NOTE 18 – EARNINGS PER SHARE (EPS) Basic EPS is calculated by dividing Net earnings attributable to Allegion plc by the weighted-average number of ordinary shares outstanding for the applicable period.
Diluted EPS is calculated after adjusting the denominator of the basic EPS calculation for the effect of all potentially dilutive ordinary shares, which in the Company’s case, includes shares issuable under share-based compensation plans.
The following table summarizes the weighted-average number of ordinary shares outstanding for basic and diluted earnings per share calculations.
## Table 0 ##
At December 31, 2017, 0.1 million stock options were excluded from the computation of weighted average diluted shares outstanding because the effect of including these shares would have been anti-dilutive.
NOTE 19 – COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES The Company is involved in various litigations, claims and administrative proceedings, including those related to environmental and product warranty matters.
Amounts recorded for identified contingent liabilities are estimates, which are reviewed periodically and adjusted to reflect additional information when it becomes available.
Subject to the uncertainties inherent in estimating future costs for contingent liabilities, except as expressly set forth in this note, management believes that any liability which may result from these legal matters would not have a material adverse effect on the financial condition, results of operations, liquidity or cash flows of the Company.
Environmental Matters The Company is dedicated to an environmental program to reduce the utilization and generation of hazardous materials during the manufacturing process and to remediate identified environmental concerns.
As to the latter, the Company is currently engaged in site investigations and remediation activities to address environmental cleanup from past operations at current and former production facilities.
The Company regularly evaluates its remediation programs and considers alternative remediation methods that are in addition to, or in replacement of, those currently utilized by the Company based upon enhanced technology and regulatory changes.
Changes to the Company's remediation programs may result in increased expenses and increased environmental reserves.
The Company is sometimes a party to environmental lawsuits and claims and has received notices of potential violations of environmental laws and regulations from the U. S.  Environmental Protection Agency and similar state authorities.
It has also been identified as a potentially responsible party ("PRP") for cleanup costs associated with off-site waste disposal at federal Superfund and state remediation sites.
For all such sites, there are other PRPs and, in most instances, the Company’s involvement is minimal.
In estimating its liability, the Company has assumed it will not bear the entire cost of remediation of any site to the exclusion of other PRPs who may be jointly and severally liable.
The ability of other PRPs to participate has been taken into account, based on our understanding of the parties’ financial condition and probable contributions on a per site basis.
Additional lawsuits and claims involving environmental matters are likely to arise from time to time in the future.
The Company incurred $3.2 million, $23.3 million, and $4.4 million of expenses during the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively, for environmental remediation at sites presently or formerly owned or leased by the Company.
In the fourth-quarter of 2016, with the collaboration and approval of state regulators, the Company launched a proactive, alternative approach to remediate two sites in the United States.
This approach will allow the Company to more aggressively address environmental conditions at these sites and reduce the impact of potential changes in regulatory requirements.
As a result, the Company recorded a $15 million charge for environmental remediation in the fourth quarter of 2016.
Environmental remediation costs are recorded in Costs of goods sold within the Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income.
As of December 31, 2017 and 2016, the Company has recorded reserves for environmental matters of $28.9 million and $30.6 million.
The total reserve at December 31, 2017 and 2016 included $8.9 million and $9.6 million related to remediation of sites previously disposed by the Company.
Environmental reserves are classified as Accrued expenses and other current liabilities or Other noncurrent liabilities based on their expected term.
The Company's total current environmental reserve at December 31, 2017 and 2016 was $12.6 million and $6.1 million and the remainder is classified as noncurrent.
Given the evolving nature of environmental laws, regulations and technology, the ultimate cost of future compliance is uncertain.
## Table 1 ##
Based upon our evaluation of certain comparative key operating metrics as of December 31, 2009, we believe that revenue for the three months ending March 31, 2010 will be lower than the same period in 2009.
Our operating strategy will be to continue to focus on maintaining occupancy levels by adjusting rental rates, promotional discounts and marketing activities.
It is unclear to us how much the above mentioned factors will impact our revenues beyond the first quarter of 2010.
From a geographic standpoint, we are experiencing the greatest year-over-year revenue declines in our Southeast markets, located in North and South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida, as well as the West Coast, which includes Seattle, Portland, San Francisco and Los Angeles.
See Analysis of Regional Trends table that follows.
Cost of operations (excluding depreciation and amortization) decreased by 1.8% in 2009 as compared to 2008, and increased by 0.7% in 2008 as compared to 2007.
The decrease in 2009 as compared to 2008 was due to reduced utilities, repairs and maintenance, telephone reservation center, property insurance and other cost of management which were offset in part by increases in property taxes and other advertising and promotion expenses.
The small increase in 2008 as compared to 2007 was due primarily to higher property tax and utilities expenses which were partially offset by lower property insurance expense.
Property tax expense increased 2.9% in 2009 as compared to 2008, and 2.6% in 2008 as compared to 2007.
These increases are primarily due to increases in assessments of property values and to a lesser degree increases in tax rates.
We expect property tax expense growth of approximately 3.5% in 2010.
Direct property payroll expense was flat in 2009 as compared to 2008 and increased by 1.2% in 2008 as compared to 2007.
The increase in 2008 reflects higher hours incurred due to adjustments in staffing levels, offset by lower incentive pay and stagnant growth in average wage rates.
For 2010, we expect moderate growth trends in payroll.
Media advertising for the Same Store Facilities was flat in 2009 as compared to 2008 and decreased 5.1% in 2008 as compared to 2007.
Media advertising primarily includes the cost of advertising on television and will vary depending on a number of factors, including our occupancy levels and demand.
Other advertising and promotion is comprised principally of yellow page and internet advertising, which increased 10.1% during 2009 as compared to 2008, and decreased 2.9% during 2008 as compared to 2007.
Our future spending on yellow page, media, and internet advertising expenditures will be driven in part by demand for our self-storage spaces, our current occupancy levels, and the relative efficacy of each type of advertising.
Media advertising in particular can be volatile and increase or decrease significantly in the short-term.
Analysis of Regional Trends The following table sets forth regional trends in our Same Store Facilities:
## Table 2 ##
## Table 3 ##
Our current intention is to repay the debt at maturity and not seek to refinance debt maturities with additional debt.
Alternatively, we may prepay debt and finance such prepayments with cash on-hand or proceeds from the issuance of preferred or common securities.
Our portfolio of real estate facilities is substantially unencumbered.
At December 31, 2010, we have 1,932 self-storage facilities with an aggregate net book value of approximately $6.9 billion that are unencumbered.
Capital Improvement Requirements: Capital improvements include major repairs or replacements to our facilities, which keep the facilities in good operating condition and maintain their visual appeal to the customer.
Capital improvements do not include costs relating to the development or expansion of facilities that add additional net rentable square footage to our portfolio.
We incurred capital improvements totaling $77.5 million during 2010.
During 2011, we expect to incur approximately $81 million for capital improvements and expect to fund such improvements with operating cash flow.
Requirement to Pay Distributions: We have operated, and intend to continue to operate, in such a manner as to qualify as a REIT under the Code, but no assurance can be given that we will at all times so qualify.
To the extent that we continue to qualify as a REIT, we will not be taxed, with certain limited exceptions, on the REIT taxable income that is distributed to our shareholders, provided that at least 90% of our taxable income is so distributed.
We believe we have satisfied the REIT distribution requirement since 1981.
Aggregate distributions paid during 2010 totaled $754.8 million, consisting of the following (amounts in thousands):

Tables referenced above, in order (Table 0 first):
<table><tr><td>In millions</td><td>2017</td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td></tr><tr><td>Weighted-average number of basic shares</td><td>95.1</td><td>95.8</td><td>95.9</td></tr><tr><td>Shares issuable under incentive stock plans</td><td>0.9</td><td>1.1</td><td>1.0</td></tr><tr><td>Weighted-average number of diluted shares</td><td>96.0</td><td>96.9</td><td>96.9</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Same Store Year-over-Year Change</td></tr><tr><td>Three Months Ended:</td><td>Rental income</td><td>Realized rent per occupied square foot</td><td>Square foot occupancy</td></tr><tr><td>March 31, 2008</td><td>3.4%</td><td>3.0%</td><td>0.3%</td></tr><tr><td>June 30, 2008</td><td>3.4%</td><td>3.0%</td><td>0.4%</td></tr><tr><td>September 30, 2008</td><td>2.5%</td><td>1.9%</td><td>0.6%</td></tr><tr><td>December 31, 2008</td><td>1.5%</td><td>1.9%</td><td>-0.5%</td></tr><tr><td>For entire year: 2008</td><td>2.7%</td><td>2.4%</td><td>0.2%</td></tr><tr><td>March 31, 2009</td><td>-1.2%</td><td>-0.2%</td><td>-1.0%</td></tr><tr><td>June 30, 2009</td><td>-4.0%</td><td>-2.9%</td><td>-1.1%</td></tr><tr><td>September 30, 2009</td><td>-5.2%</td><td>-4.2%</td><td>-1.0%</td></tr><tr><td>December 31, 2009</td><td>-4.3%</td><td>-3.8%</td><td>-0.5%</td></tr><tr><td>For entire year: 2009</td><td>-3.7%</td><td>-2.8%</td><td>-0.9%</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Year Ended December 31,</td><td colspan="3">Year Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2010</td><td>2009</td><td>Change</td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td><td>Change</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="6">(Amounts in thousands, except for weighted average data)</td></tr><tr><td>Same Store Facilities Operating Trends by Region</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Revenues:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Southern California (184 facilities)</td><td>$212,614</td><td>$215,997</td><td>-1.6%</td><td>$215,997</td><td>$224,280</td><td>-3.7%</td></tr><tr><td>Northern California (167 facilities)</td><td>148,500</td><td>148,934</td><td>-0.3%</td><td>148,934</td><td>153,987</td><td>-3.3%</td></tr><tr><td>Texas (230 facilities)</td><td>142,515</td><td>140,926</td><td>1.1%</td><td>140,926</td><td>142,443</td><td>-1.1%</td></tr><tr><td>Florida (185 facilities)</td><td>137,525</td><td>138,299</td><td>-0.6%</td><td>138,299</td><td>145,635</td><td>-5.0%</td></tr><tr><td>Illinois (121 facilities)</td><td>90,356</td><td>90,912</td><td>-0.6%</td><td>90,912</td><td>93,217</td><td>-2.5%</td></tr><tr><td>Washington (90 facilities)</td><td>74,187</td><td>74,702</td><td>-0.7%</td><td>74,702</td><td>78,481</td><td>-4.8%</td></tr><tr><td>Georgia (87 facilities)</td><td>48,910</td><td>49,225</td><td>-0.6%</td><td>49,225</td><td>52,138</td><td>-5.6%</td></tr><tr><td>All other states (861 facilities)</td><td>573,109</td><td>564,343</td><td>1.6%</td><td>564,343</td><td>578,304</td><td>-2.4%</td></tr><tr><td>Total revenues</td><td>1,427,716</td><td>1,423,338</td><td>0.3%</td><td>1,423,338</td><td>1,468,485</td><td>-3.1%</td></tr><tr><td colspan="7">Cost of operations:</td></tr><tr><td>Southern California</td><td>48,999</td><td>48,434</td><td>1.2%</td><td>48,434</td><td>48,159</td><td>0.6%</td></tr><tr><td>Northern California</td><td>39,060</td><td>39,162</td><td>-0.3%</td><td>39,162</td><td>39,857</td><td>-1.7%</td></tr><tr><td>Texas</td><td>53,828</td><td>53,915</td><td>-0.2%</td><td>53,915</td><td>55,124</td><td>-2.2%</td></tr><tr><td>Florida</td><td>45,940</td><td>47,306</td><td>-2.9%</td><td>47,306</td><td>49,840</td><td>-5.1%</td></tr><tr><td>Illinois</td><td>39,621</td><td>40,514</td><td>-2.2%</td><td>40,514</td><td>39,190</td><td>3.4%</td></tr><tr><td>Washington</td><td>19,776</td><td>18,437</td><td>7.3%</td><td>18,437</td><td>18,420</td><td>0.1%</td></tr><tr><td>Georgia</td><td>17,106</td><td>16,825</td><td>1.7%</td><td>16,825</td><td>17,261</td><td>-2.5%</td></tr><tr><td>All other states</td><td>203,100</td><td>199,448</td><td>1.8%</td><td>199,448</td><td>204,952</td><td>-2.7%</td></tr><tr><td>Total cost of operations</td><td>467,430</td><td>464,041</td><td>0.7%</td><td>464,041</td><td>472,803</td><td>-1.9%</td></tr><tr><td colspan="7">Net operating income:</td></tr><tr><td>Southern California</td><td>163,615</td><td>167,563</td><td>-2.4%</td><td>167,563</td><td>176,121</td><td>-4.9%</td></tr><tr><td>Northern California</td><td>109,440</td><td>109,772</td><td>-0.3%</td><td>109,772</td><td>114,130</td><td>-3.8%</td></tr><tr><td>Texas</td><td>88,687</td><td>87,011</td><td>1.9%</td><td>87,011</td><td>87,319</td><td>-0.4%</td></tr><tr><td>Florida</td><td>91,585</td><td>90,993</td><td>0.7%</td><td>90,993</td><td>95,795</td><td>-5.0%</td></tr><tr><td>Illinois</td><td>50,735</td><td>50,398</td><td>0.7%</td><td>50,398</td><td>54,027</td><td>-6.7%</td></tr><tr><td>Washington</td><td>54,411</td><td>56,265</td><td>-3.3%</td><td>56,265</td><td>60,061</td><td>-6.3%</td></tr><tr><td>Georgia</td><td>31,804</td><td>32,400</td><td>-1.8%</td><td>32,400</td><td>34,877</td><td>-7.1%</td></tr><tr><td>All other states</td><td>370,009</td><td>364,895</td><td>1.4%</td><td>364,895</td><td>373,352</td><td>-2.3%</td></tr><tr><td>Total net operating income</td><td>$960,286</td><td>$959,297</td><td>0.1%</td><td>$959,297</td><td>$995,682</td><td>-3.7%</td></tr><tr><td>Weighted average occupancy:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Southern California</td><td>91.1%</td><td>89.8%</td><td>1.4%</td><td>89.8%</td><td>90.0%</td><td>-0.2%</td></tr><tr><td>Northern California</td><td>91.0%</td><td>88.9%</td><td>2.4%</td><td>88.9%</td><td>89.8%</td><td>-1.0%</td></tr><tr><td>Texas</td><td>89.5%</td><td>88.9%</td><td>0.7%</td><td>88.9%</td><td>90.4%</td><td>-1.7%</td></tr><tr><td>Florida</td><td>89.5%</td><td>88.6%</td><td>1.0%</td><td>88.6%</td><td>89.0%</td><td>-0.4%</td></tr><tr><td>Illinois</td><td>89.3%</td><td>88.0%</td><td>1.5%</td><td>88.0%</td><td>88.6%</td><td>-0.7%</td></tr><tr><td>Washington</td><td>90.0%</td><td>88.9%</td><td>1.2%</td><td>88.9%</td><td>89.8%</td><td>-1.0%</td></tr><tr><td>Georgia</td><td>88.4%</td><td>87.4%</td><td>1.1%</td><td>87.4%</td><td>88.7%</td><td>-1.5%</td></tr><tr><td>All other states</td><td>89.7%</td><td>88.7%</td><td>1.1%</td><td>88.7%</td><td>89.2%</td><td>-0.6%</td></tr><tr><td>Total weighted average occupancy</td><td>89.8%</td><td>88.7%</td><td>1.2%</td><td>88.7%</td><td>89.5%</td><td>-0.9%</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td>Unsecured debt</td><td>Secured debt</td><td>Total</td></tr><tr><td>2011</td><td>$103,532</td><td>$30,243</td><td>$133,775</td></tr><tr><td>2012</td><td>-</td><td>70,761</td><td>70,761</td></tr><tr><td>2013</td><td>186,460</td><td>79,123</td><td>265,583</td></tr><tr><td>2014</td><td>-</td><td>49,111</td><td>49,111</td></tr><tr><td>2015</td><td>-</td><td>29,133</td><td>29,133</td></tr><tr><td>Thereafter</td><td>-</td><td>20,054</td><td>20,054</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>$289,992</td><td>$278,425</td><td>$568,417</td></tr></table>

Question: What's the growth rate of Texas (230 facilities) in 2010?
Answer: 0.01128
Reasoning program: subtract(142515,140926), divide(#0,140926)