    100,000     100,000    100,000  

5.35% notes due 2015

   150,000    150,000     150,000    150,000  

4.95% notes due 2020

   250,000    —    

3.875% notes due 2026

   134,328    244,000     2,659    134,328  

7.25% notes due 2028

   50,000    50,000     50,000    50,000  

Discount on notes issued

   (5,435  (13,352   (2,938  (5,435

Premium on notes issued

   19    31     4    19  
              

Total

  $688,912   $890,679    $753,587   $688,912  
              

The required principal payments excluding the effects of note discounts or premium for the remaining years subsequent to December 31, 20092010 are as follows (in thousands):

 

2010

  $—  

2011(1)

   284,328  $96,521  

2012

   50,000   50,000  

2013

   60,000   60,000  

2014

   100,000   100,000  

2015

   150,000  

Thereafter

   200,000   300,000  
       
  $694,328  $756,521  
       

 

(1)

We reflect the 3.875% convertible notes as maturing in 2011 on2011on this schedule due to the fact that we may redeem them at a redemption price equal to the principal amount of the notes plus any accrued and unpaid interest, if any, up to, but excluding, the purchase date on or after September 20, 2011. In addition, on September 15, 2011, September 15, 2016 and September 15, 2021 or following the occurrence of certain change in control transactions prior to September 15, 2011, holders of these notes may require us to repurchase the notes for an amount equal to the principal amount of the notes plus any accrued and unpaid interest thereon.

Interest on these notes is payable semi-annually. These notes contain certain financial and non-financial covenants, all of which we have met as of December 31, 2009.2010.

The covenants under our line of credit agreements require us to insure our properties against loss or damage in amounts customarily maintained by similar businesses or as they may be required by applicable law. The covenants for the notes require us to keep all of our insurable properties insured against loss or damage at least equal to their then full insurable value. We have an insurance policy which has no terrorism exclusion, except for non-certified nuclear, chemical and biological acts of terrorism. Our financial condition and results of operations are subject to the risks associated with acts of terrorism and the potential for uninsured losses as the result of any such acts. Effective November 26, 2002, under this existing coverage, any losses caused by certified acts of terrorism would be partially reimbursed by the United States under a formula established by federal law. Under this formula the United States pays 85% of covered terrorism losses exceeding the statutorily established deductible paid by the insurance provider, and insurers pay 10% until aggregate insured losses from all insurers reach $100 billion in a calendar year. If the aggregate amount of insured losses under this program exceeds $100 billion during the applicable period for all insured and insurers combined, then each insurance provider will not be liable for payment of any amount which exceeds the aggregate amount of $100 billion. On December 26, 2007, the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007 was signed into law and extends the program through December 31, 2014.

NOTE 7: SHARE OPTIONS AND GRANTS

2007 Plan

In March 2007, the WRIT Board of Trustees adopted, and in July 2007 WRIT shareholders approved, the Washington Real Estate Investment Trust 2007 Omnibus Long-Term Incentive Plan (“2007 Plan”). This plan replaced the Share Grant Plan, which expired on December 15, 2007, as well as the 2001 Stock Option Plan and Stock Option Plan for Trustees. The shares and options granted pursuant to the above plans are not affected by the adoption of the 2007 Plan. However, if an award under the Share Grant Plan is forfeited or an award of options granted under the Option Plans expires without being exercised, the shares covered by those awards will not be available for issuance under the 2007 Plan.

The 2007 Plan provides for the award to WRIT’s trustees, officers and non-officer employees of restricted shares, restricted share units, options and other awards up to an aggregate of 2,000,000 shares over the ten year period in which the plan will be in effect. Restricted share units are converted into shares of our stock upon full vesting through the issuance of new shares. If an award under the 2007 Plan of restricted shares or restricted share units is forfeited or an award of options or any other rights granted under the 2007 Plan expires without being exercised, the shares covered by any such award would again become available for issuance under new awards.

Elected deferrals of short term incentive awards by officers are converted into restricted share units which vest immediately on the grant date and WRIT will match 25% of the deferred short term incentive in restricted share units, which vest at the end of three years. Dividends on these restricted share units are paid in the form of restricted share units valued based on the market value of WRIT’s stock on the date dividends are paid. We granted 876 and 4,783 restricted share units to officers in 2008 and 2007, respectively, pursuant to elective short term incentive deferrals. During 2008, we granted 263 restricted share units on dividends. In 2009, we granted 458 restricted share units on dividends.deferrals as follows:

   Years Ended December 31, 
   2010   2009   2008 

Deferred short term incentive

   1,364     —       876  

Dividends

   375     458     263  

Total compensation expense recognized in the consolidated financial statements for all share based awards, including share grants, restricted share units and performance share units, in each of the three years ending 2009 was as follows (in millions):

 

   Stock-based
Compensation
Expense

2007(1)

  $2.7

2008(1)

  $2.2

2009(1)

  $2.0

(1)

2007 included $0.6 million related to the accelerated vesting of prior CEO share grant awards as required by FASB ASC 505-50 and 718-10 (formerly FAS 123(R),Share Based Payments). 2009 and 2008 included $0.1 million and $0.2 million, respectively, related to the accelerated vesting of departing Chief Financial Officer share grant and restricted unit awards.

   Years Ended December 31, 
   2010   2009   2008 

Stock-based compensation expense

  $5.9    $ 3.5    $ 2.4  

Options

The previous Option Plans provided for the grant of qualified and non-qualified options. The last option awards to officers were in 2002, to non-officer key employees in 2003 and to trustees in 2004. Options granted under the plans were granted with exercise prices equal to the market price on the date of grant, vested 50% after year one and 50% after year two and expire ten years following the date of grant. Options granted to trustees were granted with exercise prices equal to the market price on the date of grant and were fully vested on the grant date. As discussed in note 2 to the consolidated financial statements, weWe accounted for option awards in accordance with APB No. 25, and we have recognized no compensation cost for stock options. The last option awards to officers were in 2002, to non-officer key employees in 2003 and to trustees in 2004. The following chart details the previously issued and currently outstanding and exercisable stock options:

 

  2009  2008 ��2007  2010   2009   2008 
  Shares Wtd Avg
Ex Price
  Shares Wtd Avg
Ex Price
  Shares Wtd Avg
Ex Price
  Shares Wtd Avg
Ex Price
   Shares Wtd Avg
Ex Price
   Shares Wtd Avg
Ex Price
 

Outstanding at January 1

  317,000   $25.31  438,000   $24.40  451,000   $24.42   314,250   $25.39     317,000   $25.31     438,000   $24.40  

Granted

  —      —    —      —    —      —     —      —       —      —       —      —    

Exercised

  (2,750 $16.34  (119,000 $22.12  (13,000 $25.07   (164,300 $24.11     (2,750 $16.34     (119,000 $22.12  

Expired/Forfeited

  —      —    (2,000 $17.59  —      —     (4,000 $28.23     —      —       (2,000 $17.59  
                              

Outstanding at December 31

  314,250   $25.39  317,000   $25.31  438,000   $24.40   145,950   $26.74     314,250   $25.39     317,000   $25.31  

Exercisable at December 31

  314,250   $25.39  317,000   $25.31  438,000   $24.40   145,950   $26.74     314,250   $25.39     317,000   $25.31  

The 314,250145,950 options outstanding at December 31, 2009,2010, all of which are exercisable, have exercise prices between $21.34$24.85 and $33.09, with a weighted-average exercise price of $25.39$26.74 and a weighted average remaining contractual life of 2.52.0 years. The aggregate intrinsic value of outstanding exercisable shares at December 31, 20092010 was $0.7$0.6 million. The aggregate intrinsic value of options exercised was $1.0 million in 2010, minimal in 2009 and $1.1 million and $0.1 million in 2008 and 2007, respectively.2008. There were nominimal options forfeited in 2010 and none in 2009.

Share Grants, Restricted Share Units and Performance Share Units

We previously maintained a Share Grant Plan for officers, trustees and other members of management. In 2004 and 2005, we granted awards to officers and other members of management in the form of restricted shares. We valued the awards based on the fair market value at the date of grant. Shares vest ratably over a five year period from the date of grant.

Beginning in 2005, we changed annual long-term incentiveThe value of trustee share-based compensation, for trustees from options of 2,000 shares plus 400awarded as restricted shares, to $30,000 in restricted shares. In May 2007, we increased the value of the restricted shares awarded to trustees towas $55,000. These shares vestvested immediately and are restricted from sale for the period of the trustee’s service.

The 2007 Plan providesprovided for the granting of restricted share units and performance share units to officers and other members of management, based upon various percentages of their salaries and their positions with WRIT. For officers, one-third of the award iswas in the form of restricted share units that vest 20% per year based upon continued employment and two-thirds of the award iswas in the form of performance share units subject to performance and market conditions. For other members of management, 100% of the award iswas in the form of restricted share units awarded based on one-year performance targets that vestvested ratably over five years from the grant date.date based upon continued employment. We recognized compensation expense for awards to other members of management according to a graded vesting schedule over six years from the date the performance target was established.

With respect to the officer performance share units that arewere subject to performance conditions, awards arewere based on three-year cumulative performance targets, for which targets will bewere set annually based on benchmarks with minimum and maximum payout thresholds. As the three-year cumulative performance targets arewere set independently each year, the grant date doesdid not occur until all such targets arewere set and all of the significant terms of the award arewere known. Because payouts arewere probable, we estimateestimated the compensation expense at each reporting period based on the current fair market value of the probable award, until the vesting occursoccurred and as progress towards meeting target iswas known. We recognizerecognized the expense for such performance-based share units ratably over the three-year period, with cumulative catch-up adjustments recorded in the current period. With respect to the officer performance share units that arewere subject to market conditions, awards arewere based on a cumulative three-year market target which iswas set at the beginning of the three-year period. We recognizerecognized compensation expense ratably over the three-year service period, based on the grant date fair value, as determined using a Monte Carlo simulation, and regardless of whether the market conditions arewere achieved and the awards ultimately vest.vested. All performance share units awarded based on achievement of respective performance or market conditions cliff vestvested at the end of the three-year period. The program providesprovided that participants who terminateterminated prior to the end of the three-year performance period forfeitforfeited their entire portion of the award.

The following are tables of activity for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 2008 and 20072008 related to our share grants, restricted share units, and performance share units.

Share Grants

 

  2009  2008  2007  2010   2009   2008 
  Shares Wtd Avg
Grant
Fair Value
  Shares Wtd Avg
Grant
Fair Value
  Shares Wtd Avg
Grant
Fair Value
  Shares Wtd Avg
Grant  Fair
Value
   Shares Wtd Avg
Grant  Fair
Value
   Shares Wtd Avg
Grant  Fair
Value
 

Vested at January 1

  312,006   $29.21  271,650   $28.97  191,217   $27.17

Unvested at January 1

  34,849   $35.04  62,530   $34.15  115,492   $33.16

Vested at January 1

Unvested at January 1

   

 

359,289

1,870

  

  

 $

$

29.66

32.50

  

  

   

 

312,006

34,849

  

  

 $

$

29.21

35.04

  

  

   

 

271,650

62,530

  

  

 $

$

28.97

34.15

  

  

Granted

  14,427   $26.69  13,019   $26.05  27,571   $34.57   14,236   $29.46     14,427   $26.69     13,019   $26.05  

Vested during year

  (47,283 $32.59  (40,356 $30.86  (80,433 $32.85   (15,176 $29.65     (47,283 $32.59     (40,356 $30.86  

Expired/Forfeited

  (123 $32.78  (344 $32.70  (100 $32.50

Forfeited

   (16 $32.50     (123 $32.78     (344 $32.70  
                              

Unvested at December 31

  1,870   $32.50  34,849   $35.04  62,530   $34.15   914   $32.50     1,870   $32.50     34,849   $35.04  

Vested at December 31

  359,289   $29.66  312,006   $29.21  271,650   $28.97   374,465   $29.66     359,289   $29.66     312,006   $29.21  

The total fair value of sharesshare grants vested during the years ending December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 is $1.1 million, $1.3 million and $2.9 million, respectively. was as follows (in millions):

   Years Ended December 31, 
   2010   2009   2008 

Fair value of share grants vested

  $ 0.5    $ 1.1    $ 1.3  

As of December 31, 2009,2010, the total compensation cost related to non-vested share awards not yet recognized was $36,300,$2,500, which we expect to recognize over a weighted average period of 14 months.1 month.

Restricted Share Units

 

  2009  2008  2007  2010   2009   2008 
  Shares Wtd Avg
Grant
Fair Value
  Shares Wtd Avg
Grant
Fair Value
  Shares Wtd Avg
Grant
Fair Value
  Shares Wtd Avg
Grant  Fair
Value
   Shares Wtd Avg
Grant  Fair
Value
   Shares Wtd Avg
Grant  Fair
Value
 

Vested at January 1

  28,914   $35.00  8,154   $35.73  —      —  

Unvested at January 1

  106,562   $30.63  80,831   $34.35  21,877   $39.54

Vested at January 1

Unvested at January 1

   

 

63,856

158,406

  

  

 $

$

33.49

28.08

  

  

   

 

28,914

106,562

  

  

 $

$

35.00

30.63

  

  

   

 

8,154

80,831

  

  

 $

$

35.73

34.35

  

  

Granted

  88,414   $26.67  49,004   $26.16  67,355   $32.85   87,634   $28.19     88,414   $26.67     49,004   $26.16  

Vested during year

  (34,942 $32.24  (20,760 $34.71  (8,154 $35.73   (52,511 $30.11     (34,942 $32.24     (20,760 $34.71  

Expired/Forfeited

  (1,628 $29.54  (2,513 $33.97  (247 $39.54

Forfeited

   (1,104 $28.39     (1,628 $29.54     (2,513 $33.97  
                              

Unvested at December 31

  158,406   $28.08  106,562   $30.63  80,831   $34.35   192,425   $27.69     158,406   $28.08     106,562   $30.63  

Vested at December 31

  63,856   $33.49  28,914   $35.00  8,154   $35.73   116,367   $31.94     63,856   $33.49     28,914   $35.00  

The total fair value of restricted share units vested during the years ending December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 is $0.8 million, $0.7 million and $0.3 million, respectively. was as follows (in millions):

   Years Ended December 31, 
   2010   2009   2008 

Fair value of restricted share units vested

  $ 1.6    $ 0.8    $ 0.7  

The value of unvested restricted share units at December 31, 20092010 was $4.1 million, which we expect to recognize as compensation cost over a weighted average period of 4239 months.

Performance Share Units

Performance Share Units with Performance Conditions:

 

  2009  2008  2007  2010   2009   2008 
  Shares Wtd Avg
Grant
Fair Value
  Shares Wtd Avg
Grant
Fair Value
  Shares  Wtd Avg
Grant
Fair Value
  Shares Wtd Avg
Grant  Fair
Value
   Shares Wtd Avg
Grant  Fair
Value
   Shares Wtd Avg
Grant  Fair
Value
 

Vested at January 1

  43,000   $30.41  —     $—    —    $—  

Unvested at January 1

  —     $—    43,000   $30.41  —    $—  

Vested at January 1

Unvested at January 1

   

 

79,600

53,400

  

  

 $

$

24.31

26.69

  

  

   

 

43,000

—  

  

  

 $

$

30.41

—  

  

  

   

 

—  

43,000

  

  

 $

$

—  

30.41

  

  

Granted

  90,000   $22.81  —     $—    43,000  $30.41   500   $26.69     90,000   $22.81     —     $—    

Vested during year

  (36,600 $17.15  (43,000 $30.41  —    $—     (53,900 $26.69     (36,600 $17.15     (43,000 $30.41  

Expired/Forfeited

  —     $—    —     $—    —    $—  

Forfeited

   —     $—       —     $—       —     $—    
                              

Unvested at December 31

  53,400   $26.69  —     $—    43,000  $30.41   —     $—       53,400   $26.69     —     $—    

Vested at December 31

  79,600   $24.31  43,000   $30.41  —    $—     133,500   $25.27     79,600   $24.31     43,000   $30.41  

Performance Share Units with Market Conditions:

 

  2009  2010   2009 
  Shares  Wtd Avg
Grant
Fair Value
  Shares Wtd Avg
Grant  Fair
Value
   Shares   Wtd Avg
Grant  Fair
Value
 

Vested at January 1

  —    $—  

Unvested at January 1

  —    $—  

Vested at January 1

Unvested at January 1

   

 

—  

37,000

  

  

 $

$

—  

20.15

  

  

   

 

—  

—  

  

  

  $

$

—  

—  

  

  

Granted

  37,000  $20.15   24,000   $33.19     37,000    $20.15  

Vested during year

  —    $—     —     $—       —      $—    

Expired/Forfeited

  —    $—     (1,900 $22.21     —      $—    
                

Unvested at December 31

  37,000  $20.15   59,100   $25.38     37,000    $20.15  

Vested at December 31

  —    $—     —     $—       —      $—    

The total fair value of performance share units vested during the years ending December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 is $0.9 million, $1.4 million and $0.0 million, respectively. was as follows (in millions):

   Years Ended December 31, 
   2010   2009   2008 

Fair value of performance share units vested

  $1.6    $ 0.9    $ 1.4  

As of December 31, 2009,2010, the future expected expense related to performance share units with performance conditions, estimated based on the probable number of performance share units expected to vest under the current plan, totaled $2.2$1.9 million, which we expect to recognize as compensation cost over a weighted average period of 2118 months. As of December 31, 2009,2010, the future expected expense related to performance share units with market conditions, totaled $0.5$0.8 million, which we expect to recognize over a weighted average period of 2420 months.

We determine the fair value of performance share units that contain market conditions included in the chart above using a binomial model employing a Monte Carlo method as of the grant date. The market condition performance measurement is the cumulative three-year average total shareholder return relative to a defined population of 25 peer companies. The model evaluates the awards for changing total shareholder return over the term of vesting, relative to the peer group, and uses random simulations that are based on past stock characteristics as well as income growth and other factors for WRIT and each of the peer companies. There were no performance share units with market conditions prior to 2009. The following are the average assumptions used to the value awards granted as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, and their respective determined fair value:

 

  2009 Awards   2010 Awards   2009 Awards 

Expected volatility

   33.4   58.1%     33.4%  

Risk-free interest rate

   1.5   1.4%     1.5%  

Expected life (from grant date)

   3.0 years     3.0 years     3.0 years  

Price of underlying stock at measurement date

  $17.15     $26.69     $17.15  

Performance share unit grant date fair value

  $20.15     $33.19     $20.15  

We based the expected volatility upon the historical volatility of our monthlydaily share closing prices. We based the risk-free interest rate used on U.S. Treasury constant maturity bonds on the measurement date with a maturity equal to the market condition performance period. We based the expected term on the market condition performance period.

NOTE 8: OTHER BENEFIT PLANS

We have a Retirement Savings Plan (the “401K“401(k) Plan”), which permits all eligible employees to defer a portion of their compensation in accordance with the Internal Revenue Code. Under the 401K401(k) Plan, we may make discretionary contributions on behalf of eligible employees. In each ofFor the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 2008 and 2007,2008, we made contributions to the 401K401(k) plan of $0.4 million.as follows (in millions):

   Years Ended December 31, 
   2010   2009   2008 

401(k) plan contributions

  $0.4    $0.4    $0.4  

We have adopted a non-qualified deferred compensation planplans for the officers and members of the Board of Trustees. The plan allowsplans allow for a deferral of a percentage of annual cash compensation and trustee fees. The plan isplans are unfunded and payments are to be made out of the general assets of WRIT. During 2008, the prior Chief Executive Officer (“prior CEO”) received a lump sum distribution of the present value of his deferred compensation. The deferred compensation liability was $0.9 million and $0.8 million at December 31, 2010 and 2009 and 2008, respectively.was as follows (in millions):

   December 31, 
   2010   2009 

Deferred compensation liability

  $1.1    $0.9  

We established a Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan (“SERP”) effective July 1, 2002 for the benefit of our prior Chief Executive Officer.CEO. Under this plan, upon the prior Chief Executive Officer’sCEO’s termination of employment from WRIT for any reason other than death, permanent and total disability, or discharge for cause, he is entitled to receive an annual benefit equal to his accrued benefit times his vested interest. We accounted for this plan in accordance with FASB ASC 715-30 (formerly SFAS No. 87,Employers’ Accounting for Pensions), whereby we accrued benefit cost in an amount that resulted in an accrued balance at the end of the prior Chief Executive Officer’sCEO’s employment in June 2007 which was not less than the present value of the estimated benefit payments to be made. At December 31, 20092010, the accrued benefit liability was $1.7$1.6 million.

For the three years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 2008 and 2007,2008, we recognized current service cost of $124,000, $132,000 and $253,000, respectively. On December 31, 2006, we adopted the recognition and disclosure provisions of FASB ASC 715-20 (formerly SFAS No. 158,Employer’s Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other Post Retirement Plans). FASB ASC 715-20 required us to recognize the funded status (i.e., the difference between the fair value of plan assets and the projected benefit obligations) of its pension plan in the December 31, 2006 statement of financial position, with a corresponding adjustment to accumulated other comprehensive income, net of tax. Because the prior Chief Executive Officer’s SERP is unfunded, the adoption of FASB ASC 715-20 did not have an effect on our consolidated financial condition at December 31, 2006, or for any prior period presented and it will not affect our operating results in future periods. as follows (in millions):

   Years Ended December 31, 
   2010   2009   2008 

Prior CEO SERP current service cost

  $0.1    $0.1    $0.1  

We currently have an investment in corporate owned life insurance intended to meet the SERP benefit liability since the Chief Executive Officer’sprior CEO’s retirement. Benefit payments to the prior Chief Executive OfficerCEO began in 2008.

In November 2005, the Board of Trustees approved the establishment of a SERP for the benefit of the officers, other than the prior Chief Executive Officer.CEO. This is a defined contribution plan under which, upon a participant’s termination of employment from WRIT for any reason other than death, discharge for cause or total and permanent disability, the participant will be entitled to receive a benefit equal to the participant’s accrued benefit times the participant’s vested interest. We account for this plan in accordance with FASB ASC 710-10 (formerly EITF 97-14,Accounting for Deferred Compensation Arrangements Where Amounts Earned are Held in a Rabbi Trust and Invested)and

FASB ASC 320-10 (formerly SFAS No. 115,Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities), whereby the investments are reported at fair value, and unrealized holding gains and losses are included in earnings. For the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 2008 and 2007,2008, we recognized current service cost of $280,000, $311,000 and $245,000, respectively.as follows (in millions):

   Years Ended December 31, 
   2010   2009   2008 

Officer SERP current service cost

  $0.3    $0.3    $0.3  

NOTE 9: FAIR VALUE OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTSDISCLOSURES

Assets and Liabilities Measured at Fair Value

For assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis, quantitative disclosures about the fair value measurements are required to be disclosed separately for each major category of assets and liabilities. The only assets or liabilities we had at December 31, 2010 and 2009 that are recorded at fair value on a recurring basis are the assets held in the SERP and the interest rate hedge contracts. We base the valuations related to these items on assumptions derived from significant other observable inputs and accordingly these valuations fall into Level 2 in the fair value hierarchy. The fair values of these assets and liabilities at December 31, 2010 and 2009 are as follows (in millions):

   December 31, 2010   December 31, 2009 
   Fair
Value
   Quoted
Prices in
Active
Markets
for
Identical
Assets
(Level 1)
   Significant
Other
Observable
Inputs
(Level 2)
   Significant
Unobservable
Inputs
(Level 3)
   Fair
Value
   Quoted
Prices in
Active
Markets
for
Identical
Assets
(Level 1)
   Significant
Other
Observable
Inputs
(Level 2)
   Significant
Unobservable
Inputs
(Level 3)
 

Assets:

                

SERP

  $1.7    $—      $1.7    $—      $1.1    $—      $1.1    $—    

Liabilities:

                

Derivatives

  $1.5    $—      $1.5    $—      $1.8    $—      $1.8    $—    

Financial Assets and Liabilities Not Measured at Fair Value

The following disclosures of estimated fair value were determined by management using available market information and established valuation methodologies, including discounted cash flow. Many of these estimates involve significant judgment. The estimated fair value disclosed may not necessarily be indicative of the amounts we could realize on disposition of the financial instruments. The use of different market assumptions or estimation methodologies could have an effect on the estimated fair value amounts. In addition, fair value estimates are made at a point in time and thus, estimates of fair value subsequent to December 31, 20092010 may differ significantly from the amounts presented.

Below is a summary of significant methodologies used in estimating fair values and a schedule of fair values at December 31, 2009.2010.

Cash and Cash Equivalents

Cash and cash equivalents includes cash and commercial paper with original maturities of less than 90 days, which are valued at the carrying value, which approximates fair value due to the short maturity of these instruments.

Notes Receivable

The fair value of the notes is estimated based on quotes for debt with similar terms and characteristics or a discounted cash flow methodology using market discount rates if reliable quotes are not available.

Derivatives

The company reports its interest rate swap at fair value in accordance with GAAP, and thus the carrying value is the fair value.

Mortgage Notes Payable

Mortgage notes payable consist of instruments in which certain of our real estate assets are used for collateral. The fair value of the mortgage notes payable is estimated based primarily upon lender quotes for instrumentsby discounting the contractual cash flows at a rate equal to the relevant treasury rates (with respect to the timing of each cash flow) plus credit spreads estimated through independent comparisons to real estate assets or loans with similar terms and maturities.characteristics.

Lines of Credit Payable

Lines of credit payable consist of bank facilities which we use for various purposes including working capital, acquisition funding or capital improvements. The lines of credit advances are priced at a specified rate plus a spread. The carrying value of the lines of credit payable is estimated to be market value given the adjustable rate of these borrowings.

Notes Payable

The fair value of these securitiesthe notes payable is estimated based primarily on lender quotes for securities with similar terms and characteristics.by discounting the contractual cash flows at a rate equal to the relevant treasury rates (with respect to the timing of each cash flow) plus credit spreads derived using the relevant securities’ market prices.

 

  2009  2008  2010   2009 
(in thousands)  Carrying
Value
  Fair Value  Carrying
Value
  Fair Value  Carrying
Value
   Fair Value   Carrying
Value
   Fair Value 

Cash and cash equivalents, including restricted cash

  $30,373  $30,373  $30,697  $30,697  $100,319    $100,319    $30,373    $30,373  

2445 M Street note receivable

  $7,157  $8,995  $7,331  $7,331  $7,090    $8,048    $7,157    $8,995  

Interest rate hedge liability

  $1,757  $1,757  $2,335  $2,335

Mortgage notes payable

  $405,451  $406,982  $421,286  $408,089  $380,171    $399,282    $383,563    $384,449  

Lines of credit payable

  $128,000  $128,000  $67,000  $67,000  $100,000    $100,000    $128,000    $128,000  

Notes payable

  $688,912  $693,620  $890,679  $712,763  $753,587    $785,637    $688,912    $693,620  

NOTE 10: DERIVATIVE INSTRUMENTS

We enter into interest rate swaps from time to time to manage our exposure to variable interest rate risk. We do not purchase derivatives for speculation. In February 2008, we entered into an interest rate swap with a notional amount of $100 million that expired in February 2010. In May 2009, we entered into a forward interest rate swap with a notional amount of $100 million. Refer to note 6 of the consolidated financial statements for the effect of these swaps on our financial statements. Both interest rate swaps qualify as cash flow hedges. Our cash flow hedges are recorded at fair value in accordance with GAAP, based on discounted cash flow methodologies and observable inputs. We record the effective portion of changes in fair value of cash flow hedges in other comprehensive income. The change in fair value of cash flow hedges is the only activity in other comprehensive income (loss) during periods presented in our consolidated financial statements. We record the ineffective portion of changes in fair value of cash flow hedges in earnings in the period affected. We assess the effectiveness of our cash flow hedges both at inception and on an ongoing basis. We deemed the hedges to be effective for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009.

The fair value and balance sheet locations of the interest rate swaps as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, are as follows (in millions):

   December 31, 2010   December 31, 2009 
   Fair Value   Fair Value 

Accounts payable and other liabilities

  $1.5    $1.8  

The interest rate swaps have been effective since inception. The gain or loss on the effective swaps is recognized in other comprehensive income, as follows (in millions):

   Years Ended December 31, 
   2010   2009 
   Fair Value   Fair Value 

Change in other comprehensive income (loss)

  $0.3    $0.5  

Derivative instruments expose us to credit risk in the event of non-performance by the counterparty under the terms of the interest rate hedge agreement. We believe that we minimize our credit risk on these transactions by dealing with major, creditworthy financial institutions. As part of our on-going control procedures, we monitor the credit ratings of counterparties and our exposure to any single entity, thus minimizing our credit risk concentration.

NOTE 11: EARNINGS PER COMMON SHARE

We determine “Basic earnings per share” using the two-class method as our unvested restricted share awards and units have non-forfeitable rights to dividends, and are therefore considered participating securities. We compute basic earnings per share by dividing net income attributable to the controlling interest less the allocation of undistributed earnings to unvested restricted share awards and units by the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding for the period.

We also determine “Diluted earnings per share” under the two-class method with respect to the unvested restricted share awards. We further evaluate any other potentially dilutive securities at the end of the period and adjust the basic earnings per share calculation for the impact of those securities that are dilutive. Our dilutive earnings per share calculation includes the dilutive impact of employee stock options based on the treasury stock method and our performance share units under the contingently issuable method. The dilutive earnings per share calculation also considers our operating partnership units and 3.875% convertible notes under the if-converted method. The operating partnership units and 3.875% convertible notes were anti-dilutive for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008.

The following table sets forth the computation of basic and diluted earnings per share (amounts in thousands; except per share data):

   Year Ended December 31, 2010 
   Income
(Numerator)
  Shares
(Denominator)
   Per Share
Amount
 

Basic earnings:

     

Income from continuing operations

  $13,131    62,140    $0.21  

Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests

   (133  62,140     —    

Allocation of undistributed earnings to unvested restricted share awards and units

   (144  62,140     —    
              

Adjusted income from continuing operations attributable to the controlling interests

   12,854    62,140     0.21  

Income from discontinued operations, including gain on sale of real estate

   24,428    62,140     0.39  
              

Adjusted net income attributable to the controlling interests

   37,282    62,140     0.60  

Effect of dilutive securities:

     

Employee stock options and performance share units

   —      124    

Diluted earnings:

     

Adjusted income from continuing operations attributable to the controlling interests

   12,854    62,264     0.21  

Income from discontinued operations, including gain on sale of real estate

   24,428    62,264     0.39  
              

Adjusted net income attributable to the controlling interests

  $37,282    62,264    $0.60  
              

   Year Ended December 31, 2009 
   Income
(Numerator)
  Shares
(Denominator)
   Per Share
Amount
 

Basic earnings:

     

Income from continuing operations

  $23,823    56,894    $0.42  

Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests

   (203  56,894     (0.01

Allocation of undistributed earnings to unvested restricted share awards and units

   (111  56,894     —    
              

Adjusted income from continuing operations attributable to the controlling interests

   23,509    56,894     0.41  

Income from discontinued operations, including gain on sale of real estate

   17,125    56,894     0.30  
              

Adjusted net income attributable to the controlling interests

   40,634    56,894     0.71  

Effect of dilutive securities:

     

Employee stock options and performance share units

   —      74    

Diluted earnings:

     

Adjusted income from continuing operations attributable to the controlling interests

   23,509    56,968     0.41  

Income from discontinued operations, including gain on sale of real estate

   17,125    56,968     0.30  
              

Adjusted net income attributable to the controlling interests

  $40,634    56,968    $0.71  
              

   Year Ended December 31, 2008 
   Income
(Numerator)
  Shares
(Denominator)
   Per Share
Amount
 

Basic earnings:

     

Income from continuing operations

  $4,807    49,138    $0.10  

Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests

   (211  49,138     (0.01

Allocation of undistributed earnings to unvested restricted share awards and units

   (98  49,138     —    
              

Adjusted income from continuing operations attributable to the controlling interests

   4,498    49,138     0.09  

Income from discontinued operations, including gain on sale of real estate

   22,486    49,138     0.46  
              

Adjusted net income attributable to the controlling interests

   26,984    49,138     0.55  

Effect of dilutive securities:

     

Employee stock options and performance share units

   —      79    

Diluted earnings:

     

Adjusted income from continuing operations attributable to the controlling interests

   4,498    49,217     0.09  

Income from discontinued operations, including gain on sale of real estate

   22,486    49,217     0.46  
              

Adjusted net income attributable to the controlling interests

  $26,984    49,217    $0.55  
              

NOTE 10:12: RENTALS UNDER OPERATING LEASES

Non-cancelable commercial operating leases provide for minimum rental income from continuing operations during each of the next five years and thereafter as follows (in millions):

 

  Rental Income  Rental Income 

2010

  $203.9

2011

   177.0  $211.7  

2012

   150.9   186.5  

2013

   128.3   163.9  

2014

   98.7   132.9  

2015

   104.9  

Thereafter

   177.8   177.5  
       
  $936.6  $977.4  
       

Apartment leases are not included as the terms are generally for one year. Most of these commercial leases increase in future years based on agreed-upon percentages or in some instances, changes in the Consumer Price Index. Percentage rents from retail centers, based on a percentage of tenants’ gross sales, were $0.2 million, $0.4 million and $0.3 million in 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. as follows (in millions):

   2010   2009   2008 

Percentage rents

  $0.1    $0.2    $0.4  

Real estate tax, operating expense and common area maintenance reimbursement income from continuing operations was $36.6 million, $30.9 million and $24.9 million for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively.as follows (in millions):

   2010   2009   2008 

Reimbursement income

  $31.3    $35.5    $29.6  

NOTE 11: COMMITTMENTS13: COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Development Commitments

At December 31, 20092010 and 2008,2009, we had various contracts outstanding with third parties in connection with our ongoing development projects. RemainingThere are no remaining contractual commitments for development projects at December 31, 2009 were $0.6 million.2010.

Litigation

We are involved from time to time in various legal proceedings, lawsuits, examinations by various tax authorities and claims that have arisen in the ordinary course of business. Management believes that the resolution of such matters will not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations.

Other

At December 31, 2009,2010, we were contingently liable under unused letters of credit in the amounts of $885,000 and $815,000, related to our assumption of mortgage debt on Dulles Business Park and West Gude, respectively, to ensure the funding of certain tenant improvements and leasing commissions over the term of the debt. We were also contingently liable under unused letters of credit totaling $536,000$18,000 related to our development projectsproject at Clayborne Apartments and Bennett Park,Apartment, to ensure the complete installation of public improvements in accordance with the projects’ related site plans.

NOTE 12:14: SEGMENT INFORMATION

We have five reportable segments: office, medical office, retail, multifamily and industrial/flex properties. Office buildings provide office space for various types of businesses and professions. Medical office buildings provide offices and facilities for a variety of medical services. Retail centers are typically neighborhood grocery store or drug store anchored retail centers. Multifamily properties provide rental housing for families throughout the Washington metropolitan area. Industrial/flex centers are used for flex-office, warehousing, services and distribution type facilities.

Real estate rental revenue as a percentage of the total for each of the five reportable operating segments is as follows:

 

   Year Ended December 31, 
   2009  2008  2007 

Office

  44 42 41

Medical office

  15 16 15

Retail

  14 15 17

Multifamily

  15 13 13

Industrial/Flex

  12 14 14

   Year Ended December 31, 
   2010  2009  2008 

Office

   44  44  42

Medical office

   15  15  16

Retail

   14  14  15

Multifamily

   16  16  14

Industrial/Flex

   11  11  13

The percentage of total income producing real estate assets, at cost, for each of the five reportable operating segments is as follows:

 

  December 31,   December 31, 
  2009 2008   2010 2009 

Office

  44 45   44  44

Medical office

  17 16   16  17

Retail

  12 12   15  12

Multifamily

  14 14   13  14

Industrial/Flex

  13 13   12  13

The accounting policies of each of the segments are the same as those described in note 2 to the consolidated financial statements. We evaluate performance based upon operating income from the combined properties in each segment. Our reportable operating segments are consolidations of similar properties. GAAP requires that segment disclosures present the measure(s) used by the chief operating decision maker for purposes of assessing segments’ performance. Net operating income is a key measurement of our segment profit and loss. Net operating income is defined as segment real estate rental revenue less segment real estate expenses.

The following table presents revenues and net operating income for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 2008 and 20072008 from these segments, and reconciles net operating income of reportable segments to net income as reported (in thousands):

 

   2009    
   Office  Medical
Office
  Retail  Multifamily  Industrial/
Flex
  Corporate
and Other
  Consolidated 

Real estate rental revenue

  $136,457  $44,911  $41,821  $46,470  $37,270  $—    $306,929  

Real estate expenses

   48,898   15,218   10,680   19,494   10,283   —     104,573  
                             

Net operating income

  $87,559  $29,693  $31,141  $26,976  $26,987  $—    $202,356  

Depreciation and amortization

               (94,042

Interest expense

               (75,001

General and administrative

               (13,906

Other income

               1,205  

Gain on extinguishment of debt, net

               5,336  

Gain from non-disposal activities

               73  

Income from discontinued operations

               1,579  

Gain on sale of real estate

               13,348  
                 

Net income

               40,948  

Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests

               (203
                 

Net income attributable to the controlling interests

              $40,745  
                             

Capital expenditures

  $14,200  $6,613  $1,270  $2,287  $2,967  $351  $27,688  
                             

Total assets

  $926,433  $360,220  $225,548  $240,442  $251,986  $40,596  $2,045,225  
                             

  2008   2010 
  Office  Medical
Office
  Retail  Multifamily  Industrial/
Flex
  Corporate
and Other
  Consolidated   Office   Medical
Office
   Retail   Multifamily   Industrial/Flex   Corporate
and Other
   Consolidated 

Real estate rental revenue

  $118,293  $43,594  $40,987  $37,858  $37,959  $—    $278,691    $131,157    $45,028    $41,003    $48,599    $32,190    $—      $297,977  

Real estate expenses

   42,427   14,177   9,647   17,436   9,812   —     93,499     45,320     14,715     10,310     19,243     9,334     —       98,922  
                                                  

Net operating income

  $75,866  $29,417  $31,340  $20,422  $28,147  $—    $185,192    $85,837    $30,313    $30,693    $29,356    $22,856    $—      $199,055  

Depreciation and amortization

               (85,659               (93,992

Interest expense

               (75,041               (68,389

General and administrative

               (12,110               (14,406

Other income

               1,073  

Other income (expense)

               32  

Loss on extinguishment of debt, net

               (5,583               (9,176

Gain from non-disposal activities

               17                 7  

Income from discontinued operations

               4,129                 2,829  

Gain on sale of real estate

               15,275                 21,599  
                                

Net income

               27,293                 37,559  

Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests

               (211               (133
                                

Net income attributable to the controlling interests

              $27,082                $37,426  
                                            

Capital expenditures

  $15,594  $6,685  $3,075  $7,129  $4,789  $642  $37,914    $13,983    $4,986    $1,982    $2,387    $1,707    $392    $25,437  
                                                  

Total assets

  $952,112  $346,725  $230,917  $264,457  $268,689  $46,507  $2,109,407    $938,638    $353,508    $313,003    $228,769    $225,206    $108,757    $2,167,881  
                                                  

 

  2007   2009 
  Office  Medical
Office
  Retail  Multifamily  Industrial/
Flex
  Corporate
and Other
  Consolidated   Office   Medical
Office
   Retail   Multifamily   Industrial/Flex   Corporate
and Other
   Consolidated 

Real estate rental revenue

  $101,987  $37,847  $41,512  $31,364  $36,189  $—    $248,899    $130,671    $44,911    $41,821    $46,470    $34,288    $—      $298,161  

Real estate expenses

   34,569   11,651   8,921   13,462   8,756   —     77,359     46,528     15,218     10,680     19,494     9,384     —       101,304  
                                                  

Net operating income

  $67,418  $26,196  $32,591  $17,902  $27,433  $—    $171,540    $84,143    $29,693    $31,141    $26,976    $24,904    $—      $196,857  

Depreciation and amortization

               (68,364               (91,668

Interest expense

               (66,336               (74,074

General and administrative

               (14,882               (13,118

Other income

               1,875  

Other income (expense)

               417  

Gain on extinguishment of debt, net

               5,336  

Gain from non-disposal activities

               1,303                 73  

Income from discontinued operations

               7,510                 3,777  

Gain on sale of real estate

               25,022                 13,348  
                                

Net income

               57,668                 40,948  

Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests

               (217               (203
                 ��              

Net income attributable to the controlling interests

              $57,451                $40,745  
                                            

Capital expenditures

  $25,401  $4,639  $2,757  $3,578  $4,747  $3,200  $44,322    $14,200    $6,613    $1,270    $2,287    $2,967    $351    $27,688  
                                                  

Total assets

  $771,614  $345,202  $230,851  $209,448  $289,227  $50,676  $1,897,018    $926,433    $360,220    $225,548    $240,442    $251,986    $40,596    $2,045,225  
                                                  

   2008 
   Office   Medical
Office
   Retail   Multifamily   Industrial/Flex   Corporate
and Other
   Consolidated 

Real estate rental revenue

  $111,431    $43,594    $40,987    $37,858    $34,839    $—      $268,709  

Real estate expenses

   40,026     14,177     9,647     17,436     8,936     —       90,222  
                                   

Net operating income

  $71,405    $29,417    $31,340    $20,422    $25,903    $—      $178,487  

Depreciation and amortization

               (82,982

Interest expense

               (74,095

General and administrative

               (12,110

Other income (expense)

               1,073  

Loss on extinguishment of debt, net

               (5,583

Gain from non-disposal activities

               17  

Income from discontinued operations

               7,211  

Gain on sale of real estate

               15,275  
                 

Net income

               27,293  

Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests

               (211
                 

Net income attributable to the controlling interests

              $27,082  
                                   

Capital expenditures

  $15,594    $6,685    $3,075    $7,129    $4,789    $642    $37,914  
                                   

Total assets

  $952,112    $346,725    $230,917    $264,457    $268,689    $46,507    $2,109,407  
                                   

NOTE 13:15: SELECTED QUARTERLY FINANCIAL DATA (UNAUDITED)

The following table summarizes our financial data by quarter for 20092010 and 20082009 (in thousands, except for per share data):

 

  Quarter(1) (2)  Quarter(1) (2) 
  First   Second   Third   Fourth 

2010:

        

Real estate rental revenue

  $74,615    $73,481    $74,738    $75,143  

Income (loss) from continuing operations

  $4,429    $6,238    $6,203    $(3,739

Net income

  $5,265    $15,021    $6,658    $10,615  

Net income attributable to the controlling interests

  $5,216    $14,994    $6,625    $10,591  

Income (loss) from continuing operations per share

        

Basic

  $0.07    $0.10    $0.10    $(0.06

Diluted

  $0.07    $0.10    $0.10    $(0.06

Net income per share

        

Basic

  $0.09    $0.24    $0.11    $0.16  

Diluted

  $0.09    $0.24    $0.10    $0.16  
  First Second  Third  Fourth

2009:

               

Real estate rental revenue

  $77,194   $76,262  $75,607  $77,866  $74,948    $73,975    $73,464    $75,774  

Income from continuing operations

  $10,199   $6,092  $4,229  $5,501  $9,614    $5,436    $3,698    $5,075  

Net income

  $10,900   $13,142  $9,603  $7,303  $10,900    $13,142    $9,603    $7,303  

Net income attributable to the controlling interests

  $10,851   $13,090  $9,550  $7,254  $10,851    $13,090    $9,550    $7,254  

Income from continuing operations per share

               

Basic

  $0.19   $0.11  $0.07  $0.09  $0.18    $0.10    $0.06    $0.08  

Diluted

  $0.19   $0.11  $0.07  $0.09  $0.18    $0.10    $0.06    $0.08  

Net income per share

               

Basic

  $0.20   $0.23  $0.16  $0.12  $0.20    $0.23    $0.16    $0.12  

Diluted

  $0.20   $0.23  $0.16  $0.12  $0.20    $0.23    $0.16    $0.12  

2008:

       

Real estate rental revenue

  $68,489   $68,118  $69,798  $72,286

Income from continuing operations

  $(4,204 $3,532  $3,945  $4,616

Net income

  $(2,667 $20,003  $4,629  $5,328

Net income attributable to the controlling interests

  $(2,724 $19,950  $4,581  $5,275

Income from continuing operations per share

       

Basic

  $(0.09 $0.07  $0.08  $0.09

Diluted

  $(0.09 $0.07  $0.08  $0.09

Net income per share

       

Basic

  $(0.06 $0.42  $0.09  $0.10

Diluted

  $(0.06 $0.41  $0.09  $0.10

 

(1)

With regard to per share calculations, the sum of the quarterly results may not equal full year results due to rounding.

(2)

The prior quarter results have been restated to conform to the current quarter presentation. Specifically, results related to properties sold or held for sale have been reclassified into discontinued operations.

NOTE 14:16: SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY

During the second quarter of 2008, we completed a public offering of 2.6 million common shares priced at $34.80 per share, raising $86.7 million in net proceeds. We used the net proceeds from the offering to repay borrowings under our lines of credit. During the fourth quarter of 2008, we completed a public offering of 1.725 million common shares priced at $35.00 per share, raising $57.6 million in net proceeds. We used the net proceeds from the offering to repay borrowings under our lines of credit and for general corporate purposes.

During the second quarter of 2009, we completed a public offering of 5.25 million common shares priced at $21.40 per share, raising $107.5 million in net proceeds. We used the net proceeds to repay a mortgage note payable, borrowings under our unsecured lines of credit and for general corporate purposes.

During the fourth quarter of 2009, we entered into a sales agency financing agreement with BNY Mellon Capital Markets, LLC relating to the issuance and sale of up to $250.0 million of the our common shares from time to time over a period of no more than 36 months, replacing a previous agreement made during the third quarter of 2008. Sales of our common shares are made at market prices prevailing at the time of sale. Net proceeds for the sale of common shares under this program are used for the repayment of borrowings under our lines of credit, acquisitions, and general corporate purposes. During 2009, we issued 2.0 million common shares at a weighted average price of $27.37We executed issuances under this program raising $53.8 million in net proceeds. During 2008, we issued 1.1 million common shares at aas follows (in millions, except for weighted average price of $36.15 under this program, raising $40.7 million in net proceeds.issue price):

   2010   2009 

Common shares issued

   5.6     2.0  

Weighted average issue price

  $30.34    $27.37  

Net proceeds

  $168.9    $53.8  

We have a dividend reinvestment program, whereby shareholders may use their dividends and optional cash payments to purchase common shares. The common shares sold under this program may either be common shares issued by us or common shares purchased in the open market. Net proceeds under this program are used for general corporate purposes. During 2009, we issued 88,460 common shares at aWe executed issuances under this program as follows (in millions, except for weighted average price of $28.34 per share, raising $2.5 million in net proceeds. During 2008, we issued 125,348 common shares at a weighted average price of $32.75 per share, raising $4.1 million in net proceeds.issue price):

   2010   2009 

Common shares issued

   0.2     0.1  

Weighted average issue price

  $30.36    $28.34  

Net proceeds

  $5.3    $2.5  

NOTE 15:17: SUBSEQUENT EVENTS

Subsequent events have been evaluated through February 26,to the end of 2010, we closed on the datepurchase of issuance1140 Connecticut Avenue, a 184,000 square foot office building in Washington, DC for these consolidated financial statements and notes thereto.$80.3 million. Additionally, we entered into a contract to purchase 1227 25th Street, a 130,000 square foot office building in Washington, DC for $47.0 million. We anticipate closing on this purchase during the first half of 2011.

SCHEDULE III

 

 Initial Cost (b)   Gross Amounts at Which Carried
at December 31, 2009
      Initial Cost (b) Net
Improvements
(Retirement)
since
Acquisition
  Gross Amounts at Which Carried
at December 31, 2010
 Accumulated
Depreciation

at
December 31,
2010
          

Properties

 Location Land Buildings
and
Improvements
 Net
Improvements
(Retirements)
since acquisition
 Land Buildings
and
Improvements
 Total (c) Accumulated
Depreciation at
December 31,
2009
 Year of
Construction
 Date of
Acquisition
 Net Rentable
Square
Feet (e)
 Units Depreciation
Life (d)
 Location Land Buildings
and
Improvements
 Land Buildings
and
Improvements
 Total (c) Year of
Construction
 

Date of
Acquisition

 Net Rentable
Square

Feet (e)
 Units Depreciation
Life (d)
 

Multifamily Properties

                          

3801 Connecticut Avenue (a)

 Washington,
DC
 $420,000 $2,678,000 $7,478,000 $420,000 $10,156,000 $10,576,000 $7,453,000 1951 Jan 1963 179,000 308 30 Years  DC   $420,000   $2,678,000   $7,663,000   $420,000   $10,341,000   $10,761,000   $7,801,000    1951   Jan 1963  179,000    308    30 Years  

Roosevelt Towers

 Virginia $336,000 $1,996,000 $8,685,000 $336,000 $10,681,000 $11,017,000 $5,831,000 1964 May 1965 170,000 191 40 Years  VA   $336,000   $1,996,000   $8,758,000   $336,000   $10,754,000   $11,090,000   $6,334,000    1964   May 1965  170,000    191    40 Years  

Country Club Towers

 Virginia $299,000 $2,562,000 $12,993,000 $299,000 $15,555,000 $15,854,000 $7,307,000 1965 Jul 1969 163,000 227 35 Years  VA   $299,000   $2,562,000   $13,062,000   $299,000   $15,624,000   $15,923,000   $8,042,000    1965   Jul 1969  163,000    227    35 Years  

Park Adams

 Virginia $287,000 $1,654,000 $8,041,000 $287,000 $9,695,000 $9,982,000 $6,009,000 1959 Jan 1969 173,000 200 35 Years  VA   $287,000   $1,654,000   $8,130,000   $287,000   $9,784,000   $10,071,000   $6,496,000    1959   Jan 1969  173,000    200    35 Years  

Munson Hill Towers

 Virginia $322,000 $3,337,000 $13,653,000 $322,000 $16,990,000 $17,312,000 $10,284,000 1963 Jan 1970 259,000 279 33 Years  VA   $322,000   $3,337,000   $14,072,000   $322,000   $17,409,000   $17,731,000   $11,116,000    1963   Jan 1970  259,000    279    33 Years  

The Ashby at McLean

 Virginia $4,356,000 $17,102,000 $12,924,000 $4,356,000 $30,026,000 $34,382,000 $13,851,000 1982 Aug 1996 252,000 256 30 Years  VA   $4,356,000   $17,102,000   $13,086,000   $4,356,000   $30,188,000   $34,544,000   $15,291,000    1982   Aug 1996  252,000    256    30 Years  

Walker House Apartments (a)

 Maryland $2,851,000 $7,946,000 $6,147,000 $2,851,000 $14,093,000 $16,944,000 $6,667,000 1971/03 Mar 1996 159,000 212 30 Years  MD   $2,851,000   $7,946,000   $6,274,000   $2,851,000   $14,220,000   $17,071,000   $7,281,000    1971/03   Mar 1996  159,000    212    30 Years  

Bethesda Hill Apartments (a)

 Maryland $3,900,000 $13,412,000 $11,217,000 $3,900,000 $24,629,000 $28,529,000 $9,862,000 1986 Nov 1997 226,000 195 30 Years  MD   $3,900,000   $13,412,000   $11,500,000   $3,900,000   $24,912,000   $28,812,000   $11,172,000    1986   Nov 1997  226,000    195    30 Years  

Bennett Park

 Virginia $2,861,000 $917,000 $78,007,000 $4,774,000 $77,011,000 $81,785,000 $8,823,000 2007 Feb 2001 268,000 224 28 Years  VA   $2,861,000   $917,000   $78,647,000   $4,774,000   $77,651,000   $82,425,000   $12,823,000    2007   Feb 2001  268,000    224    28 Years  

The Clayborne

 Virginia $269,000  0 $30,289,000 $699,000 $29,859,000 $30,558,000 $3,624,000 2008 Jun 2003 87,000 74 26 Years  VA   $269,000   $—     $30,313,000   $699,000   $29,883,000   $30,582,000   $5,562,000    2008   Jun 2003  87,000    74    26 Years  

The Kenmore (a)

 Washington,
DC
 $28,222,000 $33,955,000 $324,000 $28,222,000 $34,279,000 $62,501,000 $1,708,000 1948 Sep 2008 270,000 374 30 Years  DC   $28,222,000   $33,955,000   $591,000   $28,222,000   $34,546,000   $62,768,000   $3,060,000    1948   Sep 2008  270,000    374    30 Years  
                                                     
  $44,123,000 $85,559,000 $189,758,000 $46,466,000 $272,974,000 $319,440,000 $81,419,000   2,206,000 2,540   $44,123,000   $85,559,000   $192,096,000   $46,466,000   $275,312,000   $321,778,000   $94,978,000      2,206,000    2,540   
                                                     

Office Buildings

                          

1901 Pennsylvania Avenue

 Washington,
DC
 $892,000 $3,481,000 $13,740,000 $892,000 $17,221,000 $18,113,000 $12,026,000 1960 May 1977 97,000  28 Years  DC   $892,000   $3,481,000   $13,520,000   $892,000   $17,001,000   $17,893,000   $12,381,000    1960   May 1977  97,000     28 Years  

51 Monroe Street

 Maryland $840,000 $10,869,000 $20,350,000 $840,000 $31,219,000 $32,059,000 $20,323,000 1975 Aug 1979 210,000  41 Years  MD   $840,000   $10,869,000   $21,329,000   $840,000   $32,198,000   $33,038,000   $21,815,000    1975   Aug 1979  210,000     41 Years  

515 King Street

 Virginia $4,102,000 $3,931,000 $4,928,000 $4,102,000 $8,859,000 $12,961,000 $3,563,000 1966 Jul 1992 76,000  50 Years  VA   $4,102,000   $3,931,000   $4,965,000   $4,102,000   $8,896,000   $12,998,000   $3,946,000    1966   Jul 1992  76,000     50 Years  

The Lexington Building

 Maryland $1,180,000 $1,262,000 $2,097,000 $1,180,000 $3,359,000 $4,539,000 $1,597,000 1970 Nov 1993 46,000  50 Years

The Saratoga Building

 Maryland $1,464,000 $1,554,000 $2,949,000 $1,464,000 $4,503,000 $5,967,000 $2,344,000 1977 Nov 1993 58,000  50 Years

6110 Executive Boulevard

 Maryland $4,621,000 $11,926,000 $9,944,000 $4,621,000 $21,870,000 $26,491,000 $12,072,000 1971 Jan 1995 198,000  30 Years  MD   $4,621,000   $11,926,000   $10,232,000   $4,621,000   $22,158,000   $26,779,000   $13,238,000    1971   Jan 1995  198,000     30 Years  

1220 19th Street

 Washington,
DC
 $7,803,000 $11,366,000 $4,168,000 $7,802,000 $15,535,000 $23,337,000 $7,636,000 1976 Nov 1995 102,000  30 Years  DC   $7,803,000   $11,366,000   $4,861,000   $7,802,000   $16,228,000   $24,030,000   $8,401,000    1976   Nov 1995  102,000     30 Years  

1600 Wilson Boulevard

 Virginia $6,661,000 $16,742,000 $11,191,000 $6,661,000 $27,933,000 $34,594,000 $10,862,000 1973 Oct 1997 166,000  30 Years  VA   $6,661,000   $16,742,000   $12,105,000   $6,661,000   $28,847,000   $35,508,000   $12,220,000    1973   Oct 1997  166,000     30 Years  

7900 Westpark Drive

 Virginia $12,049,000 $71,825,000 $30,546,000 $12,049,000 $102,371,000 $114,420,000 $41,644,000 1972/’86/’99 Nov 1997 523,000  30 Years  VA   $12,049,000   $71,825,000   $32,765,000   $12,049,000   $104,590,000   $116,639,000   $46,818,000    1972/'86/'99   Nov 1997  523,000     30 Years  

600 Jefferson Plaza

 Maryland $2,296,000 $12,188,000 $4,328,000 $2,296,000 $16,516,000 $18,812,000 $6,014,000 1985 May 1999 112,000  30 Years  MD   $2,296,000   $12,188,000   $4,851,000   $2,296,000   $17,039,000   $19,335,000   $6,822,000    1985   May 1999  112,000     30 Years  

1700 Research Boulevard

 Maryland $1,847,000 $11,105,000 $3,107,000 $1,847,000 $14,212,000 $16,059,000 $5,894,000 1982 May 1999 101,000  30 Years  MD   $1,847,000   $11,105,000   $3,232,000   $1,847,000   $14,337,000   $16,184,000   $6,554,000    1982   May 1999  101,000     30 Years  

Parklawn Plaza

 Maryland $714,000 $4,053,000 $1,054,000 $714,000 $5,107,000 $5,821,000 $1,939,000 1986 Nov 1999 40,000  30 Years

Wayne Plaza

 Maryland $1,564,000 $6,243,000 $7,658,000 $1,564,000 $13,901,000 $15,465,000 $4,227,000 1970 May 2000 91,000  30 Years  MD   $1,564,000   $6,243,000   $7,726,000   $1,564,000   $13,969,000   $15,533,000   $5,112,000    1970   May 2000  91,000     30 Years  

Courthouse Square

 Virginia  0 $17,096,000 $3,664,000  0 $20,760,000 $20,760,000 $7,284,000 1979 Oct 2000 113,000  30 Years  VA    0   $17,096,000   $3,895,000    0   $20,991,000   $20,991,000   $8,102,000    1979   Oct 2000  113,000     30 Years  

One Central Plaza

 Maryland $5,480,000 $39,107,000 $12,186,000 $5,480,000 $51,293,000 $56,773,000 $16,299,000 1974 Apr 2001 267,000  30 Years  MD   $5,480,000   $39,107,000   $14,270,000   $5,480,000   $53,377,000   $58,857,000   $18,658,000    1974   Apr 2001  267,000     30 Years  

Atrium Building

 Maryland $3,182,000 $11,281,000 $2,257,000 $3,182,000 $13,538,000 $16,720,000 $4,628,000 1980 July 2002 80,000  30 Years  MD   $3,182,000   $11,281,000   $2,417,000   $3,182,000   $13,698,000   $16,880,000   $5,111,000    1980   July 2002  80,000     30 Years  

1776 G Street

 Washington,
DC
 $31,500,000 $54,327,000 $1,934,000 $31,500,000 $56,261,000 $87,761,000 $14,601,000 1979 Aug 2003 263,000  30 Years  DC   $31,500,000   $54,327,000   $3,043,000   $31,500,000   $57,370,000   $88,870,000   $16,707,000    1979   Aug 2003  263,000     30 Years  

Albermarle Point

 Virginia $1,326,000 $18,211,000 $1,240,000 $1,326,000 $19,451,000 $20,777,000 $3,380,000 2001/03/’05 July 2005 89,000  30 Years  VA   $1,326,000   $18,211,000   $1,550,000   $1,326,000   $19,761,000   $21,087,000   $4,155,000    2001/03/'05   July 2005  89,000     30 Years  

Dulles Station I

 Virginia $9,467,000 $1,225,000 $42,586,000 $9,467,000 $43,811,000 $53,278,000 $3,260,000 2007 Dec 2005 180,000  30 Years  VA   $9,467,000   $1,225,000   $43,452,000   $9,467,000   $44,677,000   $54,144,000   $5,230,000    2007   Dec 2005  180,000     30 Years  

Dulles Station II (f)

 Virginia $15,001,000 $494,000 $3,586,000 $15,001,000 $4,080,000 $19,081,000  0 n/a Dec 2005 0  n/a  VA   $15,001,000   $494,000   $4,254,000   $15,001,000   $4,748,000   $19,749,000    0    n/a   Dec 2005  0     n/a  

West Gude (a)

 Maryland $11,580,000 $43,240,000 $4,563,000 $11,580,000 $47,803,000 $59,383,000 $6,947,000 1984/86/88 Aug 2006 276,000  30 Years  MD   $11,580,000   $43,240,000   $5,100,000   $11,580,000   $48,340,000   $59,920,000   $9,112,000    1984/86/88   Aug 2006  276,000     30 Years  

The Crescent (a)

 Maryland $2,060,000 $9,451,000 $1,302,000 $2,061,000 $10,752,000 $12,813,000 $1,336,000 1989 Aug 2006 49,000  30 Years

The Ridges (a)

 Maryland $4,058,000 $19,207,000 $905,000 $4,058,000 $20,112,000 $24,170,000 $2,589,000 1990 Aug 2006 104,000  30 Years

The Crescent

  MD   $2,060,000   $9,451,000   $1,319,000   $2,061,000   $10,769,000   $12,830,000   $1,808,000    1989   Aug 2006  49,000     30 Years  

6565 Arlington Boulevard

 Virginia $5,584,000 $23,195,000 $2,094,000 $5,584,000 $25,289,000 $30,873,000 $3,680,000 1967 Aug 2006 140,000  30 Years  VA   $5,584,000   $23,195,000   $2,948,000   $5,584,000   $26,143,000   $31,727,000   $4,927,000    1967   Aug 2006  140,000     30 Years  

Monument II

 Virginia $10,244,000 $65,205,000 $952,000 $10,244,000 $66,157,000 $76,401,000 $7,510,000 2000 Mar 2007 205,000  30 Years  VA   $10,244,000   $65,205,000   $2,796,000   $10,244,000   $68,001,000   $78,245,000   $10,304,000    2000   Mar 2007  205,000     30 Years  

Woodholme Center

 Maryland $2,194,000 $16,711,000 $1,044,000 $2,194,000 $17,755,000 $19,949,000 $1,746,000 1989 Jun 2007 73,000  30 Years  MD   $2,194,000   $16,711,000   $1,498,000   $2,194,000   $18,209,000   $20,403,000   $2,514,000    1989   Jun 2007  73,000     30 Years  

2000 M Street

 Washington,
DC
  0 $61,101,000 $2,072,000  0 $63,173,000 $63,173,000 $5,407,000 1971 Dec 2007 227,000  30 Years  DC   $—     $61,101,000   $3,936,000   $—     $65,037,000   $65,037,000   $8,100,000    1971   Dec 2007  227,000     30 Years  

2445 M Street (a)

 Washington,
DC
 $46,887,000 $106,743,000 $200,000 $46,887,000 $106,943,000 $153,830,000 $4,446,000 1986 Dec 2008 290,000  30 Years  DC   $46,887,000   $106,743,000   $508,000   $46,887,000   $107,251,000   $154,138,000   $8,725,000    1986   Dec 2008  290,000     30 Years  

Quantico Building E

  VA   $4,518,000   $24,801,000   $27,000   $4,518,000   $24,828,000   $29,346,000   $788,000    2007   Jun 2010  135,000     30 Years  

Quantico Building G

  VA   $4,897,000   $25,376,000   $26,000   $4,897,000   $25,402,000   $30,299,000   $837,000    2009   Jun 2010  136,000     30 Years  
                                                  
  $194,596,000 $653,139,000 $196,645,000 $194,596,000 $849,784,000 $1,044,380,000 $213,254,000   4,176,000    $196,595,000   $677,240,000   $206,625,000   $196,595,000   $883,865,000   $1,080,460,000   $242,385,000      4,199,000    
                                                  

-104-


Schedule III (continued)

 

 Initial Cost (b)   Gross Amounts at Which Carried
at December 31, 2009
      Initial Cost (b) Net
Improvements
(Retirement)
since
Acquisition
  Gross Amounts at Which Carried
at December 31, 2010
 Accumulated
Depreciation

at
December 31,
2010
          

Properties

 Location Land Buildings
and
Improvements
 Net
Improvements
(Retirements)
since acquisition
 Land Buildings
and
Improvements
 Total (c) Accumulated
Depreciation at
December 31,
2009
 Year of
Construction
 Date of
Acquisition
 Net Rentable
Square
Feet (e)
 Units Depreciation
Life (d)
 Location Land Buildings
and
Improvements
 Land Buildings
and
Improvements
 Total (c) Year of
Construction
 

Date of
Acquisition

 Net Rentable
Square

Feet (e)
 Units Depreciation
Life (d)
 

Medical Office

                          

Woodburn Medical Park I

 Virginia $2,563,000 $12,460,000 $3,441,000 $2,563,000 $15,901,000 $18,464,000 $5,833,000 1984 Nov 1998 71,000  30 Years  VA   $2,563,000   $12,460,000   $3,853,000   $2,563,000   $16,313,000   $18,876,000   $6,580,000    1984   Nov 1998  71,000     30 Years  

Woodburn Medical Park II

 Virginia $2,632,000 $17,574,000 $3,822,000 $2,632,000 $21,396,000 $24,028,000 $7,308,000 1988 Nov 1998 96,000  30 Years  VA   $2,632,000   $17,574,000   $3,849,000   $2,632,000   $21,423,000   $24,055,000   $8,309,000    1988   Nov 1998  96,000     30 Years  

8501 Arlington Boulevard (a)

 Virginia $2,071,000 $26,317,000 $336,000 $2,071,000 $26,653,000 $28,724,000 $6,067,000 2000 Oct 2003 92,000  30 Years  VA   $2,071,000   $26,317,000   $480,000   $2,071,000   $26,797,000   $28,868,000   $7,049,000    2000   Oct 2003  92,000     30 Years  

8503 Arlington Boulevard (a)

 Virginia $1,598,000 $25,850,000 $174,000 $1,598,000 $26,024,000 $27,622,000 $5,851,000 2001 Oct 2003 88,000  30 Years  VA   $1,598,000   $25,850,000   $339,000   $1,598,000   $26,189,000   $27,787,000   $6,794,000    2001   Oct 2003  88,000     30 Years  

8505 Arlington Boulevard (a)

 Virginia $2,819,000 $19,680,000 $574,000 $2,819,000 $20,254,000 $23,073,000 $4,479,000 2002 Oct 2003 75,000  30 Years  VA   $2,819,000   $19,680,000   $601,000   $2,819,000   $20,281,000   $23,100,000   $5,274,000    2002   Oct 2003  75,000     30 Years  

Shady Grove Medical II (a)

 Maryland $1,995,000 $16,601,000 $198,000 $1,995,000 $16,799,000 $18,794,000 $3,211,000 1999 Aug 2004 66,000  30 Years  MD   $1,995,000   $16,601,000   $235,000   $1,995,000   $16,836,000   $18,831,000   $3,826,000    1999   Aug 2004  66,000     30 Years  

8301 Arlington Boulevard

 Virginia $1,251,000 $6,589,000 $1,043,000 $1,251,000 $7,632,000 $8,883,000 $1,566,000 1965 Oct 2004 49,000  30 Years  VA   $1,251,000   $6,589,000   $1,239,000   $1,251,000   $7,828,000   $9,079,000   $1,921,000    1965   Oct 2004  49,000     30 Years  

Alexandria Professional Center

 Virginia $6,783,000 $19,676,000 $2,979,000 $6,783,000 $22,655,000 $29,438,000 $2,950,000 1968 Apr 2006 113,000  30 Years  VA   $6,783,000   $19,676,000   $3,693,000   $6,783,000   $23,369,000   $30,152,000   $3,857,000    1968   Apr 2006  113,000     30 Years  

9707 Medical Center Drive (a)

 Maryland $3,069,000 $11,777,000 $589,000 $3,069,000 $12,366,000 $15,435,000 $1,839,000 1994 Apr 2006 38,000  30 Years  MD   $3,069,000   $11,777,000   $617,000   $3,069,000   $12,394,000   $15,463,000   $2,327,000    1994   Apr 2006  38,000     30 Years  

15001 Shady Grove Road

 Maryland $4,094,000 $16,410,000 $1,549,000 $4,094,000 $17,959,000 $22,053,000 $2,466,000 1999 Apr 2006 51,000  30 Years  MD   $4,094,000   $16,410,000   $1,625,000   $4,094,000   $18,035,000   $22,129,000   $3,199,000    1999   Apr 2006  51,000     30 Years  

15005 Shady Grove Road (a)

 Maryland $4,186,000 $17,548,000 $129,000 $4,186,000 $17,677,000 $21,863,000 $2,259,000 2002 Jul 2006 52,000  30 Years  MD   $4,186,000   $17,548,000   $137,000   $4,186,000   $17,685,000   $21,871,000   $2,912,000    2002   Jul 2006  52,000     30 Years  

Plumtree Medical Center (a)

 Maryland $1,723,000 $5,749,000 $862,000 $1,723,000 $6,611,000 $8,334,000 $927,000 1991 Jun 2006 33,000  30 Years  MD   $1,723,000   $5,749,000   $784,000   $1,723,000   $6,533,000   $8,256,000   $1,161,000    1991   Jun 2006  33,000     30 Years  

2440 M Street

 Washington,
DC
 $12,500,000 $37,321,000 $3,452,000 $12,500,000 $40,773,000 $53,273,000 $4,733,000 1986/06 Mar 2007 110,000  30 Years  DC   $12,500,000   $37,321,000   $4,135,000   $12,500,000   $41,456,000   $53,956,000   $6,399,000    1986/06   Mar 2007  110,000     30 Years  

Woodholme Medical Center (a)

 Maryland $3,744,000 $24,587,000 $1,071,000 $3,744,000 $25,658,000 $29,402,000 $2,757,000 1996 Jun 2007 125,000  30 Years  MD   $3,744,000   $24,587,000   $1,088,000   $3,744,000   $25,675,000   $29,419,000   $3,824,000    1996   Jun 2007  125,000     30 Years  

Ashburn Farm Professional Cntr (a)

 Virginia $3,770,000 $19,200,000 $664,000 $3,770,000 $19,864,000 $23,634,000 $1,994,000 1998/00/02 Jun 2007 75,000  30 Years  VA   $3,770,000   $19,200,000   $695,000   $3,770,000   $19,895,000   $23,665,000   $2,777,000    1998/00/02   Jun 2007  75,000     30 Years  

CentreMed I & II

 Virginia $2,062,000 $12,506,000 $468,000 $2,062,000 $12,974,000 $15,036,000 $1,201,000 1998 Aug 2007 52,000  30 Years  VA   $2,062,000   $12,506,000   $465,000   $2,062,000   $12,971,000   $15,033,000   $1,695,000    1998   Aug 2007  52,000     30 Years  

4661 Kenmore Avenue (f)

 Virginia $3,764,000  0 $1,389,000 $5,153,000  0 $5,153,000  0 n/a Aug 2007 0  n/a  VA   $3,764,000   $—     $1,700,000   $5,464,000   $—     $5,464,000   $—      n/a   Aug 2007  0     n/a  

Sterling Medical Office Bldg

 Virginia $970,000 $5,274,000 $376,000 $970,000 $5,650,000 $6,620,000 $464,000 1986 May 2008 36,000  30 Years  VA   $970,000   $5,274,000   $645,000   $970,000   $5,919,000   $6,889,000   $794,000    1986   May 2008  36,000     30 Years  

Lansdowne MOB

 Virginia $1,308,000 $18,778,000 $42,000 $1,308,000 $18,820,000 $20,128,000 $231,000 2009 Aug 2009 87,000  30 Years  VA   $1,308,000   $18,778,000   $1,043,000   $1,308,000   $19,821,000   $21,129,000   $950,000    2009   Aug 2009  87,000     30 Years  
                                                  
  $62,902,000 $313,897,000 $23,158,000 $64,291,000 $335,666,000 $399,957,000 $56,136,000   1,309,000    $62,902,000   $313,897,000   $27,223,000   $64,602,000   $339,420,000   $404,022,000   $69,648,000      1,309,000    
                                                  

Retail Centers

                          

Takoma Park

 Maryland $415,000 $1,084,000 $96,000 $415,000 $1,180,000 $1,595,000 $1,090,000 1962 Jul 1963 51,000  50 Years  MD   $415,000   $1,084,000   $96,000   $415,000   $1,180,000   $1,595,000   $1,118,000    1962   Jul 1963  51,000     50 Years  

Westminster

 Maryland $519,000 $1,775,000 $9,429,000 $519,000 $11,204,000 $11,723,000 $5,035,000 1969 Sep 1972 151,000  37 Years  MD   $519,000   $1,775,000   $9,550,000   $519,000   $11,325,000   $11,844,000   $5,425,000    1969   Sep 1972  151,000     37 Years  

Concord Centre

 Virginia $413,000 $850,000 $3,297,000 $413,000 $4,147,000 $4,560,000 $2,672,000 1960 Dec 1973 76,000  33 Years  VA   $413,000   $850,000   $3,331,000   $413,000   $4,181,000   $4,594,000   $2,748,000    1960   Dec 1973  76,000     33 Years  

Wheaton Park

 Maryland $796,000 $857,000 $4,066,000 $796,000 $4,923,000 $5,719,000 $2,727,000 1967 Sep 1977 72,000  50 Years  MD   $796,000   $857,000   $4,084,000   $796,000   $4,941,000   $5,737,000   $2,887,000    1967   Sep 1977  72,000     50 Years  

Bradlee

 Virginia $4,152,000 $5,383,000 $7,879,000 $4,152,000 $13,262,000 $17,414,000 $7,956,000 1955 Dec 1984 168,000  40 Years  VA   $4,152,000   $5,383,000   $7,940,000   $4,152,000   $13,323,000   $17,475,000   $8,385,000    1955   Dec 1984  168,000     40 Years  

Chevy Chase Metro Plaza

 Washington,
DC
 $1,549,000 $4,304,000 $4,198,000 $1,549,000 $8,502,000 $10,051,000 $4,731,000 1975 Sep 1985 49,000  50 Years  DC   $1,549,000   $4,304,000   $4,460,000   $1,549,000   $8,764,000   $10,313,000   $5,030,000    1975   Sep 1985  49,000     50 Years  

Montgomery Village Center

 Maryland $11,625,000 $9,105,000 $2,704,000 $11,625,000 $11,809,000 $23,434,000 $4,193,000 1969 Dec 1992 198,000  50 Years  MD   $11,625,000   $9,105,000   $2,837,000   $11,625,000   $11,942,000   $23,567,000   $4,499,000    1969   Dec 1992  198,000     50 Years  

Shoppes of Foxchase

 Virginia $5,838,000 $2,979,000 $12,884,000 $5,838,000 $15,863,000 $21,701,000 $3,080,000 1960 Jun 1994 134,000  50 Years  VA   $5,838,000   $2,979,000   $12,954,000   $5,838,000   $15,933,000   $21,771,000   $3,656,000    1960   Jun 1994  134,000     50 Years  

Frederick County Square

 Maryland $6,561,000 $6,830,000 $2,473,000 $6,561,000 $9,303,000 $15,864,000 $4,832,000 1973 Aug 1995 227,000  30 Years  MD   $6,561,000   $6,830,000   $2,561,000   $6,561,000   $9,391,000   $15,952,000   $5,186,000    1973   Aug 1995  227,000     30 Years  

800 S. Washington Street

 Virginia $2,904,000 $5,489,000 $5,448,000 $2,904,000 $10,937,000 $13,841,000 $2,339,000 1951/’55/’59/’90 Jun 1998 44,000  30 Years  VA   $2,904,000   $5,489,000   $5,940,000   $2,904,000   $11,429,000   $14,333,000   $2,795,000    1951/'55/'59/'90   Jun 1998  44,000     30 Years  

Centre at Hagerstown

 Maryland $13,029,000 $25,415,000 $440,000 $13,029,000 $25,855,000 $38,884,000 $6,898,000 2000 Jun 2002 332,000  30 Years

Centre at Hagerstown .

  MD   $13,029,000   $25,415,000   $1,189,000   $13,029,000   $26,604,000   $39,633,000   $7,837,000    2000   Jun 2002  332,000     30 Years  

Frederick Crossing (a)

 Maryland $12,759,000 $35,477,000 $559,000 $12,759,000 $36,036,000 $48,795,000 $6,344,000 1999-2003 Mar 2005 295,000  30 Years  MD   $12,759,000   $35,477,000   $1,154,000   $12,759,000   $36,631,000   $49,390,000   $7,620,000    1999-2003   Mar 2005  295,000     30 Years  

Randolph Shopping Center

 Maryland $4,928,000 $13,025,000 $595,000 $4,928,000 $13,620,000 $18,548,000 $1,872,000 1972 May 2006 82,000  30 Years  MD   $4,928,000   $13,025,000   $595,000   $4,928,000   $13,620,000   $18,548,000   $2,373,000    1972   May 2006  82,000     30 Years  

Montrose Shopping Center

 Maryland $11,612,000 $22,410,000 $2,152,000 $11,612,000 $24,562,000 $36,174,000 $3,220,000 1970 May 2006 143,000  30 Years  MD  ��$11,612,000   $22,410,000   $2,102,000   $11,612,000   $24,512,000   $36,124,000   $4,152,000    1970   May 2006  143,000     30 Years  

Gateway Overlook

  MD   $28,816,000   $52,249,000    0   $28,816,000   $52,249,000   $81,065,000   $136,000    2007   Dec 2010  223,000     30 Years  
                                                  
  $77,100,000 $134,983,000 $56,220,000 $77,100,000 $191,203,000 $268,303,000 $56,989,000   2,022,000    $105,916,000   $187,232,000   $58,793,000   $105,916,000   $246,025,000   $351,941,000   $63,847,000      2,245,000    
                                                  

-105-


Schedule III (continued)

 

     Initial Cost (b)   Gross Amounts at Which Carried
at December 31, 2009
            

Properties

 Location Land Buildings
and
Improvements
 Net
Improvements
(Retirements)
since acquisition
 Land Buildings
and
Improvements
 Total (c) Accumulated
Depreciation at
December 31,
2009
 Year of
Construction
 Date of
Acquisition
 Net Rentable
Square
Feet (e)
 Units Depreciation
Life (d)

Industrial Properties

             

Fullerton Business Center

 Virginia $950,000 $3,317,000 $1,295,000 $950,000 $4,612,000 $5,562,000 $2,388,000 1980 Sep 1985 104,000  50 Years

Charleston Busines Center

 Maryland $2,045,000 $2,091,000 $779,000 $2,045,000 $2,870,000 $4,915,000 $1,075,000 1973 Nov 1993 85,000  50 Years

The Alban Business Center

 Virginia $878,000 $3,298,000 $796,000 $878,000 $4,094,000 $4,972,000 $1,940,000 1981/’82 Oct 1996 87,000  30 Years

Ammendale Technology Park I

 Maryland $1,335,000 $6,466,000 $2,679,000 $1,335,000 $9,145,000 $10,480,000 $4,036,000 1985 Feb 1997 167,000  30 Years

Ammendale Technology Park II

 Maryland $862,000 $4,996,000 $2,022,000 $862,000 $7,018,000 $7,880,000 $3,124,000 1986 Feb 1997 107,000  30 Years

Pickett Industrial Park

 Virginia $3,300,000 $4,920,000 $1,955,000 $3,300,000 $6,875,000 $10,175,000 $2,937,000 1973 Oct 1997 246,000  30 Years

Northern Virginia Ind. Park

 Virginia $4,971,000 $25,670,000 $10,914,000 $4,971,000 $36,584,000 $41,555,000 $16,392,000 1968/91 May 1998 787,000  30 Years

8900 Telegraph Road

 Virginia $372,000 $1,489,000 $179,000 $372,000 $1,668,000 $2,040,000 $713,000 1985 Sep 1998 32,000  30 Years

Dulles South IV

 Virginia $913,000 $5,997,000 $1,460,000 $913,000 $7,457,000 $8,370,000 $2,457,000 1988 Jan 1999 83,000  30 Years

Sully Square

 Virginia $1,052,000 $6,506,000 $1,345,000 $1,052,000 $7,851,000 $8,903,000 $2,669,000 1986 Apr 1999 95,000  30 Years

Amvax

 Maryland $246,000 $1,987,000 $18,000 $246,000 $2,005,000 $2,251,000 $684,000 1986 Sep 1999 31,000  30 Years

Fullerton Industrial Center

 Virginia $2,465,000 $8,397,000 $663,000 $2,464,000 $9,061,000 $11,525,000 $2,225,000 1980/82 Jan 2003 137,000  30 Years

8880 Gorman Road

 Maryland $1,771,000 $9,230,000 $322,000 $1,771,000 $9,552,000 $11,323,000 $1,892,000 2000 Mar 2004 141,000  30 Years

Dulles Business Park (a)

 Virginia $6,085,000 $50,504,000 $2,413,000 $6,084,000 $52,918,000 $59,002,000 $10,850,000 1999/04/05 Dec 04/Apr 05 324,000  30 Years

Albemarle Point Place

 Virginia $6,159,000 $40,154,000 $315,000 $6,159,000 $40,469,000 $46,628,000 $6,775,000 2001/03/05 Jul 2005 207,000  30 Years

Hampton

 Maryland $7,048,000 $16,223,000 $779,000 $7,048,000 $17,002,000 $24,050,000 $2,816,000 1989/05 Feb 2006 302,000  30 Years

9950 Business Parkway

 Maryland $2,035,000 $9,236,000 $278,000 $2,035,000 $9,514,000 $11,549,000 $1,438,000 2005 May 2006 102,000  30 Years

270 Technology Park

 Maryland $4,704,000 $21,115,000 $815,000 $4,704,000 $21,930,000 $26,634,000 $2,570,000 1986/87 Feb 2007 157,000  30 Years

6100 Columbia Park Drive

 Maryland $4,724,000 $5,519,000 $1,324,000 $4,724,000 $6,843,000 $11,567,000 $466,000 1969 Feb 2008 150,000  30 Years
                            
  $51,915,000 $227,115,000 $30,351,000 $51,913,000 $257,468,000 $309,381,000 $67,447,000   3,344,000  
                             

Total

  $430,636,000 $1,414,693,000 $496,132,000 $434,366,000 $1,907,095,000 $2,341,461,000 $475,245,000   13,057,000 2,540 
                             

Notes

     Initial Cost (b)  Net
Improvements
(Retirement)
since
Acquisition
  Gross Amounts at Which Carried
at December 31, 2010
  Accumulated
Depreciation

at
December 31,
2010
               

Properties

 Location  Land  Buildings
and
Improvements
   Land  Buildings
and
Improvements
  Total (c)   Year of
Construction
  

Date of
Acquisition

 Net Rentable
Square

Feet (e)
  Units  Depreciation
Life (d)
 

Industrial Properties

             

Fullerton Business Center

  VA   $950,000   $3,317,000   $1,807,000   $950,000   $5,124,000   $6,074,000   $2,489,000    1980   Sep 1985  104,000     50 Years  

The Alban Business Center

  VA   $878,000   $3,298,000   $805,000   $878,000   $4,103,000   $4,981,000   $2,104,000    1981/'82   Oct 1996  87,000     30 Years  

Pickett Industrial Park

  VA   $3,300,000   $4,920,000   $1,937,000   $3,300,000   $6,857,000   $10,157,000   $3,203,000    1973   Oct 1997  246,000     30 Years  

Northern Virginia Ind. Park

  VA   $4,971,000   $25,670,000   $11,403,000   $4,971,000   $37,073,000   $42,044,000   $17,947,000    1968/91   May 1998  787,000     30 Years  

8900 Telegraph Road

  VA   $372,000   $1,489,000   $351,000   $372,000   $1,840,000   $2,212,000   $779,000    1985   Sep 1998  32,000     30 Years  

Dulles South IV

  VA   $913,000   $5,997,000   $1,460,000   $913,000   $7,457,000   $8,370,000   $2,724,000    1988   Jan 1999  83,000     30 Years  

Sully Square

  VA   $1,052,000   $6,506,000   $1,413,000   $1,052,000   $7,919,000   $8,971,000   $3,006,000    1986   Apr 1999  95,000     30 Years  

Fullerton Industrial Center

  VA   $2,465,000   $8,397,000   $682,000   $2,464,000   $9,080,000   $11,544,000   $2,579,000    1980/82   Jan 2003  137,000     30 Years  

8880 Gorman Road

  MD   $1,771,000   $9,230,000   $322,000   $1,771,000   $9,552,000   $11,323,000   $2,273,000    2000   Mar 2004  141,000     30 Years  

Dulles Business Park (a)

  VA   $6,085,000   $50,504,000   $2,414,000   $6,084,000   $52,919,000   $59,003,000   $13,116,000    1999/04/05   Dec 04/Apr 05  324,000     30 Years  

Albemarle Point Place

  VA   $6,159,000   $40,154,000   $393,000   $6,159,000   $40,547,000   $46,706,000   $8,237,000    2001/03/05   Jul 2005  207,000     30 Years  

Hampton

  MD   $7,048,000   $16,223,000   $724,000   $7,048,000   $16,947,000   $23,995,000   $3,483,000    1989/05   Feb 2006  302,000     30 Years  

9950 Business Parkway

  MD   $2,035,000   $9,236,000   $278,000   $2,035,000   $9,514,000   $11,549,000   $1,847,000    2005   May 2006  102,000     30 Years  

270 Technology Park

  MD   $4,704,000   $21,115,000   $601,000   $4,704,000   $21,716,000   $26,420,000   $3,391,000    1986/87   Feb 2007  157,000     30 Years  

6100 Columbia Park Drive

  MD   $4,724,000   $5,519,000   $1,334,000   $4,724,000   $6,853,000   $11,577,000   $750,000    1969   Feb 2008  150,000     30 Years  
                                     
  $47,427,000   $211,575,000   $25,924,000   $47,425,000   $237,501,000   $284,926,000   $67,928,000      2,954,000    
                                        

Total

  $456,963,000   $1,475,503,000   $510,661,000   $461,004,000   $1,982,123,000   $2,443,127,000   $538,786,000      12,913,000    2,540   
                                        

 

a)At December 31, 2009,2010, our properties were encumbered by non-recourse mortgage amounts as follows: $32,170,000$31,486,000 on West Gude Drive, $21,888,000 on The Ridges and The Crescent, $93,084,000$94,339,000 on 2445 M Street, $44,975,000$43,987,000 on Prosperity Medical Center, $9,688,000$9,375,000 on Shady Grove Medical Village, $5,121,000$4,955,000 on 9707 Medical Center Drive, $8,313,000$8,149,000 on 15005 Shady Grove Road, $4,601,000$4,512,000 on Plum Tree Medical Center, $20,599,000$20,285,000 on Woodholme Medical Center, $5,073,000$4,841,000 on Ashburn Farm, Office Park II, $22,798,000$22,268,000 on Frederick Crossing, $35,399,000 on 3801 Connecticut Avenue, $16,531,000 on Walker House, $29,099,000 on Bethesda Hill, $18,969,000$18,311,000 on Dulles Business Park and $37,143,000$36,634,000 on The Kenmore.

b)The purchase cost of real estate investments has been divided between land and buildings and improvements on the basis of management’s determination of the fair values.

c)At December 31, 2009,2010, total land, buildings and improvements are carried at $2,507,428,000$2,588,915,000 for federal income tax purposes.

d)The useful life shown is for the main structure. Buildings and improvements are depreciated over various useful lives ranging from 3 to 50 years.

e)Residential properties are presented in gross square feet.

f)As of December 31, 2009,2010, WRIT had under development an office project with 360,000 square feet of office space and a parking garage to be developed in Herndon, VA (Dulles Station Phase II). WRIT also held a 0.8 acre parcel of land at 4661 Kenmore for future medical office development. Additionally, WRIT had investments in various smaller development or redevelopment projects. The total land value not yet placed in service of our development projects at December 31, 20092010 was $20.2$20.5 million.

-106-


WASHINGTON REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUST AND SUBSIDIARIES

SUMMARY OF REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION

(IN THOUSANDS)

The following is a reconciliation of real estate assets and accumulated depreciation for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 2008 and 2007:2008:

 

(In Thousands)

  2009 2008 2007   2010 2009 2008 

Real estate assets

        

Balance, beginning of period

  $2,326,646   $2,093,268   $1,716,457    $2,341,461   $2,326,646   $2,093,268  

Additions - property acquisitions*

   20,086    219,380    313,355     140,584    20,086    219,380  

- improvements*

   30,399    45,105    106,805     28,196    30,399    45,105  

Deductions - write-off of disposed assets

   (2,451  (1,004  (454   (866  (2,451  (1,004

Deductions - property sales

   (33,219  (30,103  (42,895   (66,248  (33,219  (30,103
                    

Balance, end of period

  $2,341,461   $2,326,646   $2,093,268    $2,443,127   $2,341,461   $2,326,646  
                    

Accumulated depreciation

        

Balance, beginning of period

  $406,241   $338,468   $290,003    $475,245   $406,241   $338,468  

Additions - depreciation

   82,022    75,254    62,274     83,302    82,022    75,254  

Deductions - write-off of disposed assets

   (2,451  (1,004  (454   (866  (2,451  (1,004

Deductions - property sales

   (10,567  (6,477  (13,355   (18,895  (10,567  (6,477
                    

Balance, end of period

  $475,245   $406,241   $338,468    $538,786   $475,245   $406,241  
                    

 

*Includes non-cash accruals for capital items and assumed mortgages.

106