Use these links to rapidly review the document
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS 2

Table of Contents

Filed Pursuant to Rule 424(b)(3)
Registration Number 333-167793

PROSPECTUS

SL Green Realty Corp.
SL Green Operating Partnership, L.P.
Reckson Operating Partnership, L.P.

        Offer to exchange $250,000,000 aggregate principal amount of 7.75% Senior Notes due 2020 issued by SL Green Realty Corp., SL Green Operating Partnership, L.P. and Reckson Operating Partnership, L.P. as co-obligors (which we refer to as the old notes) for $250,000,000 aggregate principal amount of 7.75% Senior Secured Notes due 2020 (which we refer to as the new notes) which have been registered under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the "Securities Act").

        The exchange offer will expire at 5:00 p.m., New York City time, on October 20, 2010 (the 30th day following the date of this prospectus), unless we extend the exchange offer in our sole and absolute discretion.

        Terms of the Exchange Offer:

•

We will exchange new notes for all outstanding old notes that are validly tendered and not withdrawn prior to the expiration or termination of the exchange offer.



•

You may withdraw tenders of old notes at any time prior to the expiration or termination of the exchange offer.



•

The terms of the new notes are substantially identical to those of the outstanding old notes, except that the transfer restrictions and registration rights relating to the old notes do not apply to the new notes.



•

The exchange of old notes for new notes will not be a taxable transaction for U.S. federal income tax purposes. You should see the discussion under the caption "Certain U.S. Federal Income Tax Considerations" for more information.



•

We will not receive any proceeds from the exchange offer.



•

We issued the old notes in a transaction not requiring registration under the Securities Act, and as a result, their transfer is restricted. We are making the exchange offer to satisfy your registration rights, as a holder of the old notes.

        There is no established trading market for the new notes or the old notes.

        Each broker-dealer that receives new notes for its own account pursuant to the exchange offer must acknowledge that it will deliver a prospectus in connection with any resale of such new notes. The letter of transmittal states that by so acknowledging and by delivering a prospectus, a broker-dealer will not be deemed to admit that it is an "underwriter" within the meaning of the Securities Act. This prospectus, as it may be amended or supplemented from time to time, may be used by a broker-dealer in connection with resales of new notes received in exchange for old notes where such old notes were acquired by such broker-dealer as a result of market-making activities or other trading activities. Broker-dealers who acquired the old notes directly from us in the initial offering must, in the absence of an exemption, comply with the registration and prospectus delivery requirements of the Securities Act in connection with the secondary resales and cannot rely on the position of the staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Commission") enunciated in Exxon Capital Holdings Corp., SEC No-Action Letter (April 13, 1988). We have agreed that, starting on the date this registration statement is declared effective and ending on the close of business 180 days after the date this registration statement is declared effective, we will make this prospectus available to any broker-dealer for use in connection with any such resale. See "Plan of Distribution."

        See "Risk Factors" beginning on page 9 and the risk factors incorporated by reference in this prospectus for a discussion of risks you should consider prior to tendering your outstanding old notes for exchange.

        Neither the Commission nor any state securities commission has approved or disapproved of these securities or passed upon the adequacy or accuracy of this prospectus. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal offense.

The date of this prospectus is September 20, 2010.

---

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ii

---

Table of Contents

SUMMARY

        The following summary highlights selected information contained or incorporated by reference in this prospectus and does not contain all of the information that may be important to you. You should carefully read this entire prospectus, including the financial data and related notes and the documents incorporated by reference in this prospectus. Unless the context requires otherwise, the term, "SL Green" refers to SL Green Realty Corp., (b) the term "SLGOP" refers to SL Green Operating Partnership, L.P., (c) the term "ROP" refers to Reckson Operating Partnership, L.P. and all entities owned or controlled by Reckson Operating Partnership, L.P. and (d) the terms "we," "our," "ours," and " us" refers to SL Green Realty Corp., SL Green Operating Partnership, L.P. and Reckson Operating Partnership, L.P. on a consolidated basis.

Overview

SL Green Realty Corp.

        SL Green, a Maryland corporation, is a self-managed real estate investment trust, or REIT, with in-house capabilities in property management, acquisitions, financing, development, construction and leasing. SL Green was formed in June 1997 for the purpose of continuing the commercial real estate business of S.L. Green Properties, Inc., our predecessor entity. S.L. Green Properties, Inc., which was founded in 1980 by Stephen L. Green, the Chairman of SL Green, had been engaged in the business of owning, managing, leasing, acquiring and repositioning office properties in Manhattan. SL Green began trading on the New York Stock Exchange (the "NYSE") on August 15, 1997 under the symbol "SLG."

        As of June 30, 2010, SL Green (inclusive of ROP) owned the following interests in commercial office properties in the New York Metro area, primarily in midtown Manhattan. SL Green's investments in the New York Metro area (inclusive of ROP) also include investments in Brooklyn, Queens, Long Island, Westchester County, Connecticut and New Jersey, which are collectively known as the Suburban assets:

        As of June 30, 2010, our Manhattan properties (inclusive of ROP) were comprised of fee ownership (23 properties), including ownership in condominium units, leasehold ownership (five properties) and operating sublease ownership (two properties). Pursuant to the operating sublease arrangements, SL Green, as tenant under the operating sublease, performs the functions traditionally performed by landlords with respect to its subtenants. SL Green is responsible for not only collecting rent from subtenants, but also maintaining the property and paying expenses relating to the property. As of June 30, 2010, our Suburban properties (inclusive of ROP) were comprised of fee ownership (30 properties), and leasehold ownership (one property).

        SL Green (inclusive of ROP) also owns investments in eight retail properties encompassing approximately 374,212 square feet, three development properties encompassing approximately 399,800 square feet and two land interests. In addition, we manage three office properties owned by third

1

---

Table of Contents

parties and affiliated companies encompassing approximately 1.0 million rentable square feet. In addition, as of June 30, 2010, we also held approximately $867.4 million of structured finance investments.

SL Green Operating Partnership, L.P.

        The sole general partner of SLGOP is SL Green. Substantially all of SL Green's assets are held by, and all of its operations are conducted through, SLGOP. As of June 30, 2010, SL Green owned approximately 98.5% of the economic interests in SLGOP and noncontrolling investors held, in the aggregate, an approximately 1.5% limited partnership interest in SLGOP. At June 30, 2010, there were 1,210,748 units of limited partnership interest of SLGOP outstanding. These units receive distributions per unit in the same manner as dividends per share that are distributed to common stockholders of SL Green.

Reckson Operating Partnership, L.P.

        ROP, commenced operations on June 2, 1995. Wyoming Acquisition GP LLC, or WAGP, is the sole general partner of ROP. WAGP is a wholly-owned subsidiary of SLGOP. The sole limited partner of ROP is SLGOP.

        ROP is engaged in the ownership, management, operation, leasing, financing and development of commercial real estate properties, principally office properties, and also owns land for future development located in New York City, Westchester and Connecticut, which collectively is also known as the New York Metro Area.

        As of June 30, 2010, ROP owned the following interests in commercial office properties in the New York Metro area, primarily in midtown Manhattan, a borough of New York City. ROP's investments in the New York Metro area also include investments in Queens, Westchester County and Connecticut, which are collectively known as the Suburban assets:

        As of June 30, 2010, ROP's Manhattan properties were comprised of fee ownership (three properties) and leasehold ownership (one property). ROP is responsible for not only collecting rent from subtenants, but also maintaining the property and paying expenses relating to the property. As of June 30, 2010, ROP's Suburban properties were comprised of fee ownership (16 properties) and leasehold ownership (one property).

Headquarters

        SL Green, SLGOP and ROP's principal corporate offices are located in midtown Manhattan at 420 Lexington Avenue, New York, New York 10170. We can be contacted at (212) 594-2700.

2

---

Table of Contents

The Exchange Offer

3

---

Table of Contents

4

---

Table of Contents

5

---

Table of Contents

6

---

Table of Contents

Consequences of Not Exchanging Old Notes

        If you do not exchange your old notes in the exchange offer, your old notes will continue to be subject to the restrictions on transfer described in the legend on the certificate for your old notes. In general, you may offer or sell your old notes only:

•

if they are registered under the Securities Act and applicable state securities laws;



•

if they are offered or sold under an exemption from registration under the Securities Act and applicable state securities laws; or



•

if they are offered or sold in a transaction not subject to the Securities Act and applicable state securities laws.

        We do not currently intend to register the old notes under the Securities Act. Under some circumstances, however, holders of the old notes, including holders who are not permitted to participate in the exchange offer or who may not freely resell new notes received in the exchange offer, may require us to file, and to cause to become effective, a shelf registration statement covering resales of old notes by these holders. For more information regarding the consequences of not tendering your old notes and our obligation to file a shelf registration statement, see "The Exchange Offer—Consequences of Exchanging or Failing to Exchange Old Notes."

7

---

Table of Contents

Summary Description of New Notes

        The terms of the new notes and those of the outstanding old notes are substantially identical, except that the transfer restrictions and registration rights relating to the old notes do not apply to the new notes. For a more complete understanding of the new notes, see "Description of the New Notes."

8

---

Table of Contents

RISK FACTORS

        You should carefully consider the risks described below, in addition to other information contained in or incorporated by reference to this prospectus, before deciding to tender your old notes in the exchange offer. The risk factors set forth below, other than those which discuss the consequences of failing to exchange your old notes in the exchange offer, are generally applicable to both the old notes and the new notes. The risks below are not the only risks that we face. Additional risks and uncertainties not currently known to us or that we currently deem to be immaterial may also materially adversely affect our business operations. The following risks could affect our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Risks Related to the Exchange Offer and Holding the New Notes

Holders who fail to exchange their old notes will continue to be subject to restrictions on transfer.

        If you do not exchange your old notes for new notes in the exchange offer, you will continue to be subject to the restrictions on transfer of your old notes described in the legend on the certificates for your old notes. The restrictions on transfer of your old notes arise because we issued the old notes under an exemption from the registration requirements of the Securities Act and applicable state securities laws. In general, you may only offer or sell the old notes if they are registered under the Securities Act and applicable state securities laws, or offered and sold under an exemption from these requirements. We do not plan to register the old notes under the Securities Act. For further information regarding the consequences of tendering your old notes in the exchange offer, see the discussions below under the captions "The Exchange Offer—Consequences of Exchanging or Failing to Exchange Old Notes."

You must comply with the exchange offer procedures in order to receive new, freely tradable new notes.

        Delivery of new notes in exchange for old notes tendered and accepted for exchange pursuant to the exchange offer will be made only after timely receipt by the exchange agent of the following:

•

certificates for old notes or a book-entry confirmation of a book-entry transfer of old notes into the Exchange Agent's account at DTC, New York, New York as depository, including an Agent's Message (as defined herein) if the tendering holder does not deliver a letter of transmittal;



•

a completed and signed letter of transmittal (or facsimile thereof), with any required signature guarantees, or an Agent's Message in lieu of the letter of transmittal; and



•

any other documents required by the letter of transmittal.

        Therefore, holders of old notes who would like to tender old notes in exchange for new notes should be sure to allow enough time for the old notes to be delivered on time. We are not required to notify you of defects or irregularities in tenders of old notes for exchange. Old notes that are not tendered or that are tendered but we do not accept for exchange will, following consummation of the exchange offer, continue to be subject to the existing transfer restrictions under the Securities Act and, upon consummation of the exchange offer, certain registration and other rights under the registration rights agreement will terminate. See "The Exchange Offer—Procedures for Tendering Old Notes" and "The Exchange Offer—Consequences of Exchanging or Failing to Exchange Old Notes."

Some holders who exchange their old notes may be deemed to be underwriters and these holders will be required to comply with the registration and prospectus delivery requirements in connection with any resale transaction.

        If you exchange your old notes in the exchange offer for the purpose of participating in a distribution of the new notes, you may be deemed to have received restricted securities and, if so, will

9

---

Table of Contents

be required to comply with the registration and prospectus delivery requirements of the Securities Act in connection with any resale transaction.

Our level of indebtedness could adversely affect our operations and effectively reduce the amount of funds available for other business purposes, including our ability to make payments of principal and interest on the new notes.

        We have a substantial amount of outstanding indebtedness, a large portion of which is due and payable prior to the maturity of the new notes. The total principal amount of our outstanding consolidated indebtedness was approximately $4.6 billion (including approximately $0.9 billion of consolidated indebtedness of ROP) as of June 30, 2010. In addition, ROP and certain of its subsidiaries also provide a senior guaranty of SLGOP's obligations under the Credit Facility. ROP and its subsidiaries' respective obligations to guarantee amounts payable under the Credit Facility are limited by the Allocable Guaranty Limitation, as defined in the guaranty agreement under the Credit Facility. As of June 30, 2010, the maximum amount of ROP's guaranty obligation was approximately $566.1 million. Our respective levels of indebtedness could reduce funds available for additional acquisitions, capital expenditures or other business purposes, impact our credit ratings, restrict our financial and operating flexibility or create competitive disadvantages compared to other companies with lower debt levels. In addition, this debt may be unassumable by a potential purchaser and may be subject to significant prepayment penalties.

        Our ability to make payments of principal and interest on our indebtedness, including the new notes, depends upon our future performance, which will be subject to general economic conditions and financial, business and other factors affecting our consolidated operations, many of which are beyond our control. If we are unable to generate sufficient cash flow from operations in the future to service our respective debt and meet our other cash requirements, we may be required, among other things:

•

to seek additional financing in the debt or equity markets;



•

to refinance or restructure all or a portion of our indebtedness, including the new notes;



•

to sell selected assets or businesses; or



•

to reduce or delay planned capital or operating expenditures.

        Such measures might not be sufficient to enable us to service our debt and meet our other cash requirements, including the new notes. In addition, any such financing, refinancing or sale of assets might not be available at all or on economically favorable terms.

Since the new notes are unsecured, your right to receive payments on the new notes is effectively subordinated to all of our existing and future secured debt, and structurally subordinated to all existing and future liabilities of our subsidiaries.

        The new notes are unsecured, unsubordinated obligations that rank equal in right of payment with all of SL Green's, SLGOP's and ROP's existing and future unsecured and unsubordinated debt. However, the new notes are effectively junior to all of ROP's, SL Green's and SLGOP's secured debt to the extent of the value of the assets securing that debt. The Indenture does not place any limitation on the amount of secured or unsecured senior indebtedness that SL Green or SLGOP may incur. In any liquidation, dissolution, bankruptcy or other similar proceeding, holders of SL Green's, SLGOP's or ROP's secured debt may assert rights against any assets securing such debt in order to receive full payment of their debt before those assets may be used to pay the holders of the new notes. In such an event, SL Green, SLGOP or ROP may not have sufficient assets remaining to pay amounts due on any or all of the new notes. In addition, the new notes are structurally subordinated to all future obligations of SL Green's subsidiaries, other than SLGOP and ROP. The new notes are also structurally subordinated to guarantees of SLGOP's debt by SLGOP's subsidiaries, other than ROP.

10

---

Table of Contents

There is no established trading market for the new notes, which could limit their market price or the ability to sell them for an amount equal to or higher than their initial offering price.

        The new notes are a new issue of securities for which there currently is no trading market. As a result, we cannot provide any assurances that a market will develop for the new notes or that you will be able to sell your new notes. We do not intend to apply for the new notes to be listed on any securities exchange or to arrange for quotation on any automated dealer system. If any of the new notes are traded after their initial issuance, they may trade at a discount to their face value. Future trading prices of the new notes will depend on many factors, including prevailing interest rates, the market for similar securities, general economic conditions and our financial condition, performance and prospects. Accordingly, you may be required to bear the financial risk of an investment in the new notes for an indefinite period of time.

The limited covenants in the Indenture governing the new notes and the terms of the new notes will not provide protection against significant events that could adversely impact your investment in the new notes.

        The Indenture governing the new notes does not:

•

require us to maintain any financial ratios or specific levels of net worth, revenues, income, cash flow or liquidity and, accordingly, does not protect holders of the new notes in the event that we experience significant adverse changes in our financial condition or results of operations;



•

limit the ability of SL Green or SLGOP to incur additional indebtedness; or



•

prohibit us, subject to certain conditions, from entering into a reorganization, restructuring, merger or similar transaction that may adversely affect the holder of the new notes.

        When evaluating the terms of the new notes, you should be aware that the terms of the Indenture and the new notes will not restrict our ability to engage in, or otherwise be a party to, a variety of corporate transactions, circumstances and events that could have an adverse impact on your investment in the new notes.

ROP's credit ratings may not reflect all risks of your investment in the new notes.

        ROP's credit ratings are an assessment by rating agencies of its ability to pay its debts when due. Consequently, real or anticipated changes in any of ROP's credit ratings will generally affect the market value of the new notes. These credit ratings may not reflect the potential impact of risks relating to structure or marketing of the new notes. Agency ratings are not a recommendation to buy, sell or hold any security and may be revised or withdrawn at any time by the issuing organization. Each agency's rating should be evaluated independently of any other agency's rating.

Risks Related to Our Business

Declines in the demand for office space in New York City, and in particular, in midtown Manhattan, as well as our Suburban markets, including Westchester County, Connecticut, New Jersey and Long Island, resulting from general economic conditions could adversely affect the value of our real estate portfolio and our results of operations and, consequently, our ability to service current debt.

        Most of our commercial office properties are located in midtown Manhattan. As a result, our business is dependent on the condition of the New York City economy in general and the market for office space in midtown Manhattan, in particular. Weakness in the New York City economy could materially reduce the value of our real estate portfolio and our rental revenues, and thus adversely affect our ability to service current debt. The Manhattan vacancy rate continues to exceed 11% although we expect that to moderate slightly by the end of 2010. We could also be impacted by

11

---

Table of Contents

weakness in our Suburban markets, including Westchester County, Connecticut, New Jersey and Long Island.

We may be unable to renew leases or relet space as leases expire.

        When our tenants decide not to renew their leases upon their expiration, we may not be able to relet the space. Even if tenants do renew or we can relet the space, the terms of renewal or reletting, including the cost of required renovations, may be less favorable than current lease terms. Through the end of 2014, leases will expire on approximately 36.7% and 15.2% of the rentable square feet at our consolidated properties and unconsolidated joint venture properties, respectively (including approximately 39.1% of the rentable square feet at ROP's consolidated properties), and these leases currently have annualized escalated rental income totaling approximately $284.5 million and $66.0 million, respectively. We also have some leases with termination options beyond 2014. If we are unable to promptly renew the leases or relet this space at similar rates, our cash flow and ability to service debt would be adversely affected.

The expiration of long term leases or operating sublease interests could adversely affect our results of operations.

        Our interests in seven of our commercial office properties are through either long-term leasehold or operating sublease interests in the land and the improvements, rather than by a fee interest in the land. Unless we can purchase a fee interest in the underlying land or extend the terms of these leases before their expiration, we will lose our right to operate these properties and our interest in the improvements upon expiration of the leases, which would significantly adversely affect our results of operations. These properties are 673 First Avenue, 420 Lexington Avenue, 461 Fifth Avenue, 711 Third Avenue, 625 Madison Avenue, 1185 Avenue of the Americas, all in Manhattan, and 1055 Washington Avenue, in Connecticut. We have the ability to acquire the fee position at 461 Fifth Avenue for a fixed price on a specific date. The average remaining term of these long-term leases, including our unilateral extension rights on each of the properties, is approximately 43 years. Pursuant to the operating sublease arrangements, we, as tenant under the operating sublease, perform the functions traditionally performed by landlords with respect to our subtenants. We are responsible for not only collecting rent from our subtenants, but also maintaining the property and paying expenses relating to the property. Our share of annualized escalated rents of these properties at June 30, 2010 totaled approximately $239.0 million, or 24.4%, of our share of total portfolio annualized revenue associated with these properties.

Our results of operations rely on major tenants, including in the financial services sector, and insolvency, bankruptcy or receivership of these and other tenants could adversely affect our results of operations.

        Giving effect to leases in effect as of June 30, 2010 for consolidated properties and unconsolidated joint venture properties as of that date, our five largest tenants, based on square footage leased, accounted for approximately 23.0% of our share of portfolio annualized rent, and three tenants, Citigroup, Inc. (and its affiliates), Viacom International Inc. and Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC, accounted for approximately 8.3%, 5.4% and 6.2% of our share of portfolio annualized rent, respectively. In addition, the financial services sector accounted for approximately 38% of our total annualized revenues and 37% of our square feet leased of our portfolio as of June 30, 2010. This sector continues to experience significant turmoil which has resulted in significant job losses.

        Giving effect to leases in effect as of June 30, 2010 for consolidated properties and unconsolidated joint venture properties as of that date, ROP's five largest tenants, based on square footage leased, accounted for approximately 23.0% of ROP's share of portfolio annualized rent, and three tenants, Citigroup, Inc. (and its affiliates), Debevoise & Plimpton, LLP and Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP,

12

---

Table of Contents

accounted for approximately 5.5%, 7.4% and 3.0% of ROP's share of portfolio annualized rent, respectively.

        If current economic conditions persist or deteriorate, we may experience increases in past due accounts, defaults, lower occupancy and reduced effective rents, particularly in respect of our financial service tenants. Our business would be adversely affected if any of our major tenants or any other tenants became insolvent, declared bankruptcy, are put into receivership or otherwise refused to pay rent in a timely fashion or at all.

Adverse economic and geopolitical conditions in general and the Northeastern commercial office markets in particular could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.

        Our business may be affected by the unprecedented volatility and illiquidity in the financial and credit markets, the general global economic recession, and other market or economic challenges experienced by the U.S. economy or real estate industry as a whole. Our business may also be adversely affected by local economic conditions, as substantially all of our revenues are derived from our properties located in the Northeast, particularly in New York City, Westchester County and Connecticut. Because our portfolio consists primarily of commercial office buildings (as compared to a more diversified real estate portfolio) located principally in Manhattan, if economic conditions persist or deteriorate, then our results of operations, financial condition and ability to service current debt may be adversely affected by the following, among other potential conditions:

•

significant job losses in the financial and professional services industries have occurred and may continue to occur, which may decrease demand for our office space, causing market rental rates and property values to be negatively impacted;



•

our ability to borrow on terms and conditions that we find acceptable, or at all, may be limited, which could reduce our ability to pursue acquisition and development opportunities and refinance existing debt, reduce our returns from both our existing operations and our acquisition and development activities and increase our future interest expense;



•

reduced values of our properties may limit our ability to dispose of assets at attractive prices or to obtain debt financing secured by our properties and may reduce the availability of unsecured loans; and



•

reduced liquidity in debt markets and increased credit risk premiums for certain market participants may impair our ability to access capital.

        These conditions, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition and ability to pay distributions, may continue or worsen in the future.

There can be no assurance that the actions of the U.S. government, Federal Reserve and other governmental and regulatory bodies for the purpose of stabilizing the financial markets, or market response to those actions, will achieve the intended effect, and our business may not benefit from and may be adversely impacted by these actions and further government or market developments could adversely impact us.

        Since mid-2007, and particularly during the second half of 2008, the financial services industry and the securities markets generally were materially and adversely affected by significant declines in the values of nearly all asset classes and by a serious lack of liquidity. This was initially triggered by declines in the value of subprime mortgages, but spread to all mortgage and real estate asset classes, to leveraged bank loans and to nearly all asset classes, including equities. The global markets have been characterized by substantially increased volatility and short-selling and an overall loss of investor confidence, initial in financial institutions, but more recently in companies in a number of other industries and in the broader markets. The decline in asset values has caused increases in margin calls for investors, requirements that derivatives counterparties post additional collateral and redemptions by

13

---

Table of Contents

mutual and hedge fund investors, all of which have increased the downward pressure on asset values and outflows of client funds across the financial services industry. In addition, the increased redemptions and unavailability of credit have required hedge funds and others to rapidly reduce leverage, which has increased volatility and further contributed to the decline in asset values.

        In response to the recent unprecedented financial issues affecting the banking system and financial markets and going concern threats to investment banks and other financial institutions, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 ("EESA"), was signed into law on October 3, 2008. The EESA provides the U.S. Secretary of Treasury with the authority to establish a Troubled Asset Relief Program ("TARP"), to purchase from financial institutions up to $700 billion of residential or commercial mortgages and any securities, obligations, or other instruments based on, or related to, such mortgages, that in each case was originated or issued on or before March 14, 2008. EESA also provides for a program that would allow companies to insure their troubled assets. On February 17, 2009, President Obama signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 ("ARRA"), a $787 billion stimulus bill for the purpose of stabilizing the economy by creating jobs among other things. As of June 25, 2010, the U.S. Treasury is managing or overseeing the following programs under TARP: the Capital Purchase Program ("CCP"), the Systemically Significant Failing Institutions Program ("SSFIP"), the Auto Industry Financing Program ("AIFP"), the Legacy Public-Private Investment Program ("-PPIP"), and the Homeowner Affordability and Stability Plan ("HASP") which is partially financed by TARP.

        There can be no assurance that the EESA, TARP or other programs will have a beneficial impact on the financial markets, including current extreme levels of volatility. In addition, the U.S. Government, Federal Reserve and other governmental and regulatory bodies have taken or are considering taking other actions to address the financial crisis. We cannot predict whether or when such actions may occur or what impact, if any, such actions could have on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We may suffer adverse consequences if our revenues decline since our operating costs do not necessarily decline in proportion to our revenue.

        We earn a significant portion of our income from renting our properties. Our operating costs, however, do not necessarily fluctuate in relation to changes in our rental revenue. This means that our costs will not necessarily decline even if our revenues do. Our operating costs could also increase while our revenues do not. If our operating costs increase but our rental revenues do not, we may be forced to borrow to cover our costs, we may incur losses and we may not have cash available for distributions.

We face risks associated with property acquisitions.

        We may acquire individual properties and portfolios of properties, including large portfolios that could significantly increase our size and alter our capital structure. Our acquisition activities and their success may be exposed to the following risks:

•

even if we enter into an acquisition agreement for a property, it is usually subject to customary conditions to closing, including due diligence investigations to our satisfaction;



•

we may be unable to finance acquisitions on favorable terms or at all;



•

acquired properties may fail to perform as we expected;



•

our estimates of the costs of repositioning or redeveloping acquired properties may be inaccurate;



•

we may not be able to obtain adequate insurance coverage for new properties;

14

---

Table of Contents

•

acquired properties may be located in new markets where we may face risks associated with a lack of market knowledge or understanding of the local economy, lack of business relationships in the area and unfamiliarity with local governmental and permitting procedures; and



•

we may be unable to quickly and efficiently integrate new acquisitions, particularly acquisitions of portfolios of properties, into our existing operations, and as a result our results of operations and financial condition could be adversely affected.

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

•

liabilities for clean-up of undisclosed environmental contamination;



•

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



•

liabilities incurred in the ordinary course of business; and



•

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

Competition for acquisitions may reduce the number of acquisition opportunities available to us and increase the costs of those acquisitions.

        We plan to continue to acquire properties as we are presented with attractive opportunities. We may face competition for acquisition opportunities with other investors, particularly private investors who can incur more leverage, and this competition may adversely affect us by subjecting us to the following risks:

•

an inability to acquire a desired property because of competition from other well-capitalized real estate investors, including publicly traded and privately held REITs, private real estate funds, domestic and foreign financial institutions, life insurance companies, sovereign wealth funds, pension trusts, partnerships and individual investors; and



•

an increase in the purchase price for such acquisition property, in the event we are able to acquire such desired property.

We rely on seven large properties for a significant portion of our revenue.

        As of June 30, 2010, seven of our properties, 220 East 42nd Street, 420 Lexington Avenue, One Madison Avenue, 485 Lexington Avenue, 1185 Avenue of the Americas, 1515 Broadway and 388-390 Greenwich Street, accounted for approximately 41.4% of our portfolio annualized rent, including our share of joint venture annualized rent, and no single property accounted for more than approximately 7% of our portfolio annualized rent, including our share of joint venture annualized rent. Our interest in 1185 Avenue of the Americas is held through ROP and constitutes 28% of ROP's portfolio annualized rent, including its share of joint venture annualized rent. As of June 30, 2010, ROP also held our interest in 919 Third Avenue, 810 Seventh Avenue and 1350 Avenue of the Americas. Those three properties, along with 1185 Avenue of the Americas, accounted for approximately 71% of ROP's portfolio annualized rent, including its share of joint venture annualized rent on June 30, 2010. Revenue and cash available for distribution by SL Green's subsidiaries, including SLGOP and ROP, to SL Green and by SL Green to its stockholders would be materially adversely affected if the ground lease for the 420 Lexington Avenue or 1185 Avenue of the Americas property were terminated for any reason or if one or all of these properties were materially damaged or destroyed. Additionally, revenue would be materially adversely affected if our tenants at these properties experienced a downturn in

15

---

Table of Contents

their business which may weaken their financial condition and result in their failure to timely make rental payments, defaulting under their leases or filing for bankruptcy.

The continuing threat of terrorist attacks may adversely affect the value of our properties and our ability to generate cash flow.

        There may be a decrease in demand for space in New York City because it is considered at risk for future terrorist attacks, and this decrease may reduce our revenues from property rentals. In the aftermath of a terrorist attack, tenants in the New York City area may choose to relocate their business to less populated, lower-profile areas of the United States that are not as likely to be targets of future terrorist activity. This in turn would trigger a decrease in the demand for space in the New York City area, which could increase vacancies in our properties and force us to lease our properties on less favorable terms. As a result, the value of our properties and the level of our revenues could materially decline.

A terrorist attack could cause insurance premiums to increase significantly.

        We maintain "all-risk" property and rental value coverage (including coverage regarding the perils of flood, earthquake and terrorism) within two property insurance portfolios and liability insurance. The first property portfolio maintains a blanket limit of $600.0 million per occurrence for the majority of the New York City properties in our portfolio with a sub-limit of $500.0 million for acts of terrorism. This policy expires in December 31, 2010. The second portfolio maintains a limit of $600.0 million per occurrence, including terrorism, for a few New York City properties and the majority of the Suburban properties. The second property policy expires on December 31, 2010. Additional coverage may be purchased on a stand-alone basis for certain assets. The liability policies cover all our properties and provide limits of $200.0 million per property. The liability policies expire on October 31, 2010.

        In October 2006, we formed a wholly-owned taxable REIT subsidiary, Belmont Insurance Company, or Belmont, to act as a captive insurance company and be one of the elements of our overall insurance program. Belmont was formed in an effort to, among other reasons, stabilize to some extent the fluctuations of insurance market conditions. Belmont is licensed in New York to write Terrorism, NBCR (nuclear, biological, chemical, and radiological), General Liability, Environmental Liability and D&O coverage.

•

Terrorism: Belmont acts as a direct property insurer with respect to a portion of our terrorism coverage for the New York City properties. Effective September 1, 2009, Belmont increased its terrorism coverage from $250 million to $400 million in an upper layer. In addition Belmont purchased reinsurance to reinsure the retained insurable risk not otherwise covered under Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization and Extension Act of 2007, or TRIPRA, as detailed below.



•

NBCR: Belmont acts as a direct insurer of NBCR coverage up to $250 million on the entire property portfolio for certified acts of terrorism above a program trigger of $100.0 million. Belmont is responsible for a small deductible and 15% of the remaining balance of a loss, with the remaining 85% covered by the Federal government.



•

General Liability: For the period commencing October 31, 2010, Belmont will insure a deductible on the general liability insurance with a $150,000 deductible per occurrence and a $2.2 million annual aggregate stop loss limit. We have secured an excess insurer to protect against catastrophic liability losses above the $150,000 deductible per occurrence and a stop loss if aggregate claims exceed $2.2 million. Prior policy years carry a higher per occurrence deductible and aggregate stop losses. Belmont has retained a third party administrator to manage all claims within the deductible and we anticipate that direct management of liability

16

---

Table of Contents

claims will improve loss experience and ultimately lower the cost of liability insurance in future years. In addition, we have an umbrella liability policy of $200.0 million.

•

Environmental Liability: Belmont insures a deductible of $1 million per occurrence on a $30 million environmental liability policy covering the entire portfolio.

        As long as we own Belmont, we are responsible for its liquidity and capital resources, and the accounts of Belmont are part of our consolidated financial statements. If we experience a loss and Belmont is required to pay under its insurance policy, we would ultimately record the loss to the extent of Belmont's required payment. Therefore, insurance coverage provided by Belmont should not be considered as the equivalent of third-party insurance, but rather as a modified form of self-insurance.

        The Terrorism Risk Insurance Act, or TRIA, which was enacted in November 2002, was renewed on December 31, 2007. Congress extended TRIA, now called TRIPRA (Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization and Extension Act of 2007) until December 31, 2014. The law extends the federal Terrorism Insurance Program that requires insurance companies to offer terrorism coverage and provides for compensation for insured losses resulting from acts of certified terrorism, subject to our current program trigger of $100.0 million. Our debt instruments, consisting of mortgage loans secured by our properties (which are generally non-recourse to us), mezzanine loans, ground leases, our 2007 unsecured revolving credit facility and other corporate obligations, contain customary covenants requiring us to maintain insurance. Although we believe that we currently maintain sufficient insurance coverage to satisfy these obligations, there is no assurance that in the future we will be able to procure coverage at a reasonable cost. In such instances, there can be no assurance that the lenders or ground lessors under these instruments will not take the position that a total or partial exclusion from "all-risk" insurance coverage for losses due to terrorist acts is a breach of these debt and ground lease instruments that allows the lenders or ground lessors to declare an event of default and accelerate repayment of debt or recapture of ground lease positions. In addition, if lenders insist on full coverage for these risks and prevail in asserting that we are required to maintain such coverage, it could result in substantially higher insurance premiums.

        We have a 49.9% interest in the property at 100 Park Avenue, where we participate with Prudential, which carries a blanket policy of $500.0 million of "all-risk" property insurance, including terrorism coverage. We own One Madison Avenue, which is under a triple net lease with insurance provided by the tenant, Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC, or CS. We monitor the coverage provided by CS to make sure that our asset is adequately protected. We have a 50.6% interest in the property at 388 and 390 Greenwich Street, where we participate with SITQ, which is leased on a triple net basis to Citigroup, N.A., which provides insurance coverage directly. We monitor all triple net leases to ensure that tenants are providing adequate coverage. Other joint ventures may be covered under separate policies from our policies, at coverage limits which we deem to be adequate. We continually monitor these policies. Although we consider our insurance coverage to be appropriate, in the event of a major catastrophe, such as an act of terrorism, we may not have sufficient coverage to replace certain properties.

Our dependence on smaller and growth-oriented businesses to rent our office space could adversely affect our cash flow and results of operations.

        Many of the tenants in our properties are smaller, growth-oriented businesses that may not have the financial strength of larger corporate tenants. Smaller companies generally experience a higher rate of failure than large businesses. Growth-oriented firms may also seek other office space, including Class A space, as they develop. Dependence on these companies could create a higher risk of tenant defaults, turnover and bankruptcies, which could adversely affect our distributable cash flow and results of operations.

17

---

Table of Contents

Debt financing, financial covenants, degree of leverage, and increases in interest rates could adversely affect our economic performance.

         Scheduled debt payments could adversely affect our results of operations.

        The total principal amount of our outstanding consolidated indebtedness was approximately $4.6 billion (including approximately $0.9 billion of consolidated indebtedness of ROP) as of June 30, 2010, consisting of approximately $0.8 billion under the Credit Facility, $0.9 billion under our senior unsecured notes, including the old notes (including $708.8 million outstanding under ROP's senior unsecured notes, including the notes), $100.0 million under our junior subordinated deferrable interest debentures and approximately $2.8 billion of non-recourse mortgage loans on seventeen of our properties (including a $222.3 million non recourse-mortgage loan on one of ROP's properties). In addition, we could increase the amount of our outstanding indebtedness in the future, in part by borrowing under the Credit Facility, which had $627.0 million available for draw as of June 30, 2010. The Credit Facility matures in June 2011 and has a one-year as-of-right extension option. As of June 30, 2010, the total principal amount of non-recourse indebtedness outstanding at the joint venture properties was approximately $4.1 billion (including $315.0 million of non-recourse indebtedness outstanding at ROP's joint venture properties), of which our proportionate share was approximately $1.8 billion (including ROP's proportionate share of $94.5 million). Cash flow could be insufficient to pay distributions at expected levels and meet the payments of principal and interest required under our current mortgage indebtedness, the Credit Facility, senior unsecured notes, debentures and indebtedness outstanding at our joint venture properties.

        If we are unable to make payments under the Credit Facility, all amounts due and owing at such time will accrue interest at a rate equal to 4% higher than the rate at which each draw was made. If a property is mortgaged to secure payment of indebtedness and we are unable to meet mortgage payments, the mortgagee could foreclose on the property, resulting in loss of income and asset value. Foreclosure on mortgaged properties or an inability to make payments under the Credit Facility would have a negative impact on our financial condition and results of operations.

        We may not be able to refinance existing indebtedness, which in all cases requires substantial principal payments at maturity. In 2010, none of our corporate indebtedness or debt on our unconsolidated joint venture properties will mature. There are no debt maturities in 2010 on our consolidated properties. In April 2010, SL Green repurchased approximately $13.2 million aggregate principal amount of the 4% Exchangeable Senior Debentures due 2025, or the Debentures, of ROP in connection with its cash tender offer for certain securities of SLGOP and ROP. In addition, on June 15, 2010, ROP repurchased approximately $80.7 million aggregate principal amount of the Debentures at the option of holders. ROP has the right redeem the remaining Debentures at any time. At the present time, we intend to exercise extension options or refinance the debt associated with our properties on or prior to their respective maturity dates. If any principal payments due at maturity cannot be refinanced, extended or paid with proceeds of other capital transactions, such as new equity capital, our cash flow will not be sufficient in all years to repay all maturing debt. At the time of refinancing, prevailing interest rates or other factors, such as the possible reluctance of lenders to make commercial real estate loans may result in higher interest rates. Increased interest expense on the refinanced debt would adversely affect cash flow and our ability to service debt.

         Financial covenants could adversely affect our ability to conduct our business.

        The mortgages and mezzanine loans on our properties contain customary negative covenants that limit our ability to further mortgage the property, to enter into new leases or materially modify existing leases, and to discontinue insurance coverage. The Credit Facility contains customary restrictions and requirements on our method of operations. The Credit Facility also requires us to maintain designated ratios of total debt-to-assets, debt service coverage and unencumbered assets-to-unsecured debt. In addition, the terms of our senior unsecured notes include certain restrictions and covenants which limit, among other things, the incurrence of additional indebtedness and liens, and which require compliance

18

---

Table of Contents

with financial ratios relating to minimum amount of debt service coverage, the maximum amount of consolidated unsecured and secured indebtedness and the minimum amount of unencumbered assets. These restrictions could adversely affect our results of operations.

         Rising interest rates could adversely affect our cash flow.

        Advances under the Credit Facility and certain property-level mortgage debt bear interest at a variable rate. These consolidated variable rate borrowings totaled approximately $1.3 billion at June 30, 2010. In addition, we could increase the amount of our outstanding variable rate debt in the future, in part by borrowing under the Credit Facility, which had $627.0 million available for draw as of June 30, 2010. Borrowings under the Credit Facility currently bear interest at a spread equal to the 30-day LIBOR, plus 90 basis points. As of June 30, 2010, borrowings under the Credit Facility and junior subordinated deferrable interest debentures totaled $0.8 billion and $100.0 million, respectively, and bore interest at 1.21% and 5.61%, respectively. We may incur indebtedness in the future that also bears interest at a variable rate or may be required to refinance our debt at higher rates. Accordingly, increases in interest rates above that which we anticipated based upon historical trends could adversely affect our results of operations and financial conditions. At June 30, 2010, a hypothetical 100 basis point increase in interest rates along the entire interest rate curve would increase our annual interest costs by approximately $12.9 million and would increase our share of joint venture annual interest costs by approximately $6.1 million.

         Failure to hedge effectively against interest rate changes may adversely affect results of operations.

        The interest rate hedge instruments we use to manage some of our exposure to interest rate volatility involve risk, such as the risk that counterparties may fail to honor their obligations under these arrangements. In addition, these arrangements may not be effective in reducing our exposure to interest rate changes. Failure to hedge effectively against interest rate changes may adversely affect our results of operations.

         No limitation on debt could adversely affect our cash flow.

        Our organizational documents do not contain any limitation on the amount of indebtedness we may incur. As of June 30, 2010, assuming the conversion of all outstanding units of SLGOP into shares of SL Green common stock, our combined debt-to-market capitalization ratio, including our share of joint venture debt of approximately $1.8 billion, was approximately 57.3%. We have historically targeted a debt-to-market capitalization less than this. However, due to the significant decrease in SL Green's stock price we are currently operating in excess of that threshold. We are currently undertaking steps aimed at reducing our debt. Any changes that increase our debt to market capitalization percentage could be viewed negatively by investors. As a result, SL Green's stock price could decrease. SL Green's market capitalization is variable and does not necessarily reflect the fair market value of its assets at all times. We also consider factors other than market capitalization in making decisions regarding the incurrence of indebtedness, such as the purchase price of properties to be acquired with debt financing, the estimated market value of our properties upon refinancing and the ability of particular properties and our business as a whole to generate cash flow to cover expected debt service.

Structured finance investments could cause us to incur expenses, which could adversely affect our results of operations.

        We owned mezzanine loans, junior participations and preferred equity interests in 28 investments with an aggregate book value of approximately $867.4 million (including three of ROP's investments with an aggregate book value of $27.8 million) at June 30, 2010. Such investments may or may not be recourse obligations of the borrower and are not insured or guaranteed by governmental agencies or otherwise. In the event of a default under these obligations, we may have to realize upon our collateral and thereafter make substantial improvements or repairs to the underlying real estate in order to maximize the property's investment potential. Borrowers may contest enforcement of foreclosure or

19

---

Table of Contents

other remedies, seek bankruptcy protection against such enforcement and/or bring claims for lender liability in response to actions to enforce their obligation to us. Relatively high loan-to-value ratios and declines in the value of the property may prevent us from realizing an amount equal to our investment upon foreclosure or realization.

        We maintain and regularly evaluate financial reserves to protect against potential future losses. Our reserves reflect management's judgment of the probability and severity of losses. We cannot be certain that our judgment will prove to be correct and that reserves will be adequate over time to protect against potential future losses because of unanticipated adverse changes in the economy or events adversely affecting specific properties, assets, tenants, borrowers, industries in which our tenants and borrowers operate or markets in which our tenants and borrowers or their properties are located. We believe the increase in our non-performing loans has been driven by the recent credit crisis, which have adversely impacted the ability of many of our borrowers to service their debt and refinance our loans to them at maturity. We significantly increased our provision for loan losses to $93.8 million and our direct write-offs to $69.1 million in 2009 based upon the performance of our assets and conditions in the financial markets and overall economy, which continued to deteriorate in 2009. We increased our provision for loan loss by $11.0 million during the six months ended June 30, 2010. If our reserves for credit losses prove inadequate, we could suffer losses which would have a material adverse affect on our financial performance, the market prices of our securities.

Special Servicing Activities could result in liability to us.

        We provide special servicing activities on behalf of third parties. We have been rated by Fitch and S&P to provide such services. An intended or unintended breach of the servicing standards and/or our fiduciary duties to bondholders could result in material liability to us.

Joint investments could be adversely affected by our lack of sole decision-making authority and reliance upon a co-venturer's financial condition.

        We co-invest with third parties through partnerships, joint ventures, co-tenancies or other entities, acquiring noncontrolling interests in, or sharing responsibility for managing the affairs of, a property, partnership, joint venture, co-tenancy or other entity. Therefore, we will not be in a position to exercise sole decision-making authority regarding that property, partnership, joint venture or other entity. Investments in partnerships, joint ventures, or other entities may involve risks not present were a third party not involved, including the possibility that our partners, co-tenants or co-venturers might become bankrupt or otherwise fail to fund their share of required capital contributions. Additionally, our partners or co-venturers might at any time have economic or other business interests or goals, which are inconsistent with our business interests or goals. These investments may also have the potential risk of impasses on decisions such as a sale, because neither we nor the partner, co-tenant or co-venturer would have full control over the partnership or joint venture. Consequently, actions by such partner, co-tenant or co-venturer might result in subjecting properties owned by the partnership or joint venture to additional risk. In addition, we may, in specific circumstances, be liable for the actions of our third-party partners, co-tenants or co-venturers. As of June 30, 2010, our unconsolidated joint ventures owned 14 properties (including one property owned by ROP's unconsolidated joint venture) and we had an aggregate cost basis in the joint ventures totaling approximately $775.8 million (including ROP's aggregate cost basis of $49.0 million in its joint venture). As of June 30, 2010, our share of joint venture debt totaled approximately $1.8 billion (including ROP's share of $94.5 million).

Our joint venture agreements may contain terms in favor of our partners that could have an adverse effect on the value of our investments in the joint ventures.

        Each of our joint venture agreements has been individually negotiated with our partner in the joint venture and, in some cases, we have agreed to terms that are favorable to our partner in the joint venture. For example, our partner may be entitled to a specified portion of the profits of the joint venture before we are entitled to any portion of such profits and our partner may have rights to buy

20

---

Table of Contents

our interest in the joint venture, to force us to buy the partner's interest in the joint venture or to compel the sale of the property owned by such joint venture. These rights may permit our partner in a particular joint venture to obtain a greater benefit from the value or profits of the joint venture than us, which could have an adverse effect on the value of our investment in the joint venture and on our financial condition and results of operations. We may also enter into similar arrangements in the future.

We are subject to possible environmental liabilities and other possible liabilities.

        We are subject to various federal, state and local environmental laws. These laws regulate our use, storage, disposal and management of hazardous substances and wastes and can impose liability on property owners or operators for the clean-up of certain hazardous substances released on a property and any associated damage to natural resources without regard to whether the release was legal or whether it was caused by the property owner or operator. The presence of hazardous substances on our properties may adversely affect occupancy and our ability to develop or sell or borrow against those properties. In addition to potential liability for clean-up costs, private plaintiffs may bring claims for personal injury, property damage or for similar reasons. Various laws also impose liability for the clean-up of contamination at any facility (e.g., a landfill) to which we have sent hazardous substances for treatment or disposal, without regard to whether the materials were transported, treated and disposed in accordance with law.

We may incur significant costs complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act and similar laws.

        Our properties may be subject to other risks relating to current or future laws including laws benefiting disabled persons, and other state or local zoning, construction or other regulations. These laws may require significant property modifications in the future for which we may not have budgeted and could result in fines being levied against us. The occurrence of any of these events could have an adverse impact on our cash flows and ability to make distributions to stockholders.

        Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, or ADA, all public accommodations must meet federal requirements related to access and use by disabled persons. Additional federal, state and local laws also may require modifications to our properties, or restrict our ability to renovate our properties. We have not conducted an audit or investigation of all of our properties to determine our compliance. If one or more of our properties is not in compliance with the ADA or other legislation, then we would be required to incur additional costs to bring the property into compliance. We cannot predict the ultimate amount of the cost of compliance with ADA or other legislation. If we incur substantial costs to comply with the ADA and any other legislation, our financial condition, results of operations and cash flow and/or ability to satisfy our debt service obligations could be adversely affected.

We face potential conflicts of interest.

         Limitations on our ability to sell or reduce the indebtedness on specific mortgaged properties could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.

        On May 15, 2002, we acquired the property located at 1515 Broadway, New York, New York. Under a tax protection agreement established to protect the limited partners of the partnership that transferred 1515 Broadway to us, we have agreed not to take certain action that would adversely affect the limited partners' tax positions before December 31, 2011. We also acquired the property located at 625 Madison Avenue, New York, New York, on October 19, 2004 and have agreed not to take certain action that would adversely affect the tax positions of certain of the partners who held interests in this property prior to the acquisition, for a period of seven years after the acquisition.

        In connection with future acquisitions of interests in properties, we may agree to similar restrictions on our ability to sell or refinance the acquired properties with similar potential adverse consequences.

21

---

Table of Contents

         There are potential conflicts of interest between SL Green and Mr. Green.

        There is a potential conflict of interest relating to the disposition of certain property contributed to us by Stephen L. Green, and his family in SL Green's initial public offering. Mr. Green serves as the chairman of SL Green's board of directors and is an executive officer. As part of our formation, Mr. Green contributed appreciated property, with a net book value of $73.5 million, to SLGOP in exchange for units of limited partnership interest in SLGOP. He did not recognize any taxable gain as a result of the contribution. SLGOP, however, took a tax basis in the contributed property equal to that of the contributing unitholder. The fair market value of the property contributed by him exceeded his tax basis by approximately $34.0 million at the time of contribution. The difference between fair market value and tax basis at the time of contribution represents a built-in gain. If we sell a property in a transaction in which a taxable gain is recognized, for tax purposes the built-in gain would be allocated solely to him and not to SL Green. As a result, Mr. Green has a conflict of interest if the sale of a property, which he contributed, is in SL Green's best interest but not his.

        There is a potential conflict of interest relating to the refinancing of indebtedness specifically allocated to Mr. Green. Mr. Green would recognize gain if he were to receive a distribution of cash from SLGOP in an amount that exceeds his tax basis in his partnership units. His tax basis includes his share of debt, including mortgage indebtedness, owed by SLGOP. If SLGOP were to retire such debt, then he would experience a decrease in his share of liabilities, which, for tax purposes, would be treated as a distribution of cash to him. To the extent the deemed distribution of cash exceeded his tax basis, he would recognize gain.

         Members of management may have a conflict of interest over whether to enforce terms of agreements with entities with which senior management, directly or indirectly, has an affiliation.

        Through Alliance Building Services, or Alliance, First Quality Maintenance, L.P., or First Quality, provides cleaning, extermination and related services, Classic Security LLC provides security services, Bright Star Couriers LLC provides messenger services, and Onyx Restoration Works provides restoration services with respect to certain properties owned by us. Alliance is owned by Gary Green, a son of Stephen L. Green, the chairman of SL Green's board of directors. Our company and our tenants accounted for approximately 23.7% of Alliance's 2009 estimated total revenue. The contracts pursuant to which these services are provided are not the result of arm's length negotiations and, therefore, there can be no assurance that the terms and conditions are not less favorable than those which could be obtained from third parties providing comparable services. In addition, to the extent that we choose to enforce our rights under any of these agreements, we may determine to pursue available remedies, such as actions for damages or injunctive relief, less vigorously than we otherwise might because of our desire to maintain our ongoing relationship with the individual involved.

         Members of management may have a conflict of interest over whether to enforce terms of senior management's employment and non-competition agreements.

        Stephen Green, Marc Holliday, Gregory Hughes, Andrew Levine and Andrew Mathias entered into employment and non-competition agreements with SL Green pursuant to which they have agreed not to actively engage in the acquisition, development or operation of office real estate in the New York City metropolitan area. For the most part these restrictions apply to the executive both during his employment and for a period of time thereafter. Each executive is also prohibited from otherwise disrupting or interfering with our business through the solicitation of our employees or clients or otherwise. To the extent that SL Green chooses to enforce its rights under any of these agreements, SL Green may determine to pursue available remedies, such as actions for damages or injunctive relief, less vigorously than we otherwise might because of its desire to maintain its ongoing relationship with the individual involved. Additionally, the non-competition provisions of these agreements, despite being limited in scope and duration, could be difficult to enforce, or may be subject to limited enforcement, should litigation arise over them in the future. Mr. Green has interests in two properties in Manhattan,

22

---

Table of Contents

which are exempt from the non-competition provisions of his employment and non-competition agreement.

SL Green's failure to qualify as a REIT would be costly.

        We believe that SL Green has operated in a manner to qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes and SL Green intends to continue to so operate. Many of these requirements, however, are highly technical and complex. The determination that SL Green is a REIT requires an analysis of factual matters and circumstances. These matters, some of which may not be totally within SL Green's control, can affect its qualification as a REIT. For example, to qualify as a REIT, at least 95% of SL Green's gross income must come from designated sources that are listed in the REIT tax laws. SL Green is also required to distribute to stockholders at least 90% of its REIT taxable income excluding capital gains. The fact that SL Green holds its assets through subsidiaries further complicates the application of the REIT requirements. Even a technical or inadvertent mistake could jeopardize SL Green's REIT status. Furthermore, Congress and the Internal Revenue Service, which we refer to as the IRS, might make changes to the tax laws and regulations, and the courts might issue new rulings that make it more difficult, or impossible, for SL Green to remain qualified as a REIT.

        If SL Green fails to qualify as a REIT, it would be subject to federal income tax at regular corporate rates. Also, unless the IRS grants SL Green relief under specific statutory provisions, it would remain disqualified as a REIT for four years following the year it first failed to qualify. If SL Green failed to qualify as a REIT, we would have to pay significant income taxes and ROP would therefore have less money available to service indebtedness.

We are dependent on external sources of capital.

        Because of distribution requirements imposed on SL Green to qualify as a REIT, it is not likely that we will be able to fund all future capital needs, including acquisitions, from income from operations. We therefore will have to rely on third-party sources of capital, which may or may not be available on favorable terms or at all. Our access to third-party sources of capital depends on a number of things, including the market's perception of our growth potential and our current and potential future earnings. In addition, we anticipate having to raise money in the public equity and debt markets with some regularity and our ability to do so will depend upon the general conditions prevailing in these markets. At any time conditions may exist which effectively prevent us, and REITs in general, from accessing these markets. Moreover, additional debt financing may substantially increase our leverage. Due to the current financial crisis and the lack of liquidity in the market, such capital may not be available.

We face significant competition for tenants.

        The leasing of real estate is highly competitive. The principal means of competition are rent charged, location, services provided and the nature and condition of the facility to be leased. We directly compete with all lessors and developers of similar space in the areas in which our properties are located. Demand for retail space has been impacted by the recent bankruptcy of a number of retail companies and a general trend toward consolidation in the retail industry, which could adversely affect the ability of our company to attract and retain tenants.

        Our commercial office properties are concentrated in highly developed areas of midtown Manhattan and certain Suburban central business districts, or CBD's. Manhattan is the largest office market in the United States. The number of competitive office properties in Manhattan and CBD's in which our Suburban properties are located (which may be newer or better located than our properties) could have a material adverse effect on our ability to lease office space at our properties, and on the effective rents we are able to charge.

23

---

Table of Contents

Loss of our key personnel could harm our operations.

        We are dependent on the efforts of Stephen L. Green, the chairman of SL Green's board of directors and an executive officer, Marc Holliday, SL Green's chief executive officer, Andrew Mathias, SL Green's president and chief investment officer and Gregory F. Hughes, SL Green's chief operating officer and chief financial officer. These officers have employment agreements which expire in December 2010, January 2013, December 2010, and September 2010, respectively. A loss of the services of any of these individuals could adversely affect our operations.

Our business and operations would suffer in the event of system failures.

        Despite system redundancy, the implementation of security measures and the existence of a Disaster Recovery Plan for our internal information technology systems, our systems are vulnerable to damages from any number of sources, including computer viruses, unauthorized access, energy blackouts, natural disasters, terrorism, war and telecommunication failures. Any system failure or accident that causes interruptions in our operations could result in a material disruption to our business. We may also incur additional costs to remedy damages caused by such disruptions.

Compliance with changing regulation applicable to corporate governance and public disclosure may result in additional expenses, affect our operations and affect our reputation.

        Changing laws, regulations and standards relating to corporate governance and public disclosure, including the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and new Commission regulations and NYSE rules, can create uncertainty for public companies. These new or changed laws, regulations and standards are subject to varying interpretations in many cases due to their lack of specificity, and as a result, their application in practice may evolve over time as new guidance is provided by regulatory and governing bodies, which could result in continuing uncertainty regarding compliance matters and higher costs necessitated by ongoing revisions to disclosure and governance practices. We are committed to maintaining high standards of corporate governance and public disclosure. As a result, our efforts to comply with evolving laws, regulations and standards have resulted in, and are likely to continue to result in, increased general and administrative expenses and a diversion of management time and attention from revenue-generating activities to compliance activities. In particular, our efforts to comply with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and the related regulations regarding our required assessment of our internal controls over financial reporting and our external auditors' audit of that assessment has required the commitment of significant financial and managerial resources. In addition, it has become more difficult and more expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance. We expect these efforts to require the continued commitment of significant resources. Further, our directors, chief executive officer and chief financial officer could face an increased risk of personal liability in connection with the performance of their duties. As a result, we may have difficulty attracting and retaining qualified directors and executive officers, which could harm our business. If our efforts to comply with new or changed laws, regulations and standards differ from the activities intended by regulatory or governing bodies due to ambiguities related to practice, our reputation may be harmed.

CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

        Certain statements in this prospectus and in the documents incorporated by reference, and in future oral and written statements that the issuer and the co-obligors make, may be forward-looking. These statements reflect our beliefs and expectations as to future events and trends affecting our business, consolidated financial condition and results of operations. These forward-looking statements are based upon our current expectations concerning future events and discuss, among other things, anticipated future performance and future business plans. Forward-looking statements are identified by such words and phrases as "anticipates," "believes," "could be," "estimates," "expects," "intends," "plans to," "may," "will" and similar expressions. Forward-looking statements are necessarily subject to

24

---

Table of Contents

risks and uncertainties, many of which are outside our control, which could cause actual results to differ materially from these statements.

        The following are important factors that we believe could cause actual results to differ materially from those in our forward-looking statements:

•

general economic or business (particularly real estate) conditions, either nationally or in the New York Metro area being less favorable than expected if the credit crisis continues;



•

reduced demand for office space;



•

risks of real estate acquisitions;



•

risks of structured finance investments and borrowers;



•

availability and creditworthiness of prospective tenants and borrowers;



•

tenant bankruptcies;



•

adverse changes in the real estate markets, including increasing vacancy, increasing availability of sublease space, decreasing rental revenue and increasing insurance costs;



•

availability, terms and deployment of capital (debt and equity);



•

unanticipated increases in financing and other costs, including a rise in interest rates;



•

market interest rates could adversely affect performance and cash flows;



•

declining real estate valuations and impairment charges;



•

our ability to comply with financial covenants in our debt instruments;



•

SL Green's ability to satisfy complex rules in order for SL Green to qualify as a REIT, for federal income tax purposes, SLGOP's and ROP's abilities to satisfy the rules in order for them to qualify as a partnership for federal income tax purposes, the ability of certain of SL Green's subsidiaries to qualify as REITs and certain of SL Green's subsidiaries to qualify as taxable REIT subsidiaries for federal income tax purposes and the ability of SL Green's subsidiaries, including SLGOP and ROP, to operate effectively within the limitations imposed by these rules;



•

accounting principles and policies and guidelines applicable to REITs;



•

competition with other companies;



•

availability of, and our ability to attract and retain, qualified personnel;



•

the continuing threat of terrorist attacks on the national, regional and local economies including, in particular, the New York City area and our tenants;



•

legislative or regulatory changes adversely affecting real estate investment trusts and the real estate business; and



•

environmental, regulatory and/or safety requirements.

        Except as required by applicable law, undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. In light of these risks and uncertainties, the forward-looking events and circumstances discussed in this prospectus might not occur and actual results, performance or achievement could differ materially from that anticipated or implied in the forward-looking statements.

25

---

Table of Contents

RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES OF SLGOP

        The following table sets forth the ratio of earnings to fixed charges for SL Green Operating Partnership, L.P. on a historical basis for the periods indicated:

        The ratios of earnings to fixed charges were computed by dividing earnings by fixed charges. For the purpose of calculating the ratios, the earnings have been calculated by adding fixed charges to income or loss from continuing operations before adjustment for noncontrolling interests plus distributions from unconsolidated joint ventures, excluding gains or losses from sale of property, loss on equity investment and marketable securities and the cumulative effect of changes in accounting principles. Fixed charges consist of all interest, whether expensed or capitalized, including the amortization of debt issuance costs and rental expense deemed to represent interest expense.

26

---

Table of Contents

RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES OF ROP

        The following table sets forth the ratio of earnings to fixed charges for Reckson Operating Partnership, L.P. on a historical basis for the periods indicated:

        The ratios of earnings to fixed charges were computed by dividing earnings by fixed charges. For the purpose of calculating the ratios, the earnings have been calculated by adding fixed charges to income or loss from continuing operations before adjustment for noncontrolling interests plus distributions from unconsolidated joint ventures, excluding gains or losses from sale of property, loss on equity investment and marketable securities and the cumulative effect of changes in accounting principles. Fixed charges consist of all interest, whether expensed or capitalized, including the amortization of debt issuance costs and rental expense deemed to represent interest expense.

27

---

Table of Contents

SELECTED HISTORICAL FINANCIAL DATA OF SLGOP

        We derived the following financial data from audited financial statements for fiscal years 2005 through 2009 and the unaudited financial statements for the six months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009. The audited financial statements for the fiscal years 2007 through 2009 and the unaudited financial statements for the six months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009 are included in this prospectus for SLGOP. Results for the interim periods should not be considered indicative of results for any other periods or for the full year ending December 31, 2010.

        The following selected financial data should be read in conjunction with "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations for SLGOP" and SLGOP's consolidated financial statements and related notes included elsewhere in this prospectus.

28

---

Table of Contents

---

(1)

Funds From Operations, or FFO, is a widely recognized measure of REIT performance. We compute FFO in accordance with standards established by the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts, or NAREIT, which may not be comparable to FFO reported by other REITs that do not compute FFO in accordance with the NAREIT definition, or that interpret the NAREIT definition differently than we do. The revised White Paper on FFO approved by the Board of Governors of NAREIT in April 2002 defines FFO as net income (loss) (computed in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, or GAAP), excluding gains (or losses) from debt restructuring and sales of properties, plus real estate related depreciation and amortization and after adjustments for unconsolidated partnerships and joint ventures. We present FFO because we consider it an important supplemental measure of our operating performance and believe that it is frequently used by securities analysts, investors and other interested parties in the evaluation of REITS, particularly those that own and operate commercial office properties. SL Green also uses FFO as one of several criteria to determine performance-based bonuses for members of senior management. FFO is intended to exclude GAAP historical cost depreciation and amortization of real estate and related assets, which assumes that the value of real estate assets diminishes ratably over time. Historically, however, real estate values have risen or fallen with market conditions. Because FFO excludes depreciation and amortization unique to real estate, gains and losses from property dispositions and extraordinary items, it provides a performance measure that, when compared year over year, reflects the impact to operations from trends in occupancy rates, rental rates, operating costs, interest costs, providing perspective not immediately apparent from net income. FFO does not represent cash generated from operating activities in accordance with GAAP and should not be considered as an alternative to net income (determined in accordance with GAAP), as an indication of our financial performance or to cash flow from operating activities (determined in accordance with GAAP) as a measure of our liquidity, nor is it indicative of funds available to fund our cash needs, including our ability to make cash distributions.

A reconciliation of FFO to net income computed in accordance with GAAP is provided under the heading of "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations for SLGOP—Funds From Operations" elsewhere in this prospectus.

---

(1)

The weighted average occupancy represents the total leased square feet divided by total available rentable square feet.