avatar PS Business Parks, Inc. Finance, Insurance, And Real Estate

Pages

  • Page 1

    Table of Contents UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549 FORM 10-K ☑ ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015 . or ☐ TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the transition period from to Commission File Number 1-10709 PS BUSINESS PARKS, INC. (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter) California 95-4300881 (State or other jurisdiction of (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) incorporation or organization) 701 Western Avenue, Glendale, California 91201-2349 (Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code) 818-244-8080 (Registrant’s telephone number, including area code) Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: Title of Each Class Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered Common Stock, $0.01 par value per share New York Stock Exchange Depositary Shares Each Representing 1/1,000 of a Share of 6.450% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series S, $0.01 par value per share New York Stock Exchange Depositary Shares Each Representing 1/1,000 of a Share of 6.000% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series T, $0.01 par value per share New York Stock Exchange Depositary Shares Each Representing 1/1,000 of a Share of 5.750% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series U, $0.01 par value per share New York Stock Exchange Depositary Shares Each Representing 1/1,000 of a Share of 5.700% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series V, $0.01 par value per share New York Stock Exchange Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None (Title of class) ☑ No ☐ Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act. Yes ☐ No ☑ Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports) and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ☑ No ☐ Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes ☑ No ☐ Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§232.405) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of the registrant’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. ☑ Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. Large accelerated filer Accelerated 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 Exchange Act). Yes☐ No ☑ As of June 30, 2015, the aggregate market value of the registrant’s common stock held by non-affiliates of theregistrant was $1,408,830,193 based on the closing price as reported on that date. Number of shares of the registrant’s common stock, par value $0.01 per share, outstanding as of February 15, 2016 (the latest practicable date): 27,034,073. DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE Portions of the definitive proxy statement to be filed in connection with the Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be held in 2016are incorporated by reference into Part III ofthis Annual Report on Form 10-K.


  • Page 2

    Table of Contents PART I ITEM 1. BUSINESS Forward-Looking Statements Forward-looking statements, within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, are made throughout this Annual Report on Form 10-K. For this purpose, any statements contained herein that are not statements of historical fact may be deemed to be forward-looking statements. Without limiting the foregoing, the words “may,” “believes,” “anticipates,” “plans,” “expects,” “seeks,” “estimates,” “intends,” and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. There are a number of important factors that could cause the results of the Company to differ materially from those indicated by such forward-looking statements, including but not limited to: (a) changes in general economic and business conditions; (b) decreases in rental rates or increases in vacancy rates/failure to renew or replace expiring leases; (c) tenant defaults; (d) the effect of the recent credit and financial market conditions; (e) our failure to maintain our status as a real estate investment trust (“REIT”); (f) the economic health of our tenants; (g) increases in operating costs; (h) casualties to our properties not covered by insurance; (i) the availability and cost of capital; (j) increases in interest rates and its effect on our stock price; (k) other factors discussed under the heading Item 1A, “Risk Factors”. In light of the significant uncertainties inherent in the forward-looking statements included herein, the inclusion of such information should not be regarded as a representation by us or any other person that our objectives and plans will be achieved. Moreover, we assume no obligation to update these forward-looking statements to reflect actual results, changes in assumptions or changes in other factors affecting such forward-looking statements, except as required by law. The Company PS Business Parks, Inc. (“PSB”) is a fully-integrated, self-advised and self-managed REIT that owns, operates, acquires and develops commercial properties, primarily multi-tenant flex, office and industrial parks. PS Business Parks, L.P. (the “Operating Partnership”) is a California limited partnership, which owns directly or indirectly substantially all of our assets and through which we conduct substantially all of our business. Unless otherwise indicated or unless the context requires otherwise, all references to “the Company,” “we,” “us,” “our,” and similar references mean PS Business Parks, Inc. and its subsidiaries, including the Operating Partnership. PSB is the sole general partner of the Operating Partnership and, as of December 31, 2015, owned 77.8% of the common partnership units. The remaining common partnership units are owned by Public Storage (“PS”). Assuming issuance of P S B common stock upon redemption of the common partnership units held by PS, PS would own 42.1% (or 14.5 million shares) of the outstanding shares of the Company’s common stock. PSB, as the sole general partner of the Operating Partnership, has full, exclusive and complete responsibility and discretion in managing and controlling the Operating Partnership. As of December 31, 2015, the Company owned and operated 28.0 million rentable square feet of commercial space, comprising 99 business parks, in the following states: California, Texas, Virginia, Florida, Maryland and Washington. The Company focuses on owning concentrated business parks which provide the Company with the greatest flexibility to meet the needs of its customers. The Company also manages 813,000 rentable square feet on behalf of PS. History of the Company: The Company was formed in 1990 as a California corporation under the name Public Storage Properties XI, Inc. In a March 17, 1998 merger with American Office Park Properties, Inc. (“AOPP”) (the “Merger”), the Company acquired the commercial property business operated by AOPP and was renamed “PS Business Parks, Inc.” Prior to the Merger, in January, 1997, AOPP was reorganized to succeed to the commercial property business of PS, becoming a fully integrated, self-advised and self-managed REIT. 2


  • Page 3

    Table of Contents The Company made no acquisitions in 2015. From January, 2013 through December, 2014, the Company acquired 2.2 million square feet of multi-tenant flex, office and industrial parks, which comprise the Non-Same Park portfolio as defined on page 29, for an aggregate purchase price of $161.1 million. The table below reflects the assets acquired during this period(in thousands): Purchase Square Occupancy at Property Date Acquired Location Price Feet December 31, 2015 Charcot Business Park II December, 2014 San Jose, California $ 16,000 119 100.0% McNeil 1 November, 2014 Austin, Texas 10,550 246 100.0% Springlake Business Center II August, 2014 Dallas, Texas 5,148 145 88.2% Arapaho Business Park 9 July, 2014 Dallas, Texas 1,134 19 100.0% MICC — Center 23 July, 2014 Miami, Florida 12,725 149 100.0% Total 2014 Acquisitions 45,557 678 97.5% Bayshore Corporate Center December, 2013 San Mateo, California 60,500 340 94.2% Valwood Business Park November, 2013 Dallas, Texas 12,425 245 90.0% Dallas Flex Portfolio October, 2013 Dallas, Texas 27,900 559 95.8% Arapaho Business Park July, 2013 Dallas, Texas 14,750 389 87.3% Total 2013 Acquisitions 115,575 1,533 92.4% Total $ 161,132 2,211 93.9% In 2013, the Company entered into a joint venture, in which it will maintain 95.0% economic interest, known as Amherst JV LLC, (the “Joint Venture”) with an unrelated real estate development company for the purpose of developing a 395-unit multi-family building on a five-acre site, to be known as Highgate, within its Westpark Business Park in Tysons, Virginia. The Company contributed the site, along with capitalized improvements, to the Joint Venture on October 5, 2015. Subsequent to the contribution date, demolition, site preparation and construction commenced and is expected to be completed in late 2017. The total development costs for the Joint Venture, including a land value of $27.0 million, are estimated to be $117.2 million. As of December 31, 2015, the Company’s investment in unconsolidated joint venture was $26.7 million. During 2015, the Company sold four business parks aggregating 492,000 square feet in non-strategic markets for net proceeds of $41.2 million, which resulted in a gain of $23.4 million. Additionally, as part of an eminent domain process, the Company sold five buildings, aggregating 82,000 square feet, at the Company’s Overlake Business Park located in Redmond, Washington, for $13.9 m illion, which resulted in a gain of $4.8 million. With these sales the Company has completed its stated objective of exiting non-strategic markets in Sacramento, California, Oregon and Arizona. During 2014, the Company sold five business parks aggregating 1.9 million square feet and 11.5 acres of land in non-strategic markets, including Portland, Oregon and Phoenix, Arizona, for net proceeds of $212.2 million, which resulted in a gain of $92.4 million. From 1998 through 2012, the Company acquired 24.9 million square feet of commercial space, developed an additional 575,000 square feet and sold 2.3 million square feet along with some parcels of land. The Company has elected to be taxed as a REIT under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), commencing with its taxable year ended December 31, 1990. To the extent that the Company continues to qualify as a REIT, it will not be taxed, with certain limited exceptions, on the net income that is currently distributed to its shareholders. The Company’s principal executive offices are located at 701 Western Avenue, Glendale, California 91201-2 349. The Company’s telephone number is (818) 244-8080. The Company maintains a website with the address psbusinessparks.com. The information contained on the Company’s website is not a part of, or incorporated by reference into, this Annual Report on Form 10-K. The Company makes available free of charge through its website its Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and Current Reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to these reports, as soon as reasonably practicable after the Company electronically files such material with, or furnishes such material to, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). Business of the Company: The Company is in the commercial property business, with 99 business parks consisting of multi-tenant flex, industrial and office space. The Company owns 14.6 million square feet of flex space. The Company defines “flex” space as buildings that are configured with a combination of warehouse and office space and 3


  • Page 4

    Table of Contents can be designed to fit a wide variety of uses. The warehouse component of the flex space has a number of uses including light manufacturing and assembly, storage and warehousing, showroom, laboratory, distribution and research and development activities. The office component of flex space is complementary to the warehouse component by enabling businesses to accommodate management and production staff in the same facility. The Company owns 8.8 million square feet of industrial space that has characteristics similar to the warehouse component of the flex space as well as ample dock access. In addition, the Company owns 4.6 million square feet of low-rise office space, generally either in business parks that combine office and flex space or in submarkets where the market demand is more office focused. The Company’s commercial properties typically consist of business parks with low-rise buildings, ranging from one to 49 buildings per park, located on parcels of various sizes which comprise from nearly 12,000 to 3.5 million aggregate square feet of rentable space. Facilities are managed through either on-site management or offices central to the facilities. Parking is generally open but in some instances is covered. The ratio of parking spaces to rentable square feet generally ranges from two to six per thousand square feet depending upon the use of the property and its location. Office space generally requires a greater parking ratio than most industrial uses. The tenant base for the Company’s facilities is diverse. The portfolio can be bifurcated into those facilities that service small to medium- sized businesses and those that service larger businesses. Approximately 35.2% of in-place rents from the portfolio are derived from facilities that generally serve small to medium-sized businesses. A property in this facility type is typically divided intounits under 5,000 square feet and leases generally range from one to three years. The remaining 64.8% of in-place rents from the portfolio aregenerally derived from facilities that serve larger businesses, with units 5,000 square feetand larger. The Company also has several tenants that lease space in multiple buildings and locations. The U.S. Government is the largest tenant with multiple leases encompassing approximately 842,000 square feet, or 5.3%, of the Company’s annualized rental income. The Company owns operating properties in six states and it may expand its operations to other states or reduce the number of states in which it operates. Properties are acquired for both income and potential capital appreciation; there is no limitation on the amount that can be invested in any specific property. The Company owns land which may be used for the development of commercial properties. The Company owns approximately14.0 acres of such land in Dallas, Texas and 6.4 acres in Northern Virginia as of December 31, 2015. Operating Partnership The properties in which the Company has an equity interest generally are owned by the Operating Partnership. Through this organizational structure, the Company has the ability to acquire interests in additional properties in transactions that could defer the contributors’ tax consequences by causing the Operating Partnership to issue equity interests in return for interests in properties. The Company is the sole general partner of the Operating Partnership. As of December 31, 2015, the Company owned 77.8% of the common partnership units of the Operating Partnership, and the remainder of such common partnership units were owned by PS. The common units owned by PS may be redeemed by PS from time to time, subject to the provisions of our charter, for cash or, at our option, shares of our common stock on a one-for-one basis. Also as of December 31, 2015, in connection with the Company’s issuance of publicly traded Cumulative Preferred Stock, the Company owned 36.8 million preferred units of the Operating Partnership of various series with an aggregate redemption value of $920.0 million with terms substantially identical to the terms of the publicly traded depositary shares each representing 1/1,000 of a share of 5.70% to 6.45% Cumulative Preferred Stock of the Company. As the general partner of the Operating Partnership, the Company has the exclusive responsibility under the Operating Partnership Agreement to manage and conduct the business of the Operating Partnership. The Board of Directors of the Company (the “Board”) directs the affairs of the Operating Partnership by managing the Company’s affairs. The Operating Partnership is responsible for, and pays when due, its share of all administrative and operating expenses of the properties it owns. The Company’s interest in the Operating Partnership entitles it to share in cash distributions from, and the profits and losses of, the Operating Partnership in proportion to the Company’s economic interest in the Operating Partnership (apart from tax allocations of profits and losses to take into account pre-contribution property appreciation or depreciation). The Company, since 1998, has paid per share dividends on its common and preferred stock that track, 4


  • Page 5

    Table of Contents on a one-for-one basis, the amount of per unit cash distributions the Company receives from the Operating Partnership in respect of the common and preferred partnership units in the Operating Partnership that are owned by the Company. Common Officers and Directors with PS Ronald L. Havner, Jr., Chairman of the Company, is also the Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer and President of PS. Gary E. Pruitt, an independent director of the Company is also a trustee of PS. Other employees of PS render services to the Company pursuant to the cost sharing and administrative services agreement. Property Management Services The Company manages commercial properties owned by PS, which are generally adjacent to self-storage facilities, for a management fee of 5% of the gross revenues of such properties in addition to reimbursement of certain costs. The property management contract with PS is for a seven-year term with the agreement automatically extending for an additional one-year period upon each one-year anniversary of its commencement (unless cancelled by either party). Either party can give notice of its intent to cancel the agreement upon expiration of its current term. Management fee revenue derived from this management contract with PS totaled $540,000, $660,000 and $639,000 for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively. As of December 31, 2015, the Company managed 813,000 rentable square feet on behalf of PS compared to 1.1 million rentable square feet as of December 31, 2014. PS also provides property management services for the self-storage component of two assets owned by the Company. These self-storage facilities, located in Palm Beach County, Florida, operate under the “Public Storage” name. Either the Company or PS can cancel the property management contract upon 60 days’ notice. Management fee expenses under the contract were $ 79,000, $70,000 and $59,000 for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively. Management Joseph D. Russell, Jr. leads the Company’s senior management team. Mr. Russell is Chief Executive Officer of the Company. The Company’s senior management includes: Maria R. Hawthorne, President; John W. Petersen, Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer; Edward A. Stokx, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer; Christopher M. Auth, Vice President (Washington Metro Division); Trenton A. Groves, Vice President and Corporate Controller; Coby A. Holley, Vice President, Investments; Robin E. Mather, Vice President (Southern California Division); Eddie F. Ruiz, Vice President and Director of Facilities; Richard E. Scott, Vice President (Northern California Division); Eugene Uhlman, Vice President, Construction Management; and David A. Vicars, Vice President (Southeast Division). REIT Structure If certain detailed conditions imposed by the Code and the related Treasury Regulations are met, an entity, such as the Company, that invests principally in real estate and that otherwise would be taxed as a corporation may elect to be treated as a REIT. The most important consequence to the Company of being treated as a REIT for federal income tax purposes is that the Company can deduct dividend distributions (including distributions on preferred stock) to its shareholders, thus effectively eliminating the “double taxation” (at the corporate and shareholder levels) that typically results when a corporation earns income and distributes that income to shareholders in the form of dividends. The Company believes that it has operated, and intends to continue to operate, in such a manner as to qualify as a REIT under the Code, but no assurance can be given that it will at all times so qualify. To the extent that the Company continues to qualify as a REIT, it will not be taxed, with certain limited exceptions, on the taxable income that is distributed to its shareholders. Operating Strategy The Company believes its operating, acquisition and finance strategies combined with its diversified portfolio produces a low risk, stable growth business model. The Company’s primary objective is to grow shareholder value. Key elements of the Company’s growth strategy include: Maximize Net Cash Flow of Existing Properties: The Company seeks to maximize the net cash flow generated by its properties by (i) maximizing average occupancy rates, (ii) achieving the highest possible levels of realized rents 5


  • Page 6

    Table of Contents per occupied square foot, (iii) controlling its operating cost structure by improving operating efficiencies and economies of scale and (iv) minimizing recurring capital expenditures required to maintain and improve occupancy. The Company believes that its experienced property management personnel and comprehensive systems combined with focused economies of scale enhance the Company’s ability to meet these goals. The Company seeks to increase occupancy rates and realized rents per square foot by providing its field personnel with incentives to lease space to credit worthy tenants and to maximize the return on investment in each lease transaction. Focus on Targeted Markets: The Company intends to continue investing in markets that have characteristics which enable them to be competitive economically. The Company believes that markets with a combination of above average population growth, job growth, higher education levels and personal income will produce better overall economic returns. The Company targets parks in high barrier to entry markets that are close to critical infrastructure, middle to high income housing or universities and have easy access to major transportation arteries. Reduce Capital Expenditures and Increase Occupancy Rates by Providing Flexible Properties and Attracting a Diversified Tenant Base: By focusing on properties with easily reconfigurable space, the Company believes it can offer facilities that appeal to a wide range of potential tenants, which aids in reducing recurring capital expenditures associated with re-leasing space. The Company believes this property flexibility also allows it to better serve existing tenants by accommodating expansion and contraction needs. In addition, the Company believes that a diversified tenant base combined with flexible parks helps it maintain occupancy rates by enabling it to attract a greater number of potential users to its space. Provide Superior Property Management: The Company seeks to provide a superior level of service to its tenants in order to maintain occupancy and increase rental rates, as well as minimize customer turnover. The Company’s property management offices are located either on-site or regionally, providing tenants with convenient access to management and helping the Company maintain its properties and while conveying a sense of quality, order and security. The Company has significant experience in acquiring properties managed by others and thereafter improving tenant satisfaction, occupancy levels, retention rates and rental income by implementing established tenant service programs. Financing Strategy The Company’s primary objective in its financing strategy is to maintain financial flexibility and a low risk capital structure. Key elements of this strategy are: Retain Operating Cash Flow: The Company seeks to retain significant funds (after funding its distributions and capital improvements) for additional investments. During the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, the Company distributed 46.1% and 42.3%, respectively, of its funds from operations (“FFO”) to common shareholders/unit holders. FFO is computed in accordance with the White Paper on FFO approved by the Board of Governors of the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts (“NAREIT”). The White Paper defines FFO as net income, computed in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”), before depreciation, amortization, gains or losses on asset dispositions, net income allocable to noncontrolling interests — common units, net income allocable to restricted stock unit holders, impairment charges and nonrecurring items. FFO is a non-GAAP financial measure and should be analyzed in conjunction with net income. However, FFO should not be viewed as a substitute for net income as a measure of operating performance as it does not reflect depreciation and amortization costs or the level of capital expenditure and leasing costs necessary to maintain the operating performance of the Company’s properties, which are significant economic costs and could materially impact the Company’s results of operations. Other REITs may use different methods for calculating FFO and, accordingly, the Company’s FFO may not be comparable to other real estate companies’ funds from operations. See Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources — Non-GAAP Supplemental Disclosure Measure: Funds from Operations,” for a reconciliation of FFO and net income allocable to common shareholders and for additional information on why the Company presents FFO. Perpetual Preferred Stock/Units: The primary source of leverage in the Company’s capital structure is perpetual preferred stock or equivalent preferred units in the Operating Partnership. This method of financing eliminates interest rate and refinancing risks as the dividend rate is fixed and the stated value or capital contribution is not required to be repaid. In addition, the consequences of defaulting on required preferred distributions are less severe than with debt. The preferred shareholders may elect two additional directors if six quarterly distributions go unpaid, whether or not consecutive. 6


  • Page 7

    Table of Contents Throughout this Form 10-K, we use the term “preferred equity” to mean both the preferred stock issued by the Company (including the depositary shares representing interests in that preferred stock) and the preferred partnership units issued by the Operating Partnership and the term “preferred distributions” to mean dividends and distributions on the preferred stock and preferred partnership units. Debt Financing: The Company, from time to time, has used debt financing to facilitate real estate acquisitions and other capital allocations. The primary source of debt the Company has historically relied upon to provide short-term capital is its $250.0 million unsecured line of credit (the “Credit Facility”). In addition, during 2011, in connection with its $520.0 million portfolio acquisition in Northern California, the Company obtained a $250.0 million unsecured three-year term loan and assumed a $250.0 million mortgage note. During 2013, the unsecured three-year term loan was repaid in full. The $250.0 million mortgage note is an interest only mortgage that matures December 1, 2016. Access to Capital: The Company targets a minimum ratio of FFO to combined fixed charges and preferred distributions paid of 3.0 to 1.0. Fixed charges include interest expense and capitalized interest while preferred distributions include amounts paid to preferred shareholders and preferred Operating Partnership unit holders. For the year ended December 31, 2015, the FFO to combined fixed charges and preferred distributions paid ratio was 3.2 to 1.0, excluding the non-cash charge for the issuance costs related to the redemption of preferred equity. The Company believes that its financial position enables it to access capital to finance future growth. Subject to market conditions, the Company may add leverage to its capital structure. Competition Competition in the market areas in which many of the Company’s properties are located is significant and has from time to time negatively impacted occupancy levels and rental rates of, and increased the operating expenses of, certain of these properties. Competition may be accelerated by any increase in availability of funds for investment in real estate. Barriers to entry are relatively low for those with the necessary capital and the Company competes for property acquisitions and tenants with entities that have greater financial resources than the Company. Sublease space and unleased developments continue to create competition among operators in certain markets in which the Company operates. While the Company will have to respond to market demands, management believes that the combination of its ability to offer a variety of options within its business parks and the Company’s financial stability provide it with an opportunity to compete favorably in its markets. The Company’s properties compete for tenants with similar properties located in its markets primarily on the basis of location, rent charged, services provided and the design and condition of improvements. The Company believes it possesses several distinguishing characteristics that enable it to compete effectively in the flex, office and industrial space markets. The Company believes its personnel are among the most experienced in these real estate markets. The Company’s facilities are part of a comprehensive system encompassing standardized procedures and integrated reporting and information networks. The Company believes that the significant operating and financial experience of its executive officers and directors combined with the Company’s capital structure, national investment scope, geographic diversity and economies of scale should enable the Company to compete effectively. Investments in Real Estate Facilities As of December 31, 2015, the Company owned and operated 28.0 million rentable square feet comprised of 99 business parks in six states compared to 28.6 million rentable square feet at December 31, 2014. Investment in and Advances to Unconsolidated Joint Venture As of December 31, 2015, the Company’s investment in unconsolidated joint venture was $26.7 million. In addition to the equity capital the Company has committed to the Joint Venture, the Company has also agreed to provide the Joint Venture with a construction loan in the amount of $75.0 million. The Joint Venture will pay interest under the construction loan at a rate equal to the London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) plus 2.25%. Interest on outstanding borrowings is payable monthly and the loan will mature on April 5, 2019. The Company had no loan advances to the Joint Venture as of December 31, 2015. Summary of Business Model The Company has a geographically diversified portfolio in six states across the country with a diversified customer mix by both size and industry concentration. The Company believes that this diversification combined with a 7


  • Page 8

    Table of Contents conservative financing strategy, a focus on markets with strong demographics for growth and a decentralized operating strategy gives the Company a business model that mitigates risk and provides strong long-term growth opportunities. Restrictions on Transactions with Affiliates The Company’s Bylaws provide that the Company may engage in transactions with affiliates provided that a purchase or sale transaction with an affiliate is (i) approved by a majority of the Company’s independent directors and (ii) fair to the Company based on an independent appraisal or fairness opinion. Borrowings The Company had an outstanding mortgage note payable of $250.0 million at December 31, 2015 and 2014. See Notes 6 and 7 to the consolidated financial statements included in this Form 10-K for a summary of the Company’s outstanding borrowings as of December 31, 2015. The Company’s Credit Facility is with Wells Fargo Bank, National Association (“Wells Fargo”). The Credit Facility has a borrowing limit of $250.0 million and expires May 1, 2019. The rate of interest charged on borrowingsis based on LIBOR plus 0.875% to LIBOR plus 1.70% depending on the Company’s credit ratings. Currently, the Company’s rate under the Credit Facility is LIBOR plus 0.875%. In addition, the Company is required to pay an annual facility fee ranging from 0.125% to 0.30% of the borrowing limit depending on the Company’s credit ratings (currently 0.125%). The Company had no balance outstanding on the Credit Facility at December 31, 2015 and 2014. The Company had $769,000 and $1.0 million of unamortized commitment fees as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. The Credit Facility requires the Company to meet certain covenants, all of which the Company was in compliance at December 31, 2015. Interest on outstanding borrowings is payable monthly. The Company had a term loan with Wells Fargo (the “Term Loan”) in the amount of $250.0 million that was scheduled to mature on December 31, 2014. The Term Loan was repaid in full in November, 2013. Interest under the Term Loan was accrued based on an applicable rate ranging from LIBOR plus 1.15% to LIBOR plus 2.25% depending on the Company’s credit ratings. During 2013, the Company’s rate under the Term Loan was LIBOR plus 1.20%. The Company has broad powers to borrow in furtherance of the Company’s objectives. The Company has incurred in the past, and may incur in the future, both short-term and long-term indebtedness to facilitate real estate acquisitions and other capital allocations. Employees As of December 31, 2015, the Company employed 142 individuals, primarily personnel engaged in property operations. Insurance The Company believes that its properties are adequately insured. Facilities operated by the Company have historically been covered by comprehensive insurance, including fire, earthquake and liability coverage from nationally recognized carriers. Environmental Matters Compliance with laws and regulations relating to the protection of the environment, including those regarding the discharge of material into the environment, has not had any material effect upon the capital expenditures, earnings or competitive position of the Company. Substantially all of the Company’s properties have been subjected to Phase I environmental reviews. Such reviews have not revealed, nor is management aware of, any probable or reasonably possible environmental costs that management believes would have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, assets or results of operations, nor is the Company aware of any potentially material environmental liability. See Item 1A, “Risk Factors” for additional information. 8


  • Page 9

    Table of Contents ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS In addition to the other information in our Annual Report on Form 10-K, you should consider the risks described below that we believe may be material to investors in evaluating the Company. This section contains forward-looking statements, and in considering these statements, you should refer to the qualifications and limitations on our forward-looking statements that are described in Item 1, “Business — Forward-Looking Statements.” Since our business consists primarily of acquiring and operating real estate, we are subject to the risks related to the ownership and operation of real estate that can adversely impact our business and financial condition. The value of our investments may be reduced by general risks of real estate ownership:Since we derive substantially all of our income from real estate operations, we are subject to the general risks of acquiring and owning real estate-related assets, including: · changes in the national, state and local economic climate and real estate conditions, such as oversupply of or reduced demand for commercial real estate space and changes in market rental rates; · how prospective tenants perceive the attractiveness, convenience and safety of our properties; · difficulties in consummating and financing acquisitions and developments on advantageous terms and the failure of acquisitions and developments to perform as expected; · our ability to provide adequate management, maintenance and insurance; · natural disasters, such as earthquakes, hurricanes and floods, which could exceed the aggregate limits of our insurance coverage; · the expense of periodically renovating, repairing and re-letting spaces; · the impact of environmental protection laws; · compliance with federal, state, and local laws and regulations; · increasing operating and maintenance costs, including property taxes, insurance and utilities, if these increased costs cannot be passed through to tenants; · adverse changes in tax, real estate and zoning laws and regulations; · increasing competition from other commercial properties in our market; · tenant defaults and bankruptcies; · tenants’ right to sublease space; and · concentration of properties leased to non-rated private companies with uncertain financial strength. Certain significant costs, such as mortgage payments, real estate taxes, insurance and maintenance, generally are not reduced even when a property’s rental income is reduced. In addition, environmental and tax laws, interest rate levels, the availability of financing and other factors may affect real estate values and property income. Furthermore, the supply of commercial space fluctuates with market conditions. If our properties do not generate sufficient income to meet operating expenses, including any debt service, tenant improvements, lease commissions and other capital expenditures, we may have to borrow additional amounts to cover fixed costs, and we may have to reduce our distributions to shareholders. There is significant competition among commercial properties: Other commercial properties compete with our properties for tenants. Some of the competing properties may be newer and better located than our properties. Competition in the market areas in which many of our properties are located is significant and has affected our occupancy levels, rental rates and operating expenses. We also expect that new properties will be built in our markets. 9


  • Page 10

    Table of Contents In addition, we compete with other buyers, some of which are larger than us, for attractive commercial properties. Therefore, we may not be able to grow as rapidly as we would like. We may encounter significant delays and expense in re-letting vacant space, or we may not be able to re-let space at existing rates, in each case resulting in losses of income: When leases expire, we may incur expenses in retrofitting space and we may not be able to re-lease the space on the same terms. Certain leases provide tenants with the right to terminate early if they pay a fee. As of December 31, 2015, 2,186 leases representing 22.0% of the leased square footage of our total portfolio, or 21.3% of annualized rental income, are scheduled to expire in 2016. While we have estimated our cost of renewing leases that expire in 2016, our estimates could be wrong. If we are unable to re-lease space promptly, if the terms are significantly less favorable than anticipated or if the costs are higher, we may have to reduce our distributions to shareholders. Tenant defaults and bankruptcies may reduce our cash flow and distributions: We may have difficulty collecting from tenants in default, particularly if they declare bankruptcy. This could affect our cash flow and our ability to fund distributions to shareholders. Since many of our tenants are non-rated private companies, this risk may be enhanced. There is inherent uncertainty in a tenant’s ability to continue paying rent if they are in bankruptcy. We may be adversely affected if casualties to our properties are not covered by insurance: While we maintain insurance coverage for the losses caused by earthquakes or hurricanes, we could suffer uninsured losses or losses in excess of our insurance policy limits forsuch occurrences. Approximately 40.2% of our properties are located in California and are generally in areas that are subject to risks of earthquake-related damage. In the event of an earthquake, hurricane or other natural disaster, we would remain liable on any mortgage debt or other unsatisfied obligations related to that property. The illiquidity of our real estate investments may prevent us from adjusting our portfolio to respond to market changes:There may be delays and difficulties in selling real estate. Therefore, we cannot easily change our portfolio when economic conditions change. Also, REIT tax laws may impose negative consequences if we sell properties held for less than twoyears. We may be adversely affected by changes in laws: Increases in income and service taxes may reduce our cash flow and ability to make expected distributions to our shareholders. Additionally, any changes in the tax law applicable to REITs may adversely affect taxation of us and/or our shareholders. Our properties are also subject to various federal, state and local regulatory requirements, such as state and local fire and safety codes. If we fail to comply with these requirements, governmental authorities could fine us or courts could award damages against us. We believe our properties comply with all significant legal requirements. However, these requirements could change in a way that would reduce our cash flow and ability to make distributions to shareholders. We may incur significant environmental remediation costs: As an owner and operator of real properties, under various federal, state and local environmental laws, we are required to clean up spills or other releases of hazardous or toxic substances on or from our properties. Certain environmental laws impose liability whether or not the owner or buyer knew of, or was responsible for, the presence of the hazardous or toxic substances. In some cases, liability may not be limited to the value of the property. The presence of these substances, or the failure to properly remediate any resulting contamination, whether from environmental or microbial issues, also may adversely affect our ability to sell, lease, operate, or encumber our facilities for purposes of borrowing. We have conducted preliminary environmental assessments of most of our properties (and conduct these assessments in connection with property acquisitions) to evaluate the environmental condition of, and potential environmental liabilities associated with, our properties. These assessments generally consist of an investigation of environmental conditions at the property (including soil or groundwater sampling or analysis if appropriate), as well as a review of available information regarding the site and publicly available data regarding conditions at other sites in the vicinity. In connection with these property assessments, our operations and recent property acquisitions, we have become aware that prior operations or activities at some properties or from nearby locations have or may have resulted in contamination to the soil or groundwater at these properties. In circumstances where our environmental assessments disclose potential or actual contamination, we may attempt to obtain indemnifications and, in appropriate circumstances, we obtain limited environmental insurance in connection with the properties acquired, but we cannot assure you that such protections will be sufficient to cover actual future liabilities nor that our assessments have identified all such risks. Although we cannot provide any assurance, based on the preliminary environmental assessments, we are not aware of any environmental contamination of our facilities material to our overall business, financial condition or results of operations. 10


  • Page 11

    Table of Contents There has been an increasing number of claims and litigation against owners and managers of rental properties relating to moisture infiltration, which can result in mold or other property damage. When we receive a complaint concerning moisture infiltration, condensation or mold problems and/or become aware that an air quality concern exists, we implement corrective measures in accordance with guidelines and protocols we have developed with the assistance of outside experts. We seek to work proactively with our tenants to resolve moisture infiltration and mold-related issues, subject to our contractual limitations on liability for such claims. However, we can give no assurance that material legal claims relating to moisture infiltration and the presence of, or exposure to, mold will not arise in the future. Property taxes can increase and cause a decline in yields on investments: Each of our properties is subject to real property taxes, which could increase in the future as property tax rates change and as our properties are assessed or reassessed by tax authorities. Recent local government shortfalls in tax revenue may cause pressure to increase tax rates or assessment levels or impose new taxes. Such increases could adversely impact our profitability. We must comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and fire and safety regulations, which can require significant expenditures: All o f our properties must comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and with related regulations (the “ADA”). The ADA has separate compliance requirements for “public accommodations” and “commercial facilities,” but generally requires that buildings be made accessible to persons with disabilities. Various state laws impose similar requirements. A failure to comply with the ADA or similar state laws could lead to government imposed fines on us and/or litigation, which could also involve an award of damages to individuals affected by the non-compliance. In addition, we must operate our properties in compliance with numerous local fire and safety regulations, building codes, and other land use regulations. Compliance with these requirements can require us to spend substantial amounts of money, which would reduce cash otherwise available for distribution to shareholders. Failure to comply with these requirements could also affect the marketability of our real estate facilities. We incur liability from tenant and employment-related claims: From time to time we have to make monetary settlements or defend actions or arbitration to resolve tenant or employment-related claims and disputes. Development of properties can subject us to risks: As of December 31, 2015, we have a joint venture development for the purpose of developing a 395 unit multi-family project. Developments of this nature are subject to a number of risks, including construction delays, complications in obtaining necessary zoning, occupancy and other governmental permits, cost overruns, problems with our joint venture partner, financing risks, and the possible inability to meet expected occupancy and rent levels. If any of these problems occur, development costs for a project may increase, and there may be costs incurred for projects that are not completed. As a result of the foregoing, some properties may be worth less or may generate less revenue than, or simply not perform as well as, we believed at the time of development, negatively affecting our operating results. Any of the foregoing risks could adversely affect our financial condition, operating results and cash flow, and our ability to pay dividends on, and the market price of, our stock. In addition, we may be unable to successfully integrate and effectively manage the properties we develop, which could adversely affect our results of operations. Global economic conditions adversely affect our business, financial condition, growth and access to capital. While there continues to be global economic uncertainty, United States unemployment levels have moderated and economic activity has modestly improved. Economic conditions in the markets where we operate facilities, and other events or factors could adversely affect demand for commercial real estate, which could adversely affect our business. To the extent that turmoil in the financial markets returns or intensifies, it has the potential to materially affect the value of our properties, the availability or the terms of financing and may impact the ability of our customers to enter into new leasing transactions or satisfy rental payments under existing leases. The volatility and duration of an economic recovery could also affect our operating results and financial condition as follows: Debt and Equity Markets: Our results of operations and share price are sensitive to volatility in the credit markets.From time to time, the commercial real estate debt markets experience volatility as a result of various factors, includingchanging underwriting standards by lenders and credit rating agencies. This may result in lenders increasing the cost for debt financing. Should the overall cost of borrowings increase, either by increases in the index rates or by increases in lender spreads, we will need to factor such increases into the economics of our acquisitions. In addition, the state of the debt markets could have an effect on the overall amount of capital being invested in real estate, which may result in price or value decreases of real estate assets and affect our ability to raise capital. 11


  • Page 12

    Table of Contents Our ability to issue preferred shares or obtain other sources of capital, such as borrowing, has been in the past, and may in the future, be adversely affected by challenging credit market conditions. The issuance of perpetual preferred securities historically has been a significant source of capital to grow our business. We believe that we have sufficient working capital and capacity under our credit facilities and our retained cash flow from operations to continue to operate our business as usual and meet our current obligations. However, if we were unable to issue preferred shares or borrow at reasonable rates, that could limit the earnings growth that might otherwise result from the acquisition and development of real estate facilities. Valuations: Market volatility makes the valuation of our properties difficult. There may be significant uncertainty in the valuation, or in the stability of the value, of our properties, which could result in a substantial decrease in the value of our properties. As a result, we may not be able to recover the carrying amount of our properties, which may require us to recognize an impairment charge in earnings. The acquisition of existing properties is a significant component of our long-term growth strategy, and acquisitions of existing properties are subject to risks that may adversely affect our growth and financial results. We acquire existing properties, either in individual transactions or portfolios offered by other commercial real estate owners. In addition to the general risks related to real estate described above, we are also subject to the following risks which may jeopardize our realization of benefits from acquisitions. Any failure to manage acquisitions and other significant transactions to achieve anticipated results and to successfully integrate acquired operations into our existing business could negatively impact our financial results: To fully realize anticipated earnings from an acquisition, we must successfully integrate the property into our operating platform. Failures or unexpected circumstances in the integration process, such as a failure to maintain existing relationships with tenants and employees due to changes in processes, standards, or compensation arrangements, or circumstances we did not detect during due diligence, could jeopardize realization of the anticipated earnings. While we did not acquire property during 2015, we will continue to seek to acquire additional multi-tenant flex, industrial and office properties where they meet our criteria. Our belief, however, is subject to risks, uncertainties and other factors, many of which are forward- looking and are uncertain in nature or are beyond our control, including the risks that our acquisitions and developments may not perform as expected, we may be unable to quickly integrate new acquisitions and developments into our existing operations, and any costs to develop projects or redevelop acquired properties may exceed estimates. Further, we face significant competition for suitable acquisition properties from other real estate investors, including other publicly traded real estate investment trusts and private institutional investors. As a result, we may be unable to acquire additional properties we desire or the purchase price for desirable properties may be significantly increased. In addition, some of these properties may have unknown characteristics or deficiencies or may not complement our portfolio of existing properties. We may also finance future acquisitions and developments through a combination of borrowings, proceeds from equity or debt offerings by us or the Operating Partnership, and proceeds from property divestitures. These financing options may not be available when desired or required or may be more costly than anticipated, which could adversely affect our cash flow. Real property development is subject to a number of risks, including construction delays, complications in obtaining necessary zoning, occupancy and other governmental permits, cost overruns, financing risks, and the possible inability to meet expected occupancy and rent levels. If any of these problems occur, development costs for a project may increase, and there may be costs incurred for projects that are not completed. As a result of the foregoing, some properties may be worth less or may generate less revenue than, or simply not perform as well as, we believed at the time of acquisition or development, negatively affecting our operating results. Any of the foregoing risks could adversely affect our financial condition, operating results and cash flow, and our ability to pay dividends on, and the market price of, our stock. In addition, we may be unable to successfully integrate and effectively manage the properties we do acquire and develop, which could adversely affect our results of operations. Acquired properties are subject to property tax reappraisals which may increase our property tax expense:Facilities that we acquire are subject to property tax reappraisal which can result in substantial increases to the ongoing property taxes paid by the seller. The reappraisal process is subject to judgment of governmental agencies regarding estimated real estate values and other factors, and as a result there is a significant degree of uncertainty in estimating 12


  • Page 13

    Table of Contents the property tax expense of an acquired property. In connection with future or recent acquisitions of properties, if ourestimates of property taxes following reappraisal are too low, we may not realize anticipated earnings from an acquisition. We would incur adverse tax consequences if we fail to qualify as a REIT. Our cash flow would be reduced if we fail to qualify as a REIT: While we believe that we have qualified since 1990 to be taxed as a REIT, and will continue to be so qualified, we cannot be certain. To continue to qualify as a REIT, we need to satisfy certain requirements under the federal income tax laws relating to our income, assets, distributions to shareholders and shareholder base. In this regard, the share ownership limits in our articles of incorporation do not necessarily ensure that our shareholder base is sufficiently diverse for us to qualify as a REIT. For any year we fail to qualify as a REIT, we would be taxed at regular corporate tax rates on our taxable income unless certain relief provisions apply. Taxes would reduce our cash available for distributions to shareholders or for reinvestment, which could adversely affect us and our shareholders. Also we would not be allowed to elect REIT status for five years after we fail to qualify unless certain relief provisions apply. We may need to borrow funds to meet our REIT distribution requirements: To qualify as a REIT, we must generally distribute to our shareholders 90% of our taxable income. Our income consists primarily of our share of our Operating Partnership’s income. We intend to make sufficient distributions to qualify as a REIT and otherwise avoid corporate tax. However, differences in timing between income and expenses and the need to make nondeductible expenditures such as capital improvements and principal payments on debt could force us to borrow funds to make necessary shareholder distributions. Subsequent to December 31, 2015, the Board increased its quarterly dividend from $0.60 per common share to $0.75 per common share, increasing quarterly distributions by $5.2 million per quarter. During the three months ended September 30, 2015, the Board increased its quarterly dividend from $0.50 per common share to $0.60 per common share, increasing quarterly distributions by $3.5 million per quarter. During 2014, the Company sold a combined total of 1.9 million square feet along with some parcels of land in Beaverton, Oregon and Phoenix, Arizona. Absent a special distribution in excess of our normal, recurring quarterly dividend, the Company would have had taxable income in excess of distributions resulting in federal income tax at the corporate level. To qualify for the dividends paid deduction for tax purposes and minimize this potential tax, on December 30, 2014, the Company paid a one-time specialcash dividend of $2.75 per common share (“Special Cash Dividend”) along with the fourth quarter 2014 regular dividend of $0.50 per common share. Holders of common partnership units of the Operating Partnership also received the same distribution on December 30, 2014. The Board will continue to evaluate our dividend rate in light of our actual and projected taxable income, liquidity requirements and other circumstances, and there can be no assurance that the future dividends declared by our Board will not differ materially. PS has significant influence over us. As of December 31, 2015, PS owned 7.2 million shares of the Company’s common stock and 7.3 million common units of the Operating Partnership (100.0% of the common units not owned by the Company). Assuming issuance of the Company’s common stock upon redemption of its partnership units, PS would own 42.1% (or 14.5 million shares) of the outstanding shares of the Company’s common stock at December 31, 2015. In addition, the PS Business Parks name and logo are owned by PS and licensed to the Company under a non-exclusive, royalty-free license agreement. The license can be terminated by either party for any reason with six months written notice. Ronald L. Havner, Jr., the Company’s chairman, is also Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer and President of PS. Gary E. Pruitt, an independent director of the Company is also a trustee of PS. Consequently, PS has the ability to significantly influence all matters submitted to a vote of our shareholders, including electing directors, changing our articles of incorporation, dissolving and approving other extraordinary transactions such as mergers, and all matters requiring the consent of the limited partners of the Operating Partnership. PS’s interest in such matters may differ from other shareholders. In addition, PS’s ownership may make it more difficult for another party to take over our Company without PS’s approval. 13


  • Page 14

    Table of Contents Provisions in our organizational documents may prevent changes in control. Our articles generally prohibit any person from owning more than 7% of our shares:Our articles of incorporation restrict the number of shares that may be owned by any “person,” and the partnership agreement of our Operating Partnership contains an anti-takeover provision. No shareholder (other than PS and certain other specified shareholders) may own more than 7% of the outstanding shares of our common stock, unless our Board waives this limitation. We imposed this limitation to avoid, to the extent possible, a concentration of ownership that might jeopardize our ability to qualify as a REIT. This limitation, however, also makes a change of control much more difficult (if not impossible) even if it may be favorable to our public shareholders. These provisions will prevent future takeover attempts not supported by PS even if a majority of our public shareholders consider it to be in their best interests as they would receive a premium for their shares over market value or for other reasons. Our Board can set the terms of certain securities without shareholder approval: Our Board is authorized, without shareholder approval, to issue up to 50.0 million shares of preferred stock and up to 100.0 million shares of equity stock, in each case in one or more series. Our Board has the right to set the terms of each of these series of stock. Consequently, the Board could set the terms of a series of stock that could make it difficult (if not impossible) for another party to take over our Company even if it might be favorable to our public shareholders. Our articles of incorporation also contain other provisions that could have the same effect. We can also cause our Operating Partnership to issue additional interests for cash or in exchange for property. The partnership agreement of our Operating Partnership restricts mergers: The partnership agreement of our Operating Partnership generally provides that we may not merge or engage in a similar transaction unless the limited partners of our Operating Partnership are entitled to receive the same proportionate payments as our shareholders. In addition, we have agreed not to merge unless the merger would have been approved had the limited partners been able to vote together with our shareholders, which has the effect of increasing PS’s influence over us due to PS’s ownership of operating partnership units. These provisions may make it more difficult for us to merge with another entity. The interests of limited partners of our Operating Partnership may conflict with the interests of our common stockholders. Limited partners of our Operating Partnership, including PS, have the right to vote on certain changes to the partnership agreement. They may vote in a way that is against the interests of our shareholders. Also, as general partner of our Operating Partnership, we are required to protect the interests of the limited partners of the Operating Partnership. The interests of the limited partners and of our shareholders may differ. We depend on external sources of capital to grow our Company. We are generally required under the Code to distribute at least 90% of our taxable income. Because of this distribution requirement, we may not be able to fund future capital needs, including any necessary building and tenant improvements, from operating cash flow. Consequently, we may need to rely on third-party sources of capital to fund our capital needs. We may not be able to obtain the financing on favorable terms or at all. Access to third-party sources of capital depends, in part, on general market conditions, the market’s perception of our growth potential, our current and expected future earnings, our cash flow, and the market price per share of our common stock. If we cannot obtain capital from third-party sources, we may not be able to acquire properties when strategic opportunities exist, satisfy any debt service obligations, or make cash distributions to shareholders. We are subject to laws and governmental regulations and actions that affect our operating results and financial condition. Our business is subject to regulation under a wide variety of U.S. federal, state and local laws, regulations and policies including those imposed by the SEC, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and the New York Stock Exchange (the “NYSE”), as well as applicable labor laws. Although we have policies and procedures designed to comply with applicable laws and regulations, failure to comply with the various laws and regulations may result in civil and criminal liability, fines and penalties, increased costs of compliance and restatement of our financial statements. 14


  • Page 15

    Table of Contents There can also be no assurance that, in response to current economic conditions or the current political environment or otherwise, laws and regulations will not be implemented or changed in ways that adversely affect our operating results and financial condition, such as recently adopted legislation that expands health care coverage costs or facilitates union activity or federal legislative proposals to otherwise increase operating costs. Terrorist attacks and the possibility of wider armed conflict may have an adverse impact on our business and operating results and could decrease the value of our assets. Terrorist attacks and other acts of violence or war could have a material adverse impact on our business and operating results. There can be no assurance that there will not be further terrorist attacks against the U.S. Attacks or armed conflicts that directly impact one or more of our properties could significantly affect our ability to operate those properties and thereby impair our operating results. Further, we may not have insurance coverage for losses caused by a terrorist attack. Such insurance may not be available, or if it is available and we decide to obtain such terrorist coverage, the cost for the insurance may be significant in relationship to the risk overall. In addition, the adverse effects that such violent acts and threats of future attacks could have on the U.S. economy could similarly have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations. Finally, further terrorist acts could cause the U.S. to enter into a wider armed conflict, which could further impact our business and operating results. Holders of depositary shares, each representing 1/1,000 of a share of our outstanding preferred stock, have dividend, liquidation and other rights that are senior to the rights of the holders of shares of our common stock. Our shares of preferred stock are entitled to cumulative dividends before any dividends may be declared or set aside on our common stock. Upon our voluntary or involuntary liquidation, dissolution or winding up, before any payment is made to holders of our common stock, shares of our preferred stock are entitled to receive a liquidation preference of $25,000 per share (or $25.00 per depositary share) plus any accrued and unpaid distributions. This will reduce the remaining amount of our assets, if any, available to distribute to holders of our common stock. In addition, our preferred stockholders have the right to elect two additional directors to our Board whenever dividends are in arrears in an aggregate amount equivalent to six or more quarterly dividends, whether or not consecutive. Future issuances by us of shares of our common stock may be dilutive to existing stockholders, and future sales of shares of our common stock may adversely affect the market price of our common stock. Sales of substantial amounts of shares of our common stock in the public market (either by us or by PS), or issuances of shares of common stock in connection with redemptions of common units of our Operating Partnership, could adversely affect the market price of our common stock. During the year ended December 31, 2013, the Company completed a public offering of its common stock and may seek to engage in such offerings in the future. Offerings of common stock, including by us in connection with portfolio or other property acquisitions or by PS in secondary offerings, and the issuance of common units of the Operating Partnership in exchange for shares of common stock, could have an adverse effect on the market price of the shares of our common stock. We rely on technology in our operations and failures, inadequacies or interruptions to our service could harm our business. The execution of our business strategy is heavily dependent on the use of technologies and systems, including the Internet, to access, store, transmit, deliver and manage information and processes. Although we believe we have taken commercially reasonable steps to protect the security of our systems, there can be no assurance that such security measures will prevent failures, inadequacies or interruptions in system services, or that system security will not be breached. Disruptions in service, system shutdowns and security breaches could have a material adverse effect on our business. ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS None. 15


  • Page 16

    Table of Contents ITEM 2. PROPERTIES As of December 31, 2015, the Company owned 99 business parks consisting of a geographically diverse portfolio of 28.0 million rentable square feet of commercial real estate which consists of 14.6 million square feet of flex space, 8.8 million square feet of industrial space and 4.6 million square feet of office space. The weighted average occupancy rate throughout2015 was 92.8% and the realized rent per square foot was $14.27. The following table reflects the geographical diversification of the 99 business parks owned by the Company as of December 31, 2015, the type of the rentable square footage and the weighted average occupancy rates throughout 2015 (except as set forth below, all of the properties are held in fee simple interest) (in thousands, except number of business parks): Weighted Number of Average Business Rentable Square Footage Occupancy State Parks Flex Industrial Office Total Rate California (1) 47 5,539 4,618 1,076 11,233 95.1% Texas (2) 23 4,611 477 — 5,088 88.4% Virginia 17 1,947 — 2,093 4,040 91.6% Florida 3 1,074 2,780 12 3,866 93.9% Maryland 6 970 — 1,382 2,352 89.6% Washington 3 411 951 28 1,390 96.8% Total 99 14,552 8,826 4,591 27,969 92.8% (1) The Company has 4.8 million square feet in California that serves as collateral to a mortgage note payable. For more information, see Note 7 to the consolidated financial statements included in this Form 10-K. (2) The Company owns two properties comprising of 232,000 square feet that are subject to ground leases in Las Colinas, Texas, expiring in 2019 and 2020, each with one 10-year extension option. While we currently anticipate that each of the properties listed above will continue to be used for its current purpose.Management will from time to time evaluate its properties from a highest and best use perspective. Competition exists in each of the market areas in which these properties are located. The Company renovates its properties in connection with the re-leasing of space to tenants and expects that it will fund the costs of such renovations from rental income. From time to time the Company may identify higher and better use of its assets.The Company has risks that tenants will default on leases and declare bankruptcy. Management believes these risks are mitigated through the Company’s geographic diversity and diverse tenant base. The Company evaluates the performance of its business parks primarily based on net operating income (“NOI”). NOI is defined by the Company as rental income as defined by GAAP less cost of operations as defined by GAAP, excluding depreciation and amortization. The Company uses NOI and its components as a measurement of the performance of its commercial real estate. Management believes that these financial measures provide them, as well as the investor, the most consistent measurement on a comparative basis of the performance of the commercial real estate and its contribution to the value of the Company. Depreciation and amortization have been excluded from NOI as they are generally not used in determining the value of commercial real estate by management or the investment community. Depreciation and amortization are generally not used in determining value as they consider the historical costs of an asset compared to its current value; therefore, to understand the effect of the assets’ historical cost on the Company’s results, investors should look at GAAP financial measures, such as total operating costs including depreciation and amortization. The Company’s calculation of NOI may not be comparable to those of other companies and should not be used as an alternative to measures of performance calculated in accordance with GAAP. Following the table below, we have reconciled total NOI to net income, which we consider the most directly comparable financial measure calculated in accordance with GAAP. The following information illustrates rental income, cost of operations and NOI generated by the Company’s total portfolio in 2015, 2014 and 2013 by state and by property classifications. As a result of acquisitions and dispositions, certain properties were not held for the full year and are reflected as sold assets. 16


  • Page 17

    Table of Contents The Company’s calculation of NOI may not be comparable to those of other companies and should not be used as an alternative to measures of performance in accordance with GAAP. In order to provide a meaningful period-to-period comparison, the tables below exclude certain material lease buyout payments noted below and amortization of the Senior Management Long-Term Equity Incentive Plan (“LTEIP”) related to field leadership. The tables below also include a reconciliation of NOI to the most comparable amounts based on GAAP (in thousands): For the Year Ended December 31, 2015 For the Year Ended December 31, 2014 For the Year Ended December 31, 2013 Flex Office Industrial Total Flex Office Industrial Total Flex Office Industrial Total Rental Income: California $ 76,883 $ 21,658 $ 38,917 $ 137,458 $ 69,606 $ 19,890 $ 37,291 $ 126,787 $ 66,305 $ 13,184 $ 34,896 $ 114,385 Texas 50,699 — 2,684 53,383 45,881 — 1,564 47,445 37,783 — 1,391 39,174 Virginia 32,249 48,578 — 80,827 32,108 49,204 — 81,312 33,373 48,942 — 82,315 Florida 12,677 169 22,553 35,399 12,180 285 21,538 34,003 11,414 210 20,672 32,296 Maryland 15,390 33,494 — 48,884 15,667 33,585 — 49,252 15,299 32,954 — 48,253 Washington 7,516 586 6,371 14,473 6,875 568 5,052 12,495 6,675 493 3,433 10,601 Sold assets 2,711 — — 2,711 22,223 2,738 — 24,961 26,378 3,592 — 29,970 Total 198,125 104,485 70,525 373,135 204,540 106,270 65,445 376,255 197,227 99,375 60,392 356,994 Cost of Operations: California 22,368 9,234 9,523 41,125 21,701 9,094 9,118 39,913 21,430 5,763 9,115 36,308 Texas 18,657 — 967 19,624 16,977 — 431 17,408 13,034 — 287 13,321 Virginia 9,615 16,199 — 25,814 9,483 16,164 — 25,647 9,191 15,947 — 25,138 Florida 4,016 95 6,774 10,885 3,895 120 6,491 10,506 3,810 141 6,070 10,021 Maryland 5,328 10,806 — 16,134 5,709 11,765 — 17,474 4,916 10,899 — 15,815 Washington 2,059 200 1,671 3,930 1,983 202 1,652 3,837 2,048 189 1,606 3,843 Sold assets 1,242 — — 1,242 8,823 1,140 — 9,963 10,132 1,494 — 11,626 Total 63,285 36,534 18,935 118,754 68,571 38,485 17,692 124,748 64,561 34,433 17,078 116,072 NOI: California 54,515 12,424 29,394 96,333 47,905 10,796 28,173 86,874 44,875 7,421 25,781 78,077 Texas 32,042 — 1,717 33,759 28,904 — 1,133 30,037 24,749 — 1,104 25,853 Virginia 22,634 32,379 — 55,013 22,625 33,040 — 55,665 24,182 32,995 — 57,177 Florida 8,661 74 15,779 24,514 8,285 165 15,047 23,497 7,604 69 14,602 22,275 Maryland 10,062 22,688 — 32,750 9,958 21,820 — 31,778 10,383 22,055 — 32,438 Washington 5,457 386 4,700 10,543 4,892 366 3,400 8,658 4,627 304 1,827 6,758 Sold assets 1,469 — — 1,469 13,400 1,598 — 14,998 16,246 2,098 — 18,344 Total $ 134,840 $ 67,951 $ 51,590 $ 254,381 $ 135,969 $ 67,785 $ 47,753 $ 251,507 $ 132,666 $ 64,942 $ 43,314 $ 240,922 17


  • Page 18

    Table of Contents The following table reconciles NOI to consolidated net income as determined by GAAP (in thousands): For The Years Ended December 31, 2015 2014 2013 Total NOI $ 254,381 $ 251,507 $ 240,922 Other income and (expenses): Lease buyout payments — — 2,252 LTEIP amortization: Cost of operations (2,470) (2,623) 1,241 General and administrative (5,766) (4,802) 2,652 Facility management fees 540 660 639 Other income and expenses (12,740) (13,221) (14,681) Depreciation and amortization (105,394) (110,357) (108,917) General and administrative (7,816) (8,487) (7,110) Acquisition transaction costs — (350) (854) Gain on sale of real estate facilities 28,235 92,373 — Net income $ 148,970 $ 204,700 $ 116,144 Portfolio Information The table below sets forth information with respect to occupancy and rental rates of the Company’s total portfolio for each of the last five years, including discontinued operations: 2015 2014 2013 (1) 2012 (1) 2011(1) Weighted average occupancy rate 92.8% 91.3% 89.9% 89.4% 89.8% Realized rent per square foot $ 14.27 $ 14.00 $ 13.91 $ 14.05 $ 15.11 (1) Excludes certain material lease buyout payments of $2.3 million, $1.8 million and $2.9 million for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively. The following table sets forth the lease expirations for all operating assets as of December 31, 2015 (in thousands): Lease Expirations as of December 31, 2015 Percent of Rentable Square Annualized Rental Annualized Rental Number of Footage Subject to Income Under Income Represented Year of Lease Expiration Tenants Expiring Leases Expiring Leases by Expiring Leases 2016 2,186 5,800 $ 83,573 21.3% 2017 1,400 6,318 89,582 22.9% 2018 685 4,497 67,325 17.2% 2019 265 3,613 51,350 13.1% 2020 270 2,908 42,458 10.8% 2021 36 1,210 17,616 4.5% 2022 33 649 12,301 3.1% 2023 13 403 5,945 1.5% 2024 9 330 6,054 1.6% 2025 16 400 9,834 2.5% Thereafter 7 218 5,938 1.5% Total 4,920 26,346 $ 391,976 100.0% 18


  • Page 19

    Table of Contents ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS We are not presently subject to material litigation nor, to our knowledge, is any material litigation threatened against us, other than routine actions for negligence and other claims and administrative proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business, some of which are expected to be covered by liability insurance or third party indemnifications and all of which collectively are not expected to have a materially adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, or liquidity. ITEM 4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES Not applicable. PART II ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES Market Price of the Registrant’s Common Equity: The common stock of the Company trades on the NYSE under the symbol PSB. The following table sets forth the high and low sales prices of the common stock on the NYSE for the applicable periods: Range Dividends Three Months Ended High Low Declared March 31, 2014 $87.54 $74.85 $ 0.50 June 30, 2014 $87.15 $80.78 $ 0.50 September 30, 2014 $85.01 $74.97 $ 0.50 December 31, 2014 $84.76 $75.02 $ 3.25 (1) March 31, 2015 $88.92 $76.93 $ 0.50 June 30, 2015 $84.25 $71.14 $ 0.50 September 30, 2015 $79.95 $70.15 $ 0.60 December 31, 2015 $90.25 $77.00 $ 0.60 (1) Amount includes a $2.75 per common share special cash dividend. Holders: As of February 15, 2016, there were 331 holders of record of the common stock. Dividends: Holders of common stock are entitled to receive distributions when, as and if declared byour Board out of any funds legally available for that purpose. The Company is required to distribute at least 90% of its taxable income prior to the filing of the Company’s tax return to maintain its REIT status for federal income tax purposes. It is management’s intention to pay distributions of not less than these required amounts. Effective September, 2015, the Board increased its quarterly dividend from $0.50 per common share to $0.60 per common share. Subsequent to December 31, 2015, the Board increased its quarterly dividend from $0.60 per common share to $0.75 per common share, increasing quarterly distributions by $5.2 million per quarter. The Board has established a distribution policy intended to maximize the retention of operating cash flow and distribute the amount required for the Company to maintain its tax status as a REIT. 19


  • Page 20

    Table of Contents Issuer Repurchases of Equity Securities: The Board previously authorized the repurchase, from time to time, of up to 6.5 million shares of the Company’s common stock on the open market or in privately negotiated transactions. During the three months ended December 31, 2015, there were no shares of the Company’s common stock repurchased. As of December 31, 2015, the Company has 1,614,721 shares available for repurchase under the program. The program does not expire. Purchases will be made subject to market conditions and other investment opportunities available to the Company. Securities Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans: The equity compensation plan information is provided in Item 12, “Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters”. 20


  • Page 21

    Table of Contents ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA The following sets forth selected consolidated financial and operating information on a historical basis of the Company. The following information should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and notes thereto of the Company included in this Form 10-K. For The Years Ended December 31, 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 (In thousands, except per share data) Revenues: Rental income $ 373,135 $ 376,255 $ 359,246 $ 346,548 $ 297,457 Facility management fees 540 660 639 649 684 Total operating revenues 373,675 376,915 359,885 347,197 298,141 Expenses: Cost of operations 121,224 127,371 114,831 114,108 99,917 Depreciation and amortization 105,394 110,357 108,917 109,398 84,391 General and administrative 13,582 13,639 5,312 8,919 9,036 Total operating expenses 240,200 251,367 229,060 232,425 193,344 Other income and (expenses): Interest and other income 590 372 1,485 241 221 Interest and other expenses (13,330) (13,593) (16,166) (20,618) (5,455) Total other income and (expenses) (12,740) (13,221) (14,681) (20,377) (5,234) Gain on sale of real estate facilities 28,235 92,373 — — — Income from continuing operations 148,970 204,700 116,144 94,395 99,563 Discontinued operations: Income from discontinued operations (1) — — — 42 360 Gain on sale of real estate facilities — — — 935 2,717 Total discontinued operations — — — 977 3,077 Net income $ 148,970 $ 204,700 $ 116,144 $ 95,372 $ 102,640 Net income allocation: Net income allocable to noncontrolling interests: Noncontrolling interests — common units $ 18,495 $ 30,729 $ 12,952 $ 5,970 $ 15,543 Noncontrolling interests — preferred units — — — 323 (6,991) Total net income allocable to noncontrolling interests 18,495 30,729 12,952 6,293 8,552 Net income allocable to PS Business Parks, Inc.: Preferred shareholders 61,885 60,488 59,216 69,136 41,799 Restricted stock unit holders 299 329 125 138 127 Common shareholders 68,291 113,154 43,851 19,805 52,162 Total net income allocable to PS Business Parks, Inc. 130,475 173,971 103,192 89,079 94,088 Net income $ 148,970 $ 204,700 $ 116,144 $ 95,372 $ 102,640 21


  • Page 22

    Table of Contents For The Years Ended December 31, 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 (In thousands, except per share data) Per Common Share: Cash Distributions (2) $ 2.20 $ 4.75 $ 1.76 $ 1.76 $ 1.76 Net income — basic $ 2.53 $ 4.21 $ 1.77 $ 0.82 $ 2.13 Net income — diluted $ 2.52 $ 4.19 $ 1.77 $ 0.81 $ 2.12 Weighted average common shares — basic 26,973 26,899 24,732 24,234 24,516 Weighted average common shares — diluted 27,051 27,000 24,833 24,323 24,599 Balance Sheet Data: Total assets $ 2,186,658 $ 2,227,114 $ 2,238,559 $ 2,151,817 $ 2,138,619 Total debt $ 250,000 $ 250,000 $ 250,000 $ 468,102 $ 717,084 Equity: PS Business Parks, Inc.'s shareholders' equity: Preferred stock $ 920,000 $ 995,000 $ 995,000 $ 885,000 $ 598,546 Common stock $ 740,496 $ 718,281 $ 722,941 $ 560,689 $ 580,659 Noncontrolling interests: Preferred units $ — $ — $ — $ — $ 5,583 Common units $ 200,103 $ 194,928 $ 196,699 $ 168,572 $ 175,807 Other Data: Net cash provided by operating activities $ 238,072 $ 227,771 $ 222,294 $ 209,127 $ 180,620 Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities $ 3,131 $ 113,188 $ (172,872) $ (105,729) $ (337,106) Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities $ (204,758) $ (219,973) $ (30,824) $ (95,495) $ 156,400 Square footage owned at the end of period 27,969 28,550 29,740 28,208 27,090 (1) Prior to the adoption of the new guidance for reporting discontinued operations and disposal of components of an entity, the operating results from assets classified as properties held for disposition prior to December 31, 2013 are included in discontinued operations for the years ended December 31, 2011 through 2013. Subsequent to the adoption, the operating results from assets sold after January 1, 2014 are included in income from continuing operations. (2) Amount includes a $2.75 per common share special cash dividendfor the year ended December 31, 2014. 22


  • Page 23

    Table of Contents ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTSOF OPERATIONS The following discussion and analysis of the results of operations and financial condition should be read in conjunction with the selected financial data and the Company’s consolidated financial statements and notes thereto included in this Form 10-K. Overview All operating metrics discussed in this section as of and for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 exclude sold assets. Management believes excluding the results of such assets provides the most relevant perspective on the ongoing operations of the Company. Please refer to “Item 15, “Exhibits and Financial Statements Schedules”” for financial metrics that include results fromsold assets. The Company focuses on increasing profitability and cash flow aimed at maximizing shareholder value. The Company strives to maintain high occupancy levels while increasing rental rates and minimizing capital expenditures when market conditions allow, although the Company may decrease rental rates in markets where conditions require. The Company also acquires properties it believes will create long-term value, and from time to time disposes of properties which no longer fit within the Company’s strategic objectives. Operating results are driven primarily by income from rental operations and are therefore substantially influenced by demand for rental space within our properties and our markets, which impacts occupancy, rental rates and capital requirements. During 2015, the Company executed leases comprising 9.5 million square feet of space including 5.9 million square feet of renewals of existing leases and 3.6 million square feet of new leases. Overall, the change in rental rates for the Company continued to improve. See further discussion of operating results below. Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates: Our accounting policies are described in Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements included in this Form 10-K. We believe our most critical accounting policies relate to revenue recognition, property acquisitions, allowance for doubtful accounts, impairment of long- lived assets, depreciation, accruals of operating expenses and accruals for contingencies, each of which we discuss below. Revenue Recognition: The Company must meet four basic criteria before revenue can be recognized: persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists; the delivery has occurred or services have been rendered; the fee is fixed or determinable; and collectability is reasonably assured. All leases are classified as operating leases. Rental income is recognized on a straight-line basis over the terms of the leases. Straight-line rent is recognized for all tenants with contractual fixed increases in rent that are not included on the Company’s credit watch list. Deferred rent receivable represents rental revenue recognized on a straight-line basis in excess of billed rents. Reimbursements from tenants for real estate taxes and other recoverable operating expenses are recognized as rental income in the period the applicable costs are incurred. Property management fees are recognized in the period earned. Property Acquisitions: The purchase price of acquired properties is recorded to land, buildings and improvements (including tenant improvements, unamortized lease commissions, acquired in-place lease values, and tenant relationships, if any) and intangible assets and liabilities associated with the value of above-market and below-market leases based on their respective estimated fair values. Acquisition related costs are expensed as incurred. In determining the fair value of the tangible assets of the acquired properties, management considers the value of the properties as if vacant as of the acquisition date. Management must make significant assumptions in determining the value of assets acquired and liabilities assumed. Using different assumptions in the recording of the purchase cost of the acquired properties would affect the timing of recognition of the related revenue and expenses. Amounts recorded to land are derived from comparable sales of land within the same region. Amounts recorded to buildings and improvements, tenant improvements and unamortized lease commissions are based on current market replacement costs and other market information. 23


  • Page 24

    Table of Contents The value recorded to the above-market or below-market in-place lease values of acquired properties is determined based upon the present value (using a discount rate which reflects the risks associated with the acquired leases) of the difference between (i) the contractual rents to be paid pursuant to the in-place leases, and (ii) management’s estimate of fair market lease rates for the corresponding in-place leases, measured over a period equal to the remaining non-cancelable term of the lease. The amounts recorded to above-market or below-market leases are included in other assets or other liabilities in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets and are amortized on a straight-line basis as an increase or reduction of rental income over the remaining non-cancelable term of the respective leases. Allowance for Doubtful Accounts: Rental revenue from our tenants is our principal source of revenue.Tenant receivables consist primarily of amounts due for contractual lease payments, reimbursements of common area maintenance expenses, property taxes and other expenses recoverable from tenants. Deferred rent receivable represents the amount that the cumulative straight-line rental income recorded to date exceeds cash rents billed to date under the lease agreement. We monitor the collectability of our receivable balances including the deferred rent receivable on an ongoing basis. Based on these reviews, we maintain an allowance for doubtful accounts for estimated losses resulting from the possible inability of our tenants to make required rent payments to us. Tenant receivables and deferred rent receivable are carried net of the allowances for uncollectible tenant receivables and deferred rent.Determination of the adequacy of these allowances requires significant judgments and estimates, and our evaluation of the adequacy of the allowance for uncollectible current tenant receivables and deferred rent receivable are performed using a methodology that incorporates specific identification, aging analysis, an overall evaluation of the historical loss trends and the current economic and business environment. Impairment of Long-Lived Assets: The Company evaluates a property for potential impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that its carrying amount may not be recoverable. On a quarterly basis, we evaluate our entire portfolio for impairment based on current operating information. In the event that these periodic assessments reflect that the carrying amount of a property exceeds the sum of the undiscounted cash flows (excluding interest) that are expected to result from the use and eventual disposition of the property, the Company would recognize an impairment loss to the extent the carrying amount exceeded the estimated fair value of the property. The estimation of expected future net cash flows is inherently uncertain and relies on subjective assumptions dependent upon future and current market conditions and events that affect the ultimate value of the property. Management must make assumptions related to the property such as future rental rates, tenant allowances, operating expenditures, property taxes, capital improvements, occupancy levels and the estimated proceeds generated from the future sale of the property. These assumptions could differ materially from actual results in future periods. Our intent to hold properties over the long-term directly decreases the likelihood of recording an impairment loss. If our strategy changes or if market conditions otherwise dictate an earlier sale date, an impairment loss could be recognized, and such loss could be material. Depreciation: We compute depreciation on our buildings and improvements using the straight-line method based on estimated useful lives generally ranging from five to 30 years. A significant portion of the acquisition cost of each property is recorded to building and building components. The recording of the acquisition cost to building and building components, as well as the determination of their useful lives, are based on estimates. If we do not appropriately record to these components or we incorrectly estimate the useful lives of these components, our computation of depreciation expense may not appropriately reflect the actual impact of these costs over future periods, which will affect net income. In addition, the net book value of real estate assets could be overstated or understated. The statement of cash flows, however, would not be affected. Accruals of Operating Expenses: The Company accrues for property tax expenses, performance bonuses and other operating expenses each quarter based on historical trends and anticipated disbursements. If these estimates are incorrect, the timing and amount of expense recognized will be affected. Accruals for Contingencies: The Company is exposed to business and legal liability risks with respect to events that may have occurred, but in accordance with GAAP has not accrued for such potential liabilities because the loss is either not probable or not estimable. Future events could result in such potential losses becoming probable and estimable, which could have a material adverse impact on our financial condition or results of operations. 24


  • Page 25

    Table of Contents Effect of Economic Conditions on the Company’s Operations: During 2015, most markets continued to reflect favorable conditions allowing for improving occupancy and rental rates. With the exception of the Virginia and Maryland markets, new rental rates for the Company improved over expiring rental rates on executed leases as economic conditions remained healthy. The Virginia and Maryland markets continue to experience soft market conditions as evidenced by continued pressure on rental rates. In these markets,rental rates on new and renewed leases declined 6.2% and 9.6%, respectively, over expiring rents for the year ended December 31, 2015. Given lease expirations of 1.0 million square feet in Virginia and 590,000 square feet in Maryland through December 31, 2016, the Company may continue to experience a decrease in rental income in these markets. Tenant Credit Risk: The Company historically has experienced a low level of write-offs of uncollectable rents,but there is inherent uncertainty in a tenant’s ability to continue paying rent and meet its full lease obligation. The table below summarizes the impact to the Company from tenants’ inability to pay rent or continue to meet their lease obligations (in thousands): For The Years Ended December 31, 2015 2014 2013 Annual write-offs of uncollectible rent $ 919 $ 1,101 $ 955 Annual write-offs as a percentage of rental income 0.2% 0.3% 0.3% Square footage of leases terminated prior to their scheduled expiration due to business failures/bankruptcies 473 362 431 Accelerated depreciation and amortization related to unamortized tenant improvements and lease commissions associated with early terminations $ 539 $ 460 $ 2,071 As of February 15, 2016, the Company had 54,000 square feet of leased space occupied by six tenants that are protected by Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. From time to time, tenants contact us, requesting early termination of their lease, reductions in space under lease, or rent deferment or abatement. At this time, the Company cannot anticipate what impact, if any, the ultimate outcome of these discussions will have on our future operating results. Company Performance and Effect of Economic Conditions on Primary Markets:During the year ended December 31, 2015, initial rental rates on new and renewed leases within the Company’s total portfolio increased 4.4% over expiring rents, a significant improvement from the year ended December 31, 2014, in which initial rental rates on new and renewed leases increased by 0.5%. The Company’s Same Park (defined below) occupancy rate at December 31, 2015 was 94.9%, compared to 93.5% at December 31, 2014. The Company’s total portfolio occupancy rate at December 31, 2015 was 94.8%, compared to 92.4% at December 31, 2014. The Company’s operations are concentrated in eight regions. Each of the eight regions in which the Company owns assets is subject to its own unique market influences. See “Supplemental Property Data and Trends” below for more information on regional operating data. Effect of Acquisitions, Development and Dispositions of Properties on the Company’s Operations: The Company is focused on growing its operations by looking for opportunities to expand its presence in existing and new markets through strategic acquisitions that meet the Company’s focus on multi-tenant flex, industrial and office parks in markets where it has or may obtain a substantial market presence. The Company may also from time to time dispose of assets based on market conditions. 25


  • Page 26

    Table of Contents The Company made no acquisitions in 2015. As of December 31, 2015, the blended occupancy rate of the nine assets comprising 2.2 million square feet acquired during 2013 and 2014, Non-Same Park (defined below) was 93.9% compared to a blended occupancy rate of 66.1% at the time of acquisition. As of December 31, 2015, the Company had 135,000 square feet of vacant space spread over these acquisitions, which we believe provides the Company with the opportunity to generate additional rental income given that the Company’s Same Park assets in these same submarkets have a weighted average occupancy of 95.5% at December 31, 2015. The table below contains the assets acquired from 2013 to 2014 (dollars and square feet in thousands): Purchase Square Occupancy at Occupancy at Property Date Acquired Location Price Feet Acquisition December 31, 2015 Charcot Business Park II December, 2014 San Jose, California $ 16,000 119 96.7% 100.0% McNeil 1 November, 2014 Austin, Texas 10,550 246 53.3% 100.0% Springlake Business Center II August, 2014 Dallas, Texas 5,148 145 35.4% 88.2% Arapaho Business Park 9 July, 2014 Dallas, Texas 1,134 19 100.0% 100.0% MICC — Center 23 July, 2014 Miami, Florida 12,725 149 0.0% 100.0% Bayshore Corporate Center December, 2013 San Mateo, California 60,500 340 81.8% 94.2% Valwood Business Park November, 2013 Dallas, Texas 12,425 245 83.5% 90.0% Dallas Flex Portfolio October, 2013 Dallas, Texas 27,900 559 72.1% 95.8% Arapaho Business Park July, 2013 Dallas, Texas 14,750 389 66.5% 87.3% Total $ 161,132 2,211 66.1% 93.9% During 2015, the Company sold four business parks aggregating 492,000 square feet in non-strategic markets for net proceeds of $41.2 million, which resulted in a gain of $23.4 million. Additionally, as part of an eminent domain process, the Company sold five buildings, aggregating 82,000 square feet, at the Company’s Overlake Business Park located in Redmond, Washington, for $13.9 million, which resulted in a gain of $4.8 million. With these sales the Company has completed its stated objective of exiting non-strategic markets in Sacramento, California, Oregon and Arizona. During 2014, the Company sold five business parks aggregating 1.9 million square feet and 11.5 acres of land in non-strategic markets, including Portland, Oregon and Phoenix, Arizona, for net proceeds of $212.2 million, which resulted in a gain of $92.4 million. In 2013, the Company entered into a joint venture, in which it will maintain a 95.0% economic interest, with an unrelated real estate development company for the purpose of developing a 395-unit multi-family building, to be known as Highgate, located within the Company’s Westpark Business Park in Tysons, Virginia. The Company contributed a five-acre site on which the multi-family project will be developed, along with capitalized improvements, to the Joint Venture on October 5, 2015. Subsequent to the contribution date, demolition, site preparation and construction commenced and is expected to be completed in late 2017. The total development costs for the Joint Venture, including a land value of $27.0 million, are estimated to be $117.2 million. As of December 31, 2015, the Company’s investment in unconsolidated joint venture was $26.7 million. Scheduled Lease Expirations: In addition to the 1.4 million square feet, or 5.2%, of space available in our total portfolio as of December 31, 2015, 2,186 leases representing 22.0% of the leased square footage of our total portfolio, or 21.3% of annualized rental income, are scheduled to expire in 2016. Our ability to re-lease available space will depend upon market conditions in the specific submarkets in which our properties are located. As a result, we cannot predict with certainty the rate at which expiring leases will be re- leased. Impact of Inflation: Although inflation has not been significant in recent years, it remains a potential factor in our economy, and the Company continues to seek ways to mitigate its potential impact. A substantial portion of the Company’s leases require tenants to pay operating expenses, including real estate taxes, utilities, and insurance, as well as increases in common area expenses, partially reducing the Company’s exposure to inflation. 26


  • Page 27

    Table of Contents Concentration of Portfolio by Region: The table below reflects the Company’s square footage based on regional concentration as of December 31, 2015. As part of the table below, we have reconciled total NOI tonet income (in thousands): Percent of Square Square 2015 Percent Region Footage Footage NOI of NOI California Northern California 7,245 25.9% $ 56,509 22.3% Southern California 3,988 14.3% 39,824 15.7% Texas Northern Texas 3,125 11.2% 19,490 7.7% Southern Texas 1,963 7.0% 14,269 5.6% Virginia 4,040 14.4% 55,013 21.8% Florida 3,866 13.8% 24,514 9.7% Maryland 2,352 8.4% 32,750 13.0% Washington 1,390 5.0% 10,543 4.2% Total 27,969 100.0% $ 252,912 100.0% Reconciliation of NOI to net income Total NOI $ 252,912 Other income and (expenses): NOI from sold assets 1,469 2014 LTEIP amortization: Cost of operations (2,470) General and administrative (5,766) Facility management fees 540 Interest and other income 590 Interest and other expenses (13,330) Depreciation and amortization (105,394) General and administrative (7,816) Gain on sale of real estate facilities 28,235 Net income $ 148,970 27


  • Page 28

    Table of Contents Concentration of Credit Risk by Industry: The information below depicts the industry concentration of our tenant base as of December 31, 2015. The Company analyzes this concentration to minimize significant industry exposure risk. Percent of Annualized Industry Rental Income Business services 17.9% Computer hardware, software and related services 10.6% Warehouse, distribution, transportation and logistics 10.0% Government 9.8% Health services 9.5% Retail, food, and automotive 7.5% Engineering and construction 6.7% Insurance and financial services 4.4% Home furnishings 3.1% Electronics 2.9% Aerospace/defense products and services 2.7% Communications 2.2% Educational services 1.8% Other 10.9% Total 100.0% The information below depicts the Company’s top 10 customers by annualized rental income as of December 31, 2015 (in thousands): Percent of Annualized Annualized Tenants Square Footage Rental Income (1) Rental Income US Government 842 $ 20,307 5.3% Lockheed Martin Corporation 168 4,431 1.2% Kaiser Permanente 199 4,181 1.1% Keeco, LLC 460 3,385 0.9% Luminex Corporation 185 3,234 0.9% MAXIMUS, Inc. 102 2,006 0.5% Investorplace Media, LLC 46 1,741 0.5% KZ Kitchen Cabinet & Stone 181 1,728 0.5% Inova Health Care Services 63 1,701 0.4% Raytheon 78 1,653 0.4% Total 2,324 $ 44,367 11.7% ____________ (1) For leases expiring prior to December 31, 2016, annualized rental income represents income to be received under existing leases from January 1, 2016 through the date of expiration. Comparison of 2015 to 2014 Results of Operations: Net income for the year ended December 31, 2015 was $149.0 million compared to $204.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2014. Net income allocable to common shareholders for the year endedDecember 31, 2015 was $68.3 million compared to $113.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2014. Net income per common share on a diluted basis was$2.52 for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to $4.19 for the year ended December 31, 2014 (based on weighted average diluted common shares outstanding of 27,051,000 and 27,000,000, respectively). The decrease in net income allocable to common shareholders was primarily due to higher gain on sale of assets reported in 2014 (gain on sale of real estate facilities was $28.2 million in 2015 compared to$92.4 million in 2014). 28


  • Page 29

    Table of Contents Effective March, 2014, the Company entered into a performance-based restricted stock unit program, the Senior Management Long- Term Equity Incentive Program for 2014-2017 (“2014 LTEIP”), with certain employees of the Company. Net compensation expense of $8.2 million and $7.4 million related to the 2014 LTEIP was recognized for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. To present comparative results, the amortization of 2014 LTEIP reported in either cost of operations (for operations leadership) or general and administrative expenses (for executive management) have been reflected as adjustments in the tables below. I n order to evaluate the performance of the Company’s portfolio over comparable periods, management analyzes the operating performance of properties owned and operated throughout both periods (herein referred to as “Same Park”). The Same Park portfolio includes all operating properties acquired prior to January 1, 2013. Operating properties acquired subsequentl y are referred to as “Non- Same Park.” For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, the Same Park facilities constitute 25.8 million rentable square feet, representing 92.1% of the 28.0 million square feet in the Company’s total portfolio as of December 31, 2015. The following table presents the operating results of the Company’s properties for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 in addition to other income and expenses items affecting net income (in thousands, except per square foot data): For The Years Ended December 31, 2015 2014 Change Rental income: Same Park (25.8 million rentable square feet) $ 345,932 $ 335,206 3.2% Non-Same Park (2.2 million rentable square feet) 24,492 16,088 52.2% Total rental income 370,424 351,294 5.4% Cost of operations: Same Park 108,185 107,032 1.1% Non-Same Park 9,327 7,753 20.3% Total cost of operations 117,512 114,785 2.4% Net operating income: Same Park 237,747 228,174 4.2% Non-Same Park 15,165 8,335 81.9% Total net operating income 252,912 236,509 6.9% Other income and (expenses): NOI from sold assets (1) 1,469 14,998 (90.2%) 2014 LTEIP amortization: Cost of operations (2,470) (2,623) (5.8%) General and administrative (5,766) (4,802) 20.1% Facility management fees 540 660 (18.2%) Other income and expenses (12,740) (13,221) (3.6%) Depreciation and amortization (105,394) (110,357) (4.5%) General and administrative (7,816) (8,487) (7.9%) Acquisition transaction costs — (350) (100.0%) Gain on sale of real estate facilities 28,235 92,373 (69.4%) Net income $ 148,970 $ 204,700 (27.2%) Same Park gross margin (2) 68.7% 68.1% 0.9% Same Park weighted average occupancy 93.5% 92.5% 1.1% Non-Same Park weighted average occupancy 85.3% 73.3% 16.4% Same Park realized rent per square foot (3) $ 14.37 $ 14.06 2.2% (1) Represents NOI from sold assets. These assets generated rental income of $2.7 million and $25.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. Cost of operations for such assets was $1.2 million and $10.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. 29


  • Page 30

    Table of Contents (2) Computed by dividing Same Park NOI by Same Park rental income. (3) Represents the annualized Same Park rental income earned per occupied square foot. Supplemental Property Data and Trends: NOI is summarized for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 by region below. See Item 2, “Properties” above for more information on NOI, including why the Company presents NOI and how the Company uses NOI. The Company’s calculation of NOI may not be comparable to those of other companies and should not be used as an alternative to measures of performance calculated in accordance with GAAP. The following table summarizes the Same Park and Non-Same Park operating results by region for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014. In addition, the table reflects the comparative impact on the overall rental income, cost of operations and NOI from properties that have been acquired since January 1, 2013, and the impact of such is included in Non-Same Park facilities in the table below. As part of the table below, we have reconciled total NOI to net income (in thousands): Rental Rental Cost of Cost of Income Income Operations Operations NOI NOI December 31, December 31, Increase December 31, December 31, Increase December 31, December 31, Increase Region 2015 2014 (Decrease) 2015 2014 (Decrease) 2015 2014 (Decrease) Same Park Northern California $ 68,611 $ 64,657 6.1% $ 18,691 $ 18,014 3.8% $ 49,920 $ 46,643 7.0% Southern California 58,621 54,864 6.8% 18,797 19,043 (1.3%) 39,824 35,821 11.2% Northern Texas 18,634 18,666 (0.2%) 6,458 6,022 7.2% 12,176 12,644 (3.7%) Southern Texas 21,714 20,040 8.4% 7,918 6,736 17.5% 13,796 13,304 3.7% Virginia 80,827 81,312 (0.6%) 25,814 25,647 0.7% 55,013 55,665 (1.2%) Florida 34,168 33,920 0.7% 10,443 10,259 1.8% 23,725 23,661 0.3% Maryland 48,884 49,252 (0.7%) 16,134 17,474 (7.7%) 32,750 31,778 3.1% Washington 14,473 12,495 15.8% 3,930 3,837 2.4% 10,543 8,658 21.8% Total Same Park 345,932 335,206 3.2% 108,185 107,032 1.1% 237,747 228,174 4.2% Non-Same Park Northern California 10,226 7,266 40.7% 3,637 2,856 27.3% 6,589 4,410 49.4% Northern Texas 11,941 8,667 37.8% 4,627 4,578 1.1% 7,314 4,089 78.9% Southern Texas 1,094 72 1,419.4% 621 72 762.5% 473 — 100.0% Florida 1,231 83 1,383.1% 442 247 78.9% 789 (164) (581.1%) Total Non-Same Park 24,492 16,088 52.2% 9,327 7,753 20.3% 15,165 8,335 81.9% Total $ 370,424 $ 351,294 5.4% $ 117,512 $ 114,785 2.4% $ 252,912 $ 236,509 6.9% Reconciliation of NOI to net income Total NOI $ 252,912 $ 236,509 6.9% Other income and (expenses): NOI from sold assets 1,469 14,998 (90.2%) 2014 LTEIP amortization: Cost of operations (2,470) (2,623) (5.8%) General and administrative (5,766) (4,802) 20.1% Facility management fees 540 660 (18.2%) Other income and expenses (12,740) (13,221) (3.6%) Depreciation and amortization (105,394) (110,357) (4.5%) General and administrative (7,816) (8,487) (7.9%) Acquisition transaction costs — (350) (100.0%) Gain on sale of real estate facilities 28,235 92,373 (69.4%) Net income $ 148,970 $ 204,700 (27.2%) The following table summarizes Same Park weighted average occupancy rates and realized rent per square foot by region for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014. Weighted Average Occupancy Rates Realized Rent Per Square Foot Region 2015 2014 Change 2015 2014 Change Northern California 96.4% 95.0% 1.5% $ 10.49 $ 10.04 4.5% Southern California 93.7% 92.4% 1.4% $ 15.69 $ 14.89 5.4% Northern Texas 88.4% 90.7% (2.5%) $ 11.92 $ 11.63 2.5% Southern Texas 93.0% 94.8% (1.9%) $ 13.60 $ 12.31 10.5% Virginia 91.6% 90.3% 1.4% $ 21.84 $ 22.29 (2.0%) Florida 93.7% 95.9% (2.3%) $ 9.81 $ 9.51 3.2% Maryland 89.6% 87.8% 2.1% $ 23.19 $ 23.86 (2.8%) Washington 96.8% 85.8% 12.8% $ 10.76 $ 10.42 3.3% Total Same Park 93.5% 92.5% 1.1% $ 14.37 $ 14.06 2.2% 30


  • Page 31

    Table of Contents Rental Income: Rental income increased $19.1 million from $351.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2014 to $370.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 as a result of an increase from the Same Park portfolio of $10.7 million, or 3.2%, combined with an $8.4 million increase from Non-Same Park facilities. The Same Park increase was due to increases in occupancy and rental rates, while the Non-Same Park increase was due to a combination of an increase in occupancy and the acquisition of additional parks during the latter half of 2014. Including the sold assets, rental income was $373.1 million and $376.3 million for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. Facility Management Fees: Facility management fees, derived from PS, account for a small portion of the Company’s revenues. During the year ended December 31, 2015, $540,000 of revenue was recognized from facility management fees compared to$660,000 for the year ended December 31, 2014. The decrease resulted from a reduction in total square footage managed on behalf of PS. Cost of Operations: Cost of operations increased $2.7 million, or 2.4%, from $114.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2014 to $117.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 as a result of an increase in the Non-Same Park facilities of $1.6 million, combined with an increase in the Same Park portfolio of $1.2 million, or 1.1%. The increase in Same Park cost of operations was a result of increases in repairs and maintenance costs and property taxes driven by higher assessed values partially offset by lower utility costs. Including the 2014 LTEIP amortization and sold assets, cost of operations was $121.2 million and $127.4 million for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. Depreciation and Amortization Expense: Depreciation and amortization expense was $105.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to $110.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2014. The decrease in depreciation and amortization expense was due to the disposition of assets, partially offset by 2014 acquisitions. General and Administrative Expenses: For the year ended December 31, 2015, general and administrative expenses decreased $671,000, or 7.9%, over 2014 as a result of non-cash expense of $840,000 relating to adjustments made to outstanding stock options in December, 2014 in connection with the Special Cash Dividend, as well as an adjustment to shares to be granted to directors upon retirement in 2014. Including the 2014 LTEIP amortization and acquisition transaction costs, for the year ended December 31, 2015, general and administrative expenses decreased $57,000, or 0.4%, over 2014. Gain on Sale of Real Estate Facilities: The Company recorded a combined gain of $28.2 million and $92.4 million for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively, related to the sales noted on page 60. Net Income Allocable to Noncontrolling Interests: Net income allocable to noncontrolling interests reflects the net income allocable to equity interests in the Operating Partnership that are not owned by the Company. Net income allocable to noncontrolling interests was $18.5 million and $30.7 million of allocated income to common unit holders for the years December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. The decrease was primarily due to higher gain on sale of assets reported in 2014(gain on sale of real estate facilities was $28.2 million in 2015 compared to $92.4 million in 2014) partially offset with an increase in NOI. Comparison of 2014 to 2013 Results of Operations: Net income for the year ended December 31, 2014 was $204.7 million compared to $116.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2013. Net income allocable to common shareholders for the year endedDecember 31, 2014 was $113.2 million compared to $43.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2013. Net income per common share on a diluted basis was$4.19 for the year ended December 31, 2014 compared to $1.77 for the year ended December 31, 2013 (based on weighted average diluted common shares outstanding of 27,000,000 and 24,833,000, respectively). The increase in net income allocable to common shareholders was due to the gain on sale of real estate facilities of $92.4 million combined with an increase in NOI, offset by an increase in general and administrative expenses resulting primarily from non-cash stock compensation charges (discussed in more detail below and in Note 11 to the consolidated financial statements included in this Form 10-K). Effective January 1, 2012, the Company entered into a performance-based restricted stock unit program, the Senior Management Long- Term Equity Incentive Program for 2012-2015 (“2012 LTEIP”), with certain employees of the 31


  • Page 32

    Table of Contents Company. While the Company saw improvements in operating metrics and delivered strong total shareholder return over 2012 and 2013, the original targets under the 2012 LTEIP were based on an assumption of a strong economic recovery starting in 2012. Given the pace of the economic recovery during those two years, the targets for 2012 and 2013 were not achieved and management determined in 2013 that it was not probable that the remaining targets under the 2012 LTEIP would be met. As such, the Company stopped recording amortization and recorded a reversal of all 2012 LTEIP amortization previously recorded in 2012 of $3.9 million during the year ended December 31, 2013. To present comparative results, the amortization of 2014 LTEIP (discussed under Comparison of 2015 to 2014) and 2013 reversal of 2012 LTEIP reported in either cost of operations (for operations leadership) or general and administrative expenses (for executive management) have been reflected as adjustments in the tables below. For the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, the Same Park facilities constitute 25.8 million rentable square feet, representing 90.2% of the 28.6 million square feet in the Company’s portfolio as of December 31, 2014. The following table presents the operating results of the Company’s properties for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 in addition to other income and expenses items affecting net income (in thousands, except per square foot data): For The Years Ended December 31, 2014 2013 Change Rental income: Same Park (25.8 million rentable square feet) $ 335,206 $ 324,903 3.2% Non-Same Park (2.2 million rentable square feet) 16,088 2,121 658.5% Total rental income 351,294 327,024 7.4% Cost of operations: Same Park 107,032 103,341 3.6% Non-Same Park 7,753 1,105 601.6% Total cost of operations 114,785 104,446 9.9% Net operating income: Same Park 228,174 221,562 3.0% Non-Same Park 8,335 1,016 720.4% Total net operating income 236,509 222,578 6.3% Other income and (expenses): NOI from sold assets (1) 14,998 18,344 (18.2%) Lease buyout payments (2) — 2,252 (100.0%) LTEIP amortization (3): Cost of operations (2,623) 1,241 (311.4%) General and administrative (4,802) 2,652 (281.1%) Facility management fees 660 639 3.3% Other income and expenses (13,221) (14,681) (9.9%) Depreciation and amortization (110,357) (108,917) 1.3% General and administrative (8,487) (7,110) 19.4% Acquisition transaction costs (350) (854) (59.0%) Gain on sale of real estate facilities 92,373 — 100.0% Net income $ 204,700 $ 116,144 76.2% Same Park gross margin (4) 68.1% 68.2% (0.1%) Same Park weighted average occupancy 92.5% 90.1% 2.7% Non-Same Park weighted average occupancy 73.3% 70.3% 4.3% Same Park realized rent per square foot (5) $ 14.06 $ 14.00 0.4% (1) Represents NOI from sold assets. These assets generated rental income of $25.0 million and $30.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. Cost of operations for such assets was $10.0 million and $11.6 million for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. (2) Represents a material lease buyout payment recorded in the fourth quarter of 2013 associated with a 75,000 square foot lease in Oregon which terminated as of December 31, 2013. 32


  • Page 33

    Table of Contents (3) Represents the 2014 LTEIP amortization recorded in 2014 and the reversal of the 2012 LTEIP amortization in 2013 of all amounts originally expensed in 2012. (4) Computed by dividing Same Park NOI by Same Park rental income. (5) Represents the Same Park rental income earned per occupied square foot. Supplemental Property Data and Trends: NOI is summarized for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 by region below. The Company’s calculation of NOI may not be comparable to those of other companies and should not be used as an alternative to measures of performance calculated in accordance with GAAP. The following table summarizes the Same Park and Non-Same Park operating results by region for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013. In addition, the table reflects the comparative impact on the overall rental income, cost of operations and NOI from properties that have been acquired since January 1, 2013, and the impact of such is included in Non-Same Park facilities in the table below. As part of the table below, we have reconciled total NOI to net income (in thousands): Rental Rental Cost of Cost of Income Income Operations Operations NOI NOI December 31, December 31, Increase December 31, December 31, Increase December 31, December 31, Increase Region 2014 2013 (Decrease) 2014 2013 (Decrease) 2014 2013 (Decrease) Same Park Northern California $ 64,657 $ 60,291 7.2% $ 18,014 $ 18,080 (0.4%) $ 46,643 $ 42,211 10.5% Southern California 54,864 53,897 1.8% 19,043 18,128 5.0% 35,821 35,769 0.1% Northern Texas 18,666 17,963 3.9% 6,022 5,750 4.7% 12,644 12,213 3.5% Southern Texas 20,040 19,287 3.9% 6,736 6,566 2.6% 13,304 12,721 4.6% Virginia 81,312 82,315 (1.2%) 25,647 25,138 2.0% 55,665 57,177 (2.6%) Florida 33,920 32,296 5.0% 10,259 10,021 2.4% 23,661 22,275 6.2% Maryland 49,252 48,253 2.1% 17,474 15,815 10.5% 31,778 32,438 (2.0%) Washington 12,495 10,601 17.9% 3,837 3,843 (0.2%) 8,658 6,758 28.1% Total Same Park 335,206 324,903 3.2% 107,032 103,341 3.6% 228,174 221,562 3.0% Non-Same Park Northern California 7,266 197 3,588.3% 2,856 100 2,756.0% 4,410 97 4,446.4% Northern Texas 8,667 1,924 350.5% 4,578 1,005 355.5% 4,089 919 344.9% Southern Texas 72 — 100.0% 72 — 100.0% — — 0.0% Florida 83 — 100.0% 247 — 100.0% (164) — (100.0%) Total Non-Same Park 16,088 2,121 658.5% 7,753 1,105 601.6% 8,335 1,016 720.4% Total $ 351,294 $ 327,024 7.4% $ 114,785 $ 104,446 9.9% $ 236,509 $ 222,578 6.3% Reconciliation of NOI to net income Total NOI $ 236,509 $ 222,578 6.3% Other income and (expenses): NOI from sold assets 14,998 18,344 (18.2%) Lease buyout payments — 2,252 (100.0%) LTEIP amortization: Cost of operations (2,623) 1,241 (311.4%) General and administrative (4,802) 2,652 (281.1%) Facility management fees 660 639 3.3% Other income and expenses (13,221) (14,681) (9.9%) Depreciation and amortization (110,357) (108,917) 1.3% General and administrative (8,487) (7,110) 19.4% Acquisition transaction costs (350) (854) (59.0%) Gain on sale of real estate facilities 92,373 — 100.0% Net income $ 204,700 $ 116,144 76.2% 33


  • Page 34

    Table of Contents The following table summarizes Same Park weighted average occupancy rates and realized rent per square foot by region for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013. Weighted Average Occupancy Rates Realized Rent Per Square Foot Region 2014 2013 Change 2014 2013 Change Northern California 95.0% 89.3% 6.4% $ 10.04 $ 9.95 0.9% Southern California 92.4% 92.3% 0.1% $ 14.89 $ 14.65 1.6% Northern Texas 90.7% 90.2% 0.6% $ 11.63 $ 11.25 3.4% Southern Texas 94.8% 93.4% 1.5% $ 12.31 $ 12.02 2.4% Virginia 90.3% 91.0% (0.8%) $ 22.29 $ 22.38 (0.4%) Florida 95.9% 95.5% 0.4% $ 9.51 $ 9.10 4.5% Maryland 87.8% 87.1% 0.8% $ 23.86 $ 23.55 1.3% Washington 85.8% 70.9% 21.0% $ 10.42 $ 10.70 (2.6%) Total Same Park 92.5% 90.1% 2.7% $ 14.06 $ 14.00 0.4% Rental Income: Rental income increased $24.3 million from $327.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2013 to $351.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2014 as a result of a $14.0 million increase in rental income from Non-Same Park facilities combined with an increase of $10.3 million, or 3.2%, from the Same Park portfolio. The Same Park increase was due to an increase in occupancy while the increase in Non-Same Park was due to a combination of an increase in occupancy and the acquisition of additional parks during the latter half of 2013. Including the sold assets and certain material lease buyout payments for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, rental income was $376.3 million and $359.2 million for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. Facility Management Fees: Facility management fees, derived from PS, account for a small portion of the Company’s revenues. During the year ended December 31, 2014, $660,000 of revenue was recognized from facility management fees compared to$639,000 for the year ended December 31, 2013. Cost of Operations: Cost of operations increased $10.3 million, or 9.9%, from $104.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2013 to $114.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2014 as a result of an increase in the Non-Same Park facilities of $6.6 million, combined with an increase in the Same Park portfolio of $3.7 million, or 3.6%. The increase in Same Park cost of operations was driven by increases in utility and repairs and maintenance costs and property taxes. Including the LTEIP amortization noted above and sold assets, cost of operations was $127.4 million and $114.8 million for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. Depreciation and Amortization Expense: Depreciation and amortization expense was $110.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2014 compared to $108.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2013. The increase in depreciation and amortization expense was due to depreciation from 2013 acquisitions, partially offset by the disposition of assets. General and Administrative Expenses: For the year ended December 31, 2014, general and administrative expenses increased $1.4 million, or 19.4%, over 2013 as a result of non-cash expense of $840,000 relating to adjustments made to outstanding stock options in December, 2014 in connection with the Special Cash Dividend, as well as an adjustment to shares to be granted to directors upon retirement. Including the LTEIP amortization and acquisition transaction costs, for the year ended December 31, 2014, general and administrative expense increased $8.3 million, or 156.8%, over 2013. Interest and Other Income: Interest and other income was $372,000 for the year ended December 31, 2014 compared to $1.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2013. During 2013, the Company sold to PS its ownership interest in STOR-Re Mutual Insurance Company, Inc. (“STOR-Re”) for $1.1 million, representing a 4.0% ownership interest, and accordingly, the Company recorded a gain on sale of the ownership interest of such amount as interest and other income. As of December 31, 2013, the Company had no ownership interest in STOR-Re. Interest and Other Expenses: Interest and other expenses was $13.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2014 compared to $16.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2013. The decrease in interest and other expenses was primarily attributable to the repayments on the Term Loan and mortgage notes payable of $18.1 million during 2013 partially offset by an increase in interest capitalized for the joint venture development. Included in interest and 34


  • Page 35

    Table of Contents other expenses for the year ended December 31, 2013 was amortization of the remaining commitment fee of $383,000 as a result of the repayment in full of the Term Loan. Gain on Sale of Real Estate Facility: On November 21, 2014, the Company completed the sale of three business parks, consisting of 42 buildings aggregating 656,000 square feet, located in Phoenix, Arizona, for net proceeds of $52.2 million, resulting in a gain of $29.6 million. On October 1, 2014, the Company completed the sale of two business parks, Cornell Oaks Corporate Center and Creekside Corporate Park along with 11.5 acres of adjacent land, located in Beaverton, Oregon, for net proceeds of $159.9 million, resulting in a gain of $62.8 million. The parks consist of 18 buildings aggregating 1.2 million square feet. Net Income Allocable to Noncontrolling Interests: Net income allocable to noncontrolling interests reflects the net income allocable to equity interests in the Operating Partnership that are not owned by the Company. Net income allocable to noncontrolling interests was $30.7 million and $13.0 million of allocated income to common unit holders for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. The increase was due to the gain on sale of real estate facilities of $92.4 million combined with an increase in NOI, offset by an increase in general and administrative expenses resulting primarily from non-cash stock compensation charges. Liquidity and Capital Resources Cash and cash equivalents increased $36.4 million from $152.5 million at December 31, 2014 to $188.9 million at December 31, 2015 for the reasons noted below. Net cash provided by operating activities for the years endedDecember 31, 2015 and 2014 was $238.1 million and $227.8 million, respectively. The increase of $10.3 million in net cash provided by operating activities was primarily due to an increase in net operating income and the change in working capital. Management believes that the Company’s internally generated net cash provided by operating activities will be sufficient to enable it to meet its operating expenses, capital expenditures, debt service requirements and distributions to shareholders for the foreseeable future. Net cash provided by investing activities was $3.1 million and $113.2 million for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. The decrease was primarily a result of lower disposal activity of $157.0 million partially offset by lower acquisitions of $45.0 million and a reduction in capital improvements of $8.1 million. Net cash used in financing activities was $204.8 million a n d $220.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2015 a n d 2014, respectively. The change was primarily due to the Special Cash Dividend paid in December, 2014 partially offset by an increase in the regular quarterly common dividend (from $0.50 per share to $0.60 per share) effective September, 2015. The reduction in distributions was partially offset with the redemption of preferred equity by $75.0 million in 2015. As described in Item 1, “Business — Borrowings,” the Company has a n outstanding mortgage note payable of $250.0 million that matures December 1, 2016. The Company intends to repay the balance of the mortgage note payable as of June 1, 2016, without prepayment penalty, using cash on hand and borrowings on its Credit Facility (defined below). The Company fully repaid the outstanding balance of $200.0 million on its Term Loan in November, 2013. See Notes 6 and 7 to the consolidated financial statements included in this Form 10-K for a summary of the Company’s outstanding borrowings as of December 31, 2015. The Company has a line of credit (the “Credit Facility”) with Wells Fargo Bank, National Association (“Wells Fargo”). The Credit Facility has a borrowing limit of $250.0 million and expires May 1, 2019. The rate of interest charged on borrowings is based on the London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) plus 0.875% to LIBOR plus 1.70% depending on the Company’s credit ratings. Currently, the Company’s rate under the Credit Facility is LIBOR plus 0.875%. In addition, the Company is required to pay an annual facility fee ranging from 0.125% to 0.30% of the borrowing limit depending on the Company’s credit ratings (currently 0.125%). The Company had no balance outstanding on the Credit Facility at December 31, 2015 and 2014. The Company had $769,000 and $1.0 million of unamortized commitment fees as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. The Credit Facility requires the 35


  • Page 36

    Table of Contents Company to meet certain covenants, all of which the Company was in compliance December 31, 2015. Interest on outstanding borrowings is payable monthly. In October, 2015, the Company redeemed its 6.875% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series R, which decreased the Company’s outstanding preferred equity to 22.0% of its market capitalization during the year ended December 31, 2015 from 25.1% at December 31, 2014. As of December 31, 2015, the Company had one fixed-rate mortgage note totaling $250.0 million, which represented 6.0% of its total market capitalization. The Company calculates market capitalization by adding (1) the liquidation preference of the Company’s outstanding preferred equity, (2) principal value of the Company’s outstanding debt and (3) the total number of common shares and common units outstanding at December 31, 2015 multiplied by the closing price of the stock on that date. The interest rate for the mortgage note is 5.45% per annum. The Company had 21.7% of its properties, in terms of net book value, encumbered at December 31, 2015. The Company focuses on retaining cash for reinvestment, as we believe this provides us the greatest level of financial flexibility. As operating fundamentals improve, additional increases in distributions to the Company’s common shareholders may be required. The Company will continue to monitor its taxable income and the corresponding dividend requirements as discussed below. Issuance of Preferred Stock: On March 14, 2013, the Company issued $110.0 million or 4.4 million depositary shares, each representing 1/1,000 of a share of the 5.70% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series V, at $25.00 per depositary share. Issuance of Common Stock: On November 7, 2013, the Company sold 1,495,000 shares of common stock in a public offering and concurrently sold 950,000 shares of common stock at the public offering price to PS. The aggregate net proceeds were $192.3 million. Redemption of Preferred Equity: On October 15, 2015, the Company completed the redemption of its 6.875% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series R, at its par value of $75.0 million. The Company reported the non-cash distributions of $2.5 million, representing the original issuance costs, as a reduction of net income allocable to common shareholders and unit holders for the year ended December 31, 2015. Repurchase of Common Stock: No shares of common stock were repurchased under the board approved common stock repurchase program during the years ended December 31, 2015 or 2014. Mortgage Note Repayment: In January, 2013, the Company repaid two mortgage notes payable totaling $18.1 million with a combined weighted average stated interest rate of 5.60%. Investments in Unconsolidated Joint Venture: As of December 31, 2015, the Company’s investment in unconsolidated joint venture was $26.7 million. The Company contributed the land and capitalized improvements to the Joint Venture on October 5, 2015. Prior to the contribution, from January 1, 2015 through October 5, 2015, the Company capitalized $2.8 million of development costs, which included $813,000 of capitalized interest. Subsequent to October 5, 2015 through December 31, 2015, the Company made cash contributions of $5.2 million to the Joint Venture and capitalized $346,000 of interest on its investment in the Joint Venture. The land and capitalized development costs were $18.4 million at December 31, 2014. For the year ended December 31, 2014, the Company capitalized $2.2 million of development costs, which included $944,000 of capitalized interest. Capital Expenditures: The Company defines recurring capital expenditures as those necessary to maintain and operate its commercial real estate at its current economic value. During the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, the Company expended $39.8 million, $47.2 million and $49.2 million, respectively, in recurring capital expenditures, or $1.41, $1.59 and $1.72 per weighted average square foot owned, respectively. Tenant improvement amounts exclude those amounts reimbursed by the tenants. Nonrecurring capital improvements include property renovations and expenditures related to repositioning acquisitions. 36


  • Page 37

    Table of Contents The following table depicts capital expenditures (in thousands): For the Years Ended December 31, 2015 2014 2013 Recurring capital expenditures Capital improvements $ 8,136 $ 8,664 $ 10,083 Tenant improvements 22,705 27,824 29,224 Lease commissions 9,005 10,684 9,850 Total recurring capital expenditures 39,846 47,172 49,157 Nonrecurring capital improvements 3,808 4,614 9,018 Total capital expenditures $ 43,654 $ 51,786 $ 58,175 Capital expenditures on a per square foot owned basis are as follows: For the Years Ended December 31, 2015 2014 2013 Recurring capital expenditures Capital improvements $ 0.29 $ 0.29 $ 0.35 Tenant improvements 0.80 0.94 1.02 Lease commissions 0.32 0.36 0.35 Total recurring capital expenditures 1.41 1.59 1.72 Nonrecurring capital improvements 0.13 0.16 0.32 Total capital expenditures $ 1.54 $ 1.75 $ 2.04 For the year ended December 31, 2015, recurring capital expenditures decreased $7.3 million, or 15.5%, over 2014 primarily due to lower tenant improvement costs combined with continued efforts to ensure capital projects are managed and valued engineered effectively. Distributions: The Company has elected and intends to qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes. In order to maintain its status as a REIT, the Company must meet, among other tests, sources of income, share ownership and certain asset tests. As a REIT, the Company is not taxed on that portion of its taxable income that is distributed to its shareholders provided that at least 90% of its taxable income is distributed to its shareholders prior to the filing of its tax return. Subsequent to December 31, 2015, the Board increased its quarterly dividend from $0.60 per common share to $0.75 per common share, increasing quarterly distributions by $5.2 million per quarter. During the three months ended September 30, 2015, the Board increased its quarterly dividend from $0.50 per common share to $0.60 per common share, increasing quarterly distributions by $3.5 million per quarter. During 2014, the Company sold a combined total of 1.9 million square feet along with some parcels of land in Beaverton, Oregon and Phoenix, Arizona. Absent a special distribution in excess of our normal, recurring quarterly dividend, the Company would have had taxable income in excess of distributions resulting in federal income tax at the corporate level. To qualify for the dividends paid deduction for tax purposes and minimize this potential tax, on December 30, 2014, the Company paid a one-time special cash dividend of $2.75 per common share along with the fourth quarter 2014 regular dividend of $0.50 per common share. Holders of common partnership units of the Operating Partnership also received the same distribution on December 30, 2014. The Board will continue to evaluate our dividend rate in light of our actual and projected taxable income, liquidity requirements and other circumstances, and there can be no assurance that the future dividends declared by our Board will not differ materially. The Company’s funding strategy has been to primarily use permanent capital, including common and preferred stock, along with internally generated retained cash flows to meet its liquidity needs. In addition, the Company may sell properties that no longer meet its investment criteria. From time to time, the Company may use its Credit Facility 37


  • Page 38

    Table of Contents or other forms of debt to facilitate real estate acquisitions or other capital allocations. The Company targets a minimum ratio of FFO to combined fixed charges and preferred distributions of 3.0 to 1.0. Fixed charges include interest expense and capitalized interest while preferred distributions include amounts paid to preferred shareholders and preferred Operating Partnership unit holders. For the year ended December 31, 2015, the FFO to fixed charges and preferred distributions coverage ratio was 3.2 to 1.0, excluding the non-cash charge for the issuance costs related to the redemption of preferred equity. Non-GAAP Supplemental Disclosure Measure: Funds from Operations: Management believes that FFO is a useful supplemental measure of the Company’s operating performance. The Company computes FFO in accordance with the White Paper on FFO approved by the Board of Governors of NAREIT. The White Paper defines FFO as net income, computed in accordance with GAAP, before depreciation, amortization, gains or losses on asset dispositions, net income allocable to noncontrolling interests — common units, net income allocable to restricted stock unit holders, impairment charges and nonrecurring items. Management believes that FFO provides a useful measure of the Company’s operating performance and when compared year over year, reflects the impact to operations from trends in occupancy rates, rental rates, operating costs, development activities, general and administrative expenses and interest costs, providing a perspective not immediately apparent from net income. FFO should be analyzed in conjunction with net income. However, FFO should not be viewed as a substitute for net income as a measure of operating performance or liquidity as it does not reflect depreciation and amortization costs or the level of capital expenditure and leasing costs necessary to maintain the operating performance of the Company’s properties, which are significant economic costs and could materially affect the Company’s results of operations. Management believes FFO provides useful information to the investment community about the Company’s operating performance when compared to the performance of other real estate companies as FFO is generally recognized as the industry standard for reporting operations of REITs. Other REITs may use different methods for calculating FFO and, accordingly, our FFO may not be comparable to other real estate companies. FFO for the Company is computed as follows (in thousands, except per share data): For The Years Ended December 31, 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 Net income allocable to common shareholders $ 68,291 $ 113,154 $ 43,851 $ 19,805 $ 52,162 Gain on sale of land and real estate facilities (28,235) (92,373) — (935) (2,717) Depreciation and amortization (1) 105,394 110,357 108,917 109,494 84,682 Net income allocable to noncontrolling interests — common units 18,495 30,729 12,952 5,970 15,543 Net income allocable to restricted stock unit holders 299 329 125 138 127 FFO allocable to common and dilutive shares 164,244 162,196 165,845 134,472 149,797 FFO allocated to noncontrolling interests — common units (34,853) (34,586) (37,755) (31,041) (34,319) FFO allocated to restricted stock unit holders (701) (256) (264) (455) (301) FFO allocated to common shares $ 128,690 $ 127,354 $ 127,826 $ 102,976 $ 115,177 Weighted average common shares outstanding 26,973 26,899 24,732 24,234 24,516 Weighted average common operating partnership units outstanding 7,305 7,305 7,305 7,305 7,305 Weighted average restricted stock units outstanding 130 69 51 107 64 Weighted average common share equivalents outstanding 78 101 101 89 83 Total common and dilutive shares 34,486 34,374 32,189 31,735 31,968 Net income per common share — diluted $ 2.52 $ 4.19 $ 1.77 $ 0.81 $ 2.12 Gain on sale of land and real estate facilities (2) (0.82) (2.68) — (0.03) (0.08) Depreciation and amortization (2) 3.06 3.21 3.38 3.46 2.65 FFO per common and dilutive shares, as reported (2) $ 4.76 $ 4.72 $ 5.15 $ 4.24 $ 4.69 38


  • Page 39

    Table of Contents (1) Includes depreciation from discontinued operations. (2) Per share amounts are computed using additional dilutive shares related to noncontrolling interests and restricted stock units. In order to provide a meaningful period-to-period comparison of FFO derived from the Company’s ongoing business operations, the table below reconciles reported FFO to adjusted FFO, which excludes certain material lease buyout payments, gain on sale of ownership interest in STOR-Re, gain on the repurchase of preferred equity, acquisition transaction costs and the impact of non-cash distributions related to the redemption of preferred equity on the Company’s FFO per common and dilutive share for the years ended December 31, 2011 through December 31, 2015. For The Years Ended December 31, 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 FFO allocable to common and dilutive shares, as reported $ 164,244 $ 162,196 $ 165,845 $ 134,472 $ 149,797 Lease buyout payments — — (2,252) (1,783) (2,886) Gain on sale of ownership interest in STOR-Re — — (1,144) — — Gain on the repurchase of preferred equity — — — — (7,389) Acquisition transaction costs — 350 854 350 3,067 Non-cash distributions related to the redemption of preferred equity 2,487 — — 17,316 — FFO allocable to common and dilutive shares, as adjusted $ 166,731 $ 162,546 $ 163,303 $ 150,355 $ 142,589 FFO per common and dilutive share, as reported $ 4.76 $ 4.72 $ 5.15 $ 4.24 $ 4.69 Lease buyout payments — — (0.07) (0.06) (0.09) Gain on sale of ownership interest in STOR-Re — — (0.04) — — Gain on the repurchase of preferred equity — — — — (0.23) Acquisition transaction costs — 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.09 Non-cash distributions related to the redemption of preferred equity 0.07 — — 0.55 — FFO per common and dilutive share, as adjusted $ 4.83 $ 4.73 $ 5.07 $ 4.74 $ 4.46 Adjusted FFO allocable to common and dilutive shares increased $4.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to 2014. The increase was due to an increase in NOI and savings from preferred distributions relating to Series R redemption partially offset by the impact of assets sold. Related Party Transactions: As of December 31, 2015, PS owned 7.2 million shares of the Company’s common stock and 7.3 million common units of the Operating Partnership (100.0% of the common units not owned by the Company). Assuming issuance of the Company’s common stock upon redemption of its partnership units, PS would own 42.1% (or 14.5 million shares) of the outstanding shares of the Company’s common stock at December 31, 2015. Ronald L. Havner, Jr., the Company’s chairman, is also the Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer and President of PS. Gary E. Pruitt, an independent director of the Company is also a trustee of PS. Pursuant to a cost sharing and administrative services agreement, the Company shares costs with PS for certain administrative services and rental of corporate office space. The administrative services include investor relations, legal, corporate tax and information systems. These costs totaled $469,000 in 2015, which were allocated to PS in accordance with a methodology intended to fairly allocate those costs. In addition, the Company provides property management services for properties owned by PS for a management fee of 5% of the gross revenues of such properties in addition to reimbursement of certain costs. These management fee revenues recognized under a management contract with PS totaled $540,000 in 2015. PS also provides property management services for the self-storage component of two assets owned by the Company for a fee of 6% of the gross revenues of such properties in addition to reimbursement of certain costs. Management fee expense recognized under the management contract with PS totaled $79,000 for the year ended December 31, 2015. Concurrently with the Company’s public offering of common stock closed on November 7, 2013, the Company sold 950,000 shares of common stock at the public offering price to PS for net proceeds of $75.3 million. 39


  • Page 40

    Table of Contents During 2013, the Company sold to PS its ownership interest in STOR-Re for $1.1 million, representing a 4.0% ownership interest, and accordingly, the Company recorded a gain on sale of the ownership interest of such amount as interest and other income. As of December 31, 2013, the Company had no ownership interest in STOR-Re. On October 1, 2013, PS borrowed $100.0 million from the Company pursuant to the terms of a term loan agreement. The loan, which could be repaid without penalty at any point prior to its maturity date of November 29, 2013, was repaid in full on October 18, 2013. Interest on the loan was at a rate of 1.388% per annum. The loan was funded, in part, with borrowings on the Credit Facility. Interest income, under this note receivable, of $66,000 was recorded for the year ended December 31, 2013. The PS Business Parks name and logo are owned by PS and licensed to the Company under a non-exclusive, royalty-free license agreement. The license can be terminated by either party for any reason with six months written notice. Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements: The Company does not have any off-balance sheet arrangements that have or are reasonably likely to have a material effect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, capital expenditures or capital resources. Contractual Obligations: The table below summarizes projected payments due under our contractual obligations as of December 31, 2015 (in thousands): Payments Due by Period Contractual Obligations Total Less than 1 year 1 - 3 years 3 - 5 years More than 5 years Mortgage note payable (principal and interest) $ 262,667 $ 262,667 $ — $ — $ — Credit Facility (principal) — — — — — Total $ 262,667 $ 262,667 $ — $ — $ — The Company is scheduled to pay cash dividends of $55.3 million per year on its preferred equity outstanding as of December 31, 2015. Dividends are paid when and if declared by the Board and accumulate if not paid. Shares of preferred equity are redeemable by the Company in order to preserve its status as a REIT and are also redeemable five years after issuance. ITEM 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK To limit the Company’s exposure to market risk, the Company principally finances its operations and growth with permanent equity capital consisting of either common or preferred stock. The Company, from time to time, will use debt financing to facilitate acquisitions. In connection with a portfolio acquisition in 2011, the Company assumed a $250.0 million mortgage note and obtained a $250.0 million Term Loan. The outstanding balance on the Term Loan was fully repaid in November, 2013. As a result, the Company’s debt as a percentage of total equity (based on book values) was 13.4% as of December 31, 2015. Our exposure to market risk for changes in interest rates relates primarily to the Credit Facility, which is subject to variable interest rates. See Notes 2, 6 and 7 to the consolidated financial statements included in this Form 10-K for additional information regarding the terms, valuations and approximate principal maturities of the Company’s indebtedness, including the mortgage note payable, Credit Facility and Term Loan. Based on borrowing rates currently available to the Company, the difference between the carrying amount of debt and its fair value is insignificant. ITEM 8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA The financial statements of the Company at December 31, 2015 and 2014 and for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 and the report of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm, thereon and the related financial statement schedule, are included elsewhere herein. Reference is made to the Index to Consolidated Financial Statements and Schedules in Item 15. 40


  • Page 41

    Table of Contents ITEM 9. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING ANDFINANCIAL DISCLOSURE None. ITEM 9A. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES Conclusion Regarding the Effectiveness of Disclosure Controls and Procedures The Company’s management, with the participation of the Company’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, evaluated the effectiveness of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”)) as of December 31, 2015. Management recognizes that any controls and procedures, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving their objectives and management necessarily applies its judgment in evaluating the cost-benefit relationship of possible controls and procedures. Based on the evaluation of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures as of December 31, 2015, the Company’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that, as of such date, the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures were effective at the reasonable assurance level. The Company also has an investment in an unconsolidated joint venture and because we do not control the joint venture, our disclosure controls and procedures with respect to such joint venture are substantially more limited than those we maintain with respect to our consolidated subsidiaries. Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act. Under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, we conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting based on the framework in Internal Control-Integrated Framework issued by the Committee on Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (2013 Framework). Based on that evaluation, our management concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2015. The effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2015 has been audited by Ernst & Young LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as stated in their attestation report which is included herein. Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting There have not been any changes in our internal control over financial reporting (as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d- 15(f) under the Exchange Act) during the fourth quarter of 2015 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. 41


  • Page 42

    Table of Contents REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of PS Business Parks, Inc. We have audited PS Business Parks, Inc.’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2015, based on criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (2013 framework) (the COSO criteria). PS Business Parks, Inc.’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 over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’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, PS Business Parks, Inc. maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial erporting as of December 31, 2015, based on the COSO criteria. We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheets of PS Business Parks, Inc. as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, and the related consolidated statements of income, equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2015 and our report dated February 22, 2016 expressed an unqualified opinion thereon. /s/ Ernst & Young LLP Los Angeles, California February 22, 2016 42


  • Page 43

    Table of Contents ITEM 9B. OTHER INFORMATION None. PART III ITEM 10. DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE The information required by this item with respect to directors is hereby incorporated by reference to the material appearing in the Company’s definitive proxy statement to be filed in connection with the annual shareholders’ meeting to be held in 2016 (the “Proxy Statement”) under the caption “Election of Directors.” The following is a biographical summary of the executive officers of the Company: Joseph D. Russell, Jr., age 56, was named Chief Executive Officer and elected as a Director of the Company in August, 2003. Mr. Russell served as President of the Company from September, 2002 through August, 2015. Mr. Russell joined Spieker Partners in 1990 and became an officer of Spieker Properties when it went public as a REIT in 1993. Prior to its merger with Equity Office Properties (“EOP”) in 2001, Mr. Russell was President of Spieker Properties’ Silicon Valley Region from 1999 to 2001. Mr. Russell earned a Bachelor of Science degree from the University of Southern California and a Masters of Business Administration from the Harvard Business School. Prior to entering the commercial real estate business, Mr. Russell spent approximately six years with IBM in various marketing positions. Mr. Russell has been a member and past President of the National Association of Industrial and Office Parks, Silicon Valley Chapter. Mr. Russell is also a member of the Board of Governors of NAREIT. Maria R. Hawthorne, age 56, was promoted to President in August, 2015. Ms. Hawthorne most recently served as Executive Vice President, Chief Administrative Officer of the Company from July, 2013 to July, 2015. Ms. Hawthorne served as Executive Vice President, East Coast from February, 2011 to July, 2013. Ms. Hawthorne served as Senior Vice President from March, 2004 to February, 2011, with responsibility for property operations on the East Coast, which includes Northern Virginia, Maryland and South Florida. From June, 2001 through March, 2004, Ms. Hawthorne was Vice President of the Company, responsible for property operations in Virginia. From July, 1994 to June, 2001, Ms. Hawthorne was a Regional Manager of the Company in Virginia. From August, 1988 to July, 1994, Ms. Hawthorne was a General Manager, Leasing Director and Property Manager for American Office Park Properties. Ms. Hawthorne earned a Bachelor of Arts Degree in International Relations from Pomona College. John W. Petersen, age 52, has been Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer since he joined the Company in December, 2004. Prior to joining the Company, Mr. Petersen was Senior Vice President, San Jose Region, for Equity Office Properties from July, 2001 to December, 2004, responsible for 11.3 million square feet of multi-tenant office, industrial and R&D space in Silicon Valley. Prior to EOP, Mr. Petersen was Senior Vice President with Spieker Properties, from 1995 to 2001 overseeing the growth of that company’s portfolio in San Jose, through acquisition and development of nearly three million square feet. Mr. Petersen is a graduate of The Colorado College in Colorado Springs, Colorado, and was recently the President of National Association of Industrial and Office Parks, Silicon Valley Chapter. Edward A. Stokx, age 50, a certified public accountant, has been Chief Financial Officer and Secretary of the Company since December, 2003 and Executive Vice President since March, 2004. Mr. Stokx has overall responsibility for the Company’s finance and accounting functions. In addition, he has responsibility for executing the Company’s financial initiatives. Mr. Stokx joined Center Trust, a developer, owner, and operator of retail shopping centers in 1997. Prior to his promotion to Chief Financial Officer and Secretary in 2001, he served as Senior Vice President, Finance and Controller. After Center Trust’s merger in January, 2003 with another public REIT, Mr. Stokx provided consulting services to various entities. Prior to joining Center Trust, Mr. Stokx was with Deloitte and Touche from 1989 to 1997, with a focus on real estate clients. Mr. Stokx earned a Bachelor of Science degree in Accounting from Loyola Marymount University. Information required by this item with respect to the nominating process, the audit committee and the audit committee financial expert is hereby incorporated by reference to the material appearing in the Proxy Statement under the caption “Corporate Governance and Board Matters.” 43


  • Page 44

    Table of Contents Information required by this item with respect to a code of ethics is hereby incorporated by reference to the material appearing in the Proxy Statement under the caption “Corporate Governance and Board Matters.” We have adopted a code of ethics that applies to our principal executive officer, principal financial officer and principal accounting officer, which is available on our website at www.psbusinessparks.com. The information contained on the Company’s website is not a part of, or incorporated by reference into, this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Any amendments to or waivers of the code of ethics granted to the Company’s executive officers or the controller will be published promptly on our website or by other appropriate means in accordance with SEC rules. Information required by this item with respect to the compliance with Section 16(a)of the Exchange Act is hereby incorporated by reference to the material appearing in the Proxy Statement under the caption “Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance.” ITEM 11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION The information required by this item is hereby incorporated by reference to the material appearing in the Proxy Statement under the captions “Corporate Governance and Board Matters,” “Executive Compensation,” “Corporate Governance and Board Matters — Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation” and “Report of the Compensation Committee.” ITEM 12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS The information required by this item with respect to security ownership of certain beneficial owners and management is hereby incorporated by reference to the material appearing in the Proxy Statement under the caption “Stock Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management.” The following table sets forth information as of December 31, 2015 on the Company’s equity compensation plans: (a) (b) (c) Number of Weighted Number of Securities Securities to be Average Remaining Available for Issued Upon Exercise Price of Future Issuance under Exercise of Outstanding Equity Compensation Outstanding Options, Plans (Excluding Options, Warrants Warrants and Securities Reflected in Plan Category and Rights Rights Column (a)) Equity compensation plans approved by security holders 337,326 $ $64.88 1,312,972 Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders — — — Total 337,326 * $ $64.88 * 1,312,972 * * Amounts include restricted stock units. ITEM 13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE The information required by this item is hereby incorporated by reference to the material appearing in the Proxy Statement under the captions “Corporate Governance and Board Matters” and “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions.” ITEM 14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES The information required by this item is hereby incorporated by reference to the material appearing in the Proxy Statement under the caption “Ratification of Independent Registered Public Accountants.” 44


  • Page 45

    Table of Contents PART IV ITEM 15. EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES a. 1. Financial Statements The financial statements listed in the accompanying Index to Consolidated Financial Statements and Schedules are filed as part of this report. 2. Financial Statements Schedule The financial statements schedule listed in the accompanying Index to Consolidated Financial Statements and Schedules are filed as part of this report. 3. Exhibits The exhibits listed in the Exhibit Index immediately preceding such exhibits are filed with or incorporated by reference in this report. b. Exhibits The exhibits listed in the Exhibit Index immediately preceding such exhibits are filed with or incorporated by reference in this report. c. Financial Statement Schedules Not applicable. 45


  • Page 46

    Table of Contents PS BUSINESS PARKS, INC. INDEX TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SCHEDULES (Item 15(a)(1) and Item 15(a)(2)) Page Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm 47 Consolidated balance sheets as of December 31, 2015 and 2014 48 Consolidated statements of income for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 49 Consolidated statements of equity for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 50 Consolidated statements of cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 51 Notes to consolidated financial statements 53 Schedule: III — Real estate and accumulated depreciation 69 All other schedules have been omitted since the required information is not present or not present in amounts sufficient to require submission of the schedule, or because the information required is included in the consolidated financial statements or notes thereto. 46


  • Page 47

    Table of Contents REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of PS Business Parks, Inc. We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of PS Business Parks, Inc. as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, and the related consolidated statements of income, equity and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2015. Our audits also included the financial statement schedule listed in the Index at Item 15(a). These financial statements and financial statement schedule are the responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements and financial statement schedule based on our audits. We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the consolidated financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion. In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of PS Business Parks, Inc. at December 31, 2015 and 2014, and the consolidated results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2015, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. Also, in our opinion, the related financial statement schedule, when considered in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole, presents fairly in all material respects the information set forth therein. We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), PS Business Parks, Inc.'s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2015, based on criteria established in Internal Control-Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (2013 framework) and our report dated February 22, 2016 expressed an unqualified opinion thereon. /s/ Ernst & Young LLP Los Angeles, California February 22, 2016 47


  • Page 48

    Table of Contents PART IV ITEM 15. EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES (Item 15(a)(1) and Item 15(a)(2)) PS BUSINESS PARKS, INC. CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS December 31, 2015 2014 (In thousands, except share data) ASSETS Cash and cash equivalents $ 188,912 $ 152,467 Real estate facilities, at cost: Land 793,569 793,569 Buildings and improvements 2,215,515 2,182,993 3,009,084 2,976,562 Accumulated depreciation (1,082,603) (991,497) 1,926,481 1,985,065 Properties held for disposition, net — 25,937 Land and building held for development 6,081 24,442 1,932,562 2,035,444 Investment in unconsolidated joint venture 26,736 — Rent receivable, net 2,234 2,838 Deferred rent receivable, net 28,327 26,050 Other assets 7,887 10,315 Total assets $ 2,186,658 $ 2,227,114 LIABILITIES AND EQUITY Accrued and other liabilities $ 76,059 $ 68,905 Mortgage note payable 250,000 250,000 Total liabilities 326,059 318,905 Commitments and contingencies Equity: PS Business Parks, Inc.’s shareholders’ equity: Preferred stock, $0.01 par value, 50,000,000 shares authorized, 36,800 and 39,800 shares issued and outstanding at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively 920,000 995,000 Common stock, $0.01 par value, 100,000,000 shares authorized, 27,034,073 and 26,919,161 shares issued and outstanding at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively 269 268 Paid-in capital 722,009 709,008 Cumulative net income 1,375,421 1,244,946 Cumulative distributions (1,357,203) (1,235,941) Total PS Business Parks, Inc.’s shareholders’ equity 1,660,496 1,713,281 Noncontrolling interests: Common units 200,103 194,928 Total noncontrolling interests 200,103 194,928 Total equity 1,860,599 1,908,209 Total liabilities and equity $ 2,186,658 $ 2,227,114 See accompanying notes. 48


  • Page 49

    Table of Contents PS BUSINESS PARKS, INC. CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME For The Years Ended December 31, 2015 2014 2013 (In thousands, except per share data) Revenues: Rental income $ 373,135 $ 376,255 $ 359,246 Facility management fees 540 660 639 Total operating revenues 373,675 376,915 359,885 Expenses: Cost of operations 121,224 127,371 114,831 Depreciation and amortization 105,394 110,357 108,917 General and administrative 13,582 13,639 5,312 Total operating expenses 240,200 251,367 229,060 Other income and (expense): Interest and other income 590 372 1,485 Interest and other expense (13,330) (13,593) (16,166) Total other income and (expense) (12,740) (13,221) (14,681) Gain on sale of real estate facilities 28,235 92,373 — Net income $ 148,970 $ 204,700 $ 116,144 Net income allocation: Net income allocable to noncontrolling interests: Noncontrolling interests — common units $ 18,495 $ 30,729 $ 12,952 Total net income allocable to noncontrolling interests 18,495 30,729 12,952 Net income allocable to PS Business Parks, Inc.: Preferred shareholders 61,885 60,488 59,216 Restricted stock unit holders 299 329 125 Common shareholders 68,291 113,154 43,851 Total net income allocable to PS Business Parks, Inc. 130,475 173,971 103,192 Net income $ 148,970 $ 204,700 $ 116,144 Net income per common share: Basic $ 2.53 $ 4.21 $ 1.77 Diluted $ 2.52 $ 4.19 $ 1.77 Weighted average common shares outstanding: Basic 26,973 26,899 24,732 Diluted 27,051 27,000 24,833 See accompanying notes. 49


  • Page 50

    Table of Contents PS BUSINESS PARKS, INC. CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF EQUITY Total PS Business Parks, Preferred Stock Common Stock Paid-in Cumulative Cumulative Inc.’s Shareholders’ Noncontrolling Total Shares Amount Shares Amount Capital Net Income Distributions Equity Interests Equity (In thousands, except share data) Balances at December 31, 2012 35,400 $ 885,000 24,298,475 $ 242 $ 537,091 $ 967,783 $ (944,427) $ 1,445,689 $ 168,572 $ 1,614,261 Issuance of preferred stock, net of issuance costs 4,400 110,000 — — (3,689) — — 106,311 — 106,311 Issuance of common stock, net of issuance costs — — 2,445,000 24 192,305 — — 192,329 — 192,329 Exercise of stock options — — 97,800 1 4,681 — — 4,682 — 4,682 Stock compensation, net — — 8,547 — (3,043) — — (3,043) — (3,043) Net income — — — — — 103,192 — 103,192 12,952 116,144 Distributions: Preferred stock — — — — — — (59,216) (59,216) — (59,216) Common stock — — — — — — (43,972) (43,972) — (43,972) Noncontrolling interests — — — — — — — — (12,856) (12,856) Adjustment to noncontrolling interests in underlying operating — — — — (28,031) — — (28,031) 28,031 — partnership Balances at December 31, 2013 39,800 995,000 26,849,822 267 699,314 1,070,975 (1,047,615) 1,717,941 196,699 1,914,640 Exercise of stock options — — 61,273 1 3,053 — — 3,054 — 3,054 Stock compensation, net — — 8,066 — 8,842 — — 8,842 — 8,842 Net income — — — — — 173,971 — 173,971 30,729 204,700 Distributions: Preferred stock — — — — — — (60,488) (60,488) — (60,488) Common stock — — — — — — (127,838) (127,838) — (127,838) Noncontrolling interests — — — — — — — — (34,701) (34,701) Adjustment to noncontrolling interests in underlying operating — — — — (2,201) — — (2,201) 2,201 — partnership Balances at December 31, 2014 39,800 995,000 26,919,161 268 709,008 1,244,946 (1,235,941) 1,713,281 194,928 1,908,209 Redemption of preferred stock, net of issuance costs (3,000) (75,000) — — 2,487 — (2,487) (75,000) — (75,000) Exercise of stock options — — 99,178 1 5,088 — — 5,089 — 5,089 Stock compensation, net — — 15,734 — 8,178 — — 8,178 — 8,178 Net income — — — — — 130,475 — 130,475 18,495 148,970 Distributions: Preferred stock — — — — — — (59,398) (59,398) — (59,398) Common stock — — — — — — (59,377) (59,377) — (59,377) Noncontrolling interests — — — — — — — — (16,072) (16,072) Adjustment to noncontrolling interests in underlying operating — — — — (2,752) — — (2,752) 2,752 — partnership Balances at December 31, 2015 36,800 $ 920,000 27,034,073 $ 269 $ 722,009 $ 1,375,421 $ (1,357,203) $ 1,660,496 $ 200,103 $ 1,860,599 See accompanying notes. 50

  • View More

Get the full picture and Receive alerts on lawsuits, news articles, publications and more!