This is a UAAR case study.

Transcription

1 File No. # This is a UR case study. Typical pages for an agricultural appraisal are included. Detail page follows some the pages. These include notes to help explain some the functionality something on the page. You may find typos; sometimes they are intentional in order to demonstrate some aspect the program. The rest the time...we stand corrected. There is a User Manual on our website Help page that is a companion to this document. If you have questions, we want you to feel welcome to contact us or comments@uaar.net 1

2 UR Quick Start Form 6-12 Months 6-12 Months : Exposure Time: Marketing Time: Zip Code: Property Code #: FMC Comd'ity Gp: Primary Land Type: Primary Commodity: James Wilson RR 1 Box 11 SD Pennington 12 ESE Plaino griculture "s if" Vacant griculture "s Improved" County griculture OwnerOccupant: Property ddress: StateCounty: Property Location: Highest & Best Use: Zoning: Economic Sized Unit Unit Type: Supplementaldd-On Unit FEM Community # FEM Map# FEM ZoneDate: ll Legal Description: SEC 16 TWP 1N RGE 12E Estimate market value rights held by Purpose Report: UseIntended User(s): Financial Planning. Fee simple subject to easements and reservations record. Rights ppraised: Value Definition: N: Use "ppraisal" or leave blank. ssignment: Report Type: Summary Subject Land Types Land Use Deeded Unit Type Unit Size Ratios Date Inspection: D Crop Eff. Date ppraisal: D Crop B MeadowHay Pasture Pasture B RoadsWaste Total Deeded No ttached ttached Sales Comparison nalysis Units Note: Use Soil or Ranch Worksheets to calculate Eff. Units. 64. Unit Type: Effective Unit Size: Time djustment Preferences Rate Change Periods uto Calculate Simple nnual Compound Monthly Manual Calculate. Total Units Cropland Hay Crops Subject Improvements Type House Garage Shop Bins Size 1, , 3, Construction Qlty Foundation Ro Floor Frame Frame Metal Span Metal Mixed CC CC CC G CC CC CC CC Metal Metal Metal Metal Exterior Siding Siding Metal Metal ct. Eff. Rem. Conge ge Life formity Utility Cond G G G You can multiselect across these cells to do a quick delete! lso works on some other grids too. Sales Record # #1 #2 ics.1 ics.2 Cost pproach: ics.6 ics.7 Income pproach: ics.6 ics.7 Sales pproach: #3 ics.3 ics.8 ics.8 Database Sales Selection #4 #5 #6 ics.4 ics.9 ics.9 #7 #8 #9 #1 ics.5 ics.1 ics.1 2

3 File No. # Data nalysis - Prior to Beginning ppraisal The "UR Quickstart" page should be included with every appraisal. Subject data etc used elsewhere in the report are transferred from this page. utomatic calculations will not work properly if the QS page is not correctly completed. Double clicking on the "yellow header bar" for a page will open a dialog box with options for the page to be "included in the Table Contents" andor printed as part the report package. lternatively, use the Properties dialog box. Worksheets are generally designed to display data to support the appraiser's conclusions. In most cases, calculated data do not transfer out a worksheet. The appraiser keys in most data for worksheets. Order Impvts - Property Rights Sold and Terms & Conditions a sale are analyzed in the first portion the sale sheet in DataLog. gware"considers" the land next with the residual going to the improvements (SFMR methodology). The approaches used in ClickFORMs are used to adjust for land, improvements, and time. The data analysis section between this page and the "Cover " are parts the NLYSIS sales data. These pages may or may not be included in a normal appraisal -- or in a different location, depending on the appraiser's style and the needs the client. The "Ratio Worksheet" is intended to quantify the relationships between the various production categories. The appraiser should reconcile the relationships between "sales" (column 1), "productivity" (column 2), and "rentsleases" (column 3) to determine which ratios apply to the data set. Select an array land types that describes an entire county, market area, or portion the state since this will be your "main" data base. Clones the data base can be made and edited; however, your main set sales data should have the same "array" land types. Once the land categories and ratios are identified, pairings "unimproved" land sales or the land portion improved sales can be completed to quantify adjustments for various factors found or thought to be present in the market. Land Ratios - are based on puritan sales data. pproaches use the acre value, NOT the ratio itself. DataLog needs the ratios in order to perform calculations. The first LND row the land table should be a land type that is common to the area; it is used as the standard by which others are compared and so is assigned a ratio 1. The ratios are set to reflect market values at the time the sale and should be periodically evaluated to ensure accuracy. The exception for the first land row designation is found with UCRR. Not all sales will have all land types for a given land list. This is OK because a future subject might have acreage for that particular land type. The land list reflects all potential land types for the given market whether or not they all apply for a given sale. The "Time Trend Worksheet" is a summary "resales" or sales where the values allocated to the same land categories are compared for the change in prices over time. Simply pull "resales" into the grid, or place an older sale for similar land onto a more current sale and the form will calculate the change in prices over time. The "Land Table Worksheet" is primarily for information only. The data does not transfer anywhere, but it is included for the appraiser to estimate the capacity various production categories. Soils could also be used rather than production categories. The object in this example was to calculate livestock carrying capacity in total UMs. ny other unit capacity could be used. few acronyms used in gware stware and throughout this document: REL - Remaining Economic Life CEV - Cash Equivalent Value GRM - Gross Rent Multiplier SC - Sales Comparison pproach RCN - Replacement Cost New GIM - Gross Income Multiplier QS - Quickstart page WS - Worksheet C - Cost pproach DOM - Days on Market 3

4 File No. # RTIO NLYSES WORKSHEET Land Use 1. D Crop 2. D Crop B 3. MeadowHay 4. Pasture 5. Pasture B 6. RoadsWaste Sales Unit Productivity Units RentsLeases Unit Conclusion Reconciliation: Most emphasis placed on sales for this analysis. Productivity and rent levels provide strong support for the ratios applied. INSTRUCTOR NOTES: The "Ratio Worksheet" is intended to quantify the relationships between the various production categories. The appraiser should reconcile the relationships between "sales" (column 1), "productivity" (column 2), and "rentsleases" (column 3) to determine which ratios apply to the data set. Select an array land types that describes an entire county, market area, or portion the state since this will be your "main" data base. Clones the data base can be made and edited; however, your main set sales data should have the same "array" land types. Once the land categories and ratios are identified, pairings "unimproved" land sales or the land portion improved sales can be completed to quantify adjustments for various factors found or thought to be present in the market. Land Ratios - are based on puritan sales data. pproaches use the acre value, NOT the ratio itself. DataLog needs the ratios in order to perform calculations. 4

5 File No. # TIME TREND NLYSIS WORKSHEET Compound Calculation nnual Periods Monthly Periods uto-calculate Periods Straight Line Calculation Manually Calculate Periods Time Trend nalysis Current DB Rec. No. Current CEVcre ics.1 ics.2 ics.3 ics.4 ics.5 ics.6 ics.7 ics.8 ics.9 ics Current Prior Sale Date DB Rec. No Prior CEVcre Prior Sale Date Periods Pull sales into first column. Rate Change ppraiser concludes a percentage. Conclusion 1month Comments The rates from the improved and unimproved sales are supporting an increase near 1month. The appraiser concludes the final percentage and uses it for the Cost pproach Time djustment WS. This WS shows how land values for resales change over time; usually on a monthly basis, but not always. There is an Evernote that shows the formula for the Rate Change calculation. Comments should support the appraiser's concluded rate. Sales can be transferred in either with index number or sale number. In the sales above, 1-1 and 11-2 are the same sales, they were just transferred in by two different methods. 5

6 File No. # LND TBLE ND CPCITY ESTIMTE WORKSHEET Sale llocation Method Ratio nalysis Historic llocation Ratio Crop or Land Use Lease c D Crop c D Crop B c MeadowHay Pasture Pasture B RoadsWaste Crop Lease 82 Us UMs Deeded Totals Unit Type 64. Units Capacity Index Capacity The "Land Table Worksheet" is primarily for information only. The data does not transfer anywhere, but it is included for the appraiser to estimate the capacity various production categories. Soils could also be used rather than production categories. The object in this example was to calculate livestock carrying capacity in total UMs. ny other unit capacity could be used. 6

7 Land nalysis (Land-Mix djustment for Sales 1-4) djust each sale to the subject's land mix (land adjustment) using unimproved sales. This page allows for a "quantitative land adjustment" only. This Land nalysis is for use in the Pairing djustment Summary Unimproved Sale #1 Land Use Sale D Crop D Crop B MeadowHay Pasture Pasture B RoadsWaste d1 cre This value transfers to the Summary page. Pairing Land djustment Sale Unit Type Sale Units Unit Subj. cre Subj. Units Unit Total ,497 22,8 9,975 28,5 26, ,992 Sale Land Contrib. 317,2. = Total d Unimproved Sale #2 Pairing Land djustment Land Use Sale cre Sale Unit Type Sale Units Unit Subj. cre Subj. Units D Crop D Crop B MeadowHay Pasture Pasture B RoadsWaste , Sale Land Contrib. 14, = Total Total 64. = Unit Total 161,662 18,476 8,83 23,95 21, = Unit , ,368 2,42 8,769 25, 23,48 2,. = ,563 Sale Land Contrib. 757,51. Total d Unimproved Sale #4 Pairing Land djustment Land Use Sale cre Sale Unit Type Sale Units Unit Subj. cre Subj. Units D Crop D Crop B MeadowHay Pasture Pasture B RoadsWaste Unit ,28 Sale Land Contrib. 237,999. = Total d Unimproved Sale #3 Pairing Land djustment Land Use Sale cre Sale Unit Type Sale Units Unit Subj. cre Subj. Units D Crop D Crop B MeadowHay Pasture Pasture B RoadsWaste 64. = Total 192,5 22, 9,625 27,5 25,3 64. =

8 File No. # Detail: Land nalysis (Sales 1-4) There are pages available for using Units instead.

9 Land nalysis (Land-Mix djustment for Sales 5-8) djust each sale to the subject's land mix (land adjustment) using unimproved sales. This page allows for a "quantitative land adjustment" only. This Land nalysis is for use in the Pairing djustment Summary Unimproved Sale #5 Land Use Sale D Crop D Crop B MeadowHay Pasture Pasture B RoadsWaste d5 cre Pairing Land djustment Sale Unit Type Sale Units Unit Subj. cre Subj. Units Sale Land Contrib. Unimproved Sale #7 Land Use Sale 64. = Unit cre = Total. Pairing Land djustment Sale Unit Type Sale Units Unit Subj. cre Subj. Units 64. = Unit cre = Total. Pairing Land djustment Sale Unit Type Sale Units Unit Subj. cre Subj. Units Sale Land Contrib. 64. = Unit = Total Total. Total D Crop D Crop B MeadowHay Pasture Pasture B RoadsWaste D Crop D Crop B MeadowHay Pasture Pasture B RoadsWaste Sale Land Contrib. Unimproved Sale #8 Land Use Sale Total 113,631 12,987 5,682 16,233 14, ,467 Sale Land Contrib. 142,85. = Total. Unimproved Sale #6 Pairing Land djustment Land Use Sale cre Sale Unit Type Sale Units Unit Subj. cre Subj. Units D Crop D Crop B MeadowHay Pasture Pasture B RoadsWaste Unit Total 64. = 8.

10 Pairing djustment Summary (1-5) Time Sale Summary Insert the "Land djusted" prices for each sale. t this point in the process, the sales and the subject are equal with regard to land mix or land components. View data for pairings and adjustment conclusions. Vacant andor improved sales should be considered. d Cash Good Good Sale #1 Sale Date Size Financing Location ccess cre Sale Price Land djustment Land djusted Price uto Calc Periods Manually Calc Periods Eff ppraisal Date Mo. Periods Yr. Smpl Cmp Rate Time djustment Time dj. Price d Cash Poor Good Sale #2 d3 35 2,. Cash Good Good Sale #3 d Cash Good Good d Cash Poor Poor Sale #4 Sale #5 TIME DJUSTMENTS The individual Land djustment values (seen above) flow into this page from the nalysis pages The adjustments below are intended to be used in the Sales Comparison pproach only. Other Location djust. Conclude: djustment Subtotal Other Size Compare Sale # Compare Sale # Compare Sale # Conclude: = = = difference difference difference with Sale # with Sale # with Sale # = = = difference difference difference 95. ccess Other djust. djustment Subtotal djust Compare Sale # Compare Sale # Compare Sale # Conclude: with Sale # with Sale # with Sale # = = = difference difference difference 15. djustment Subtotal djust. Other 2 with Sale # with Sale # with Sale # Compare Sale # Compare Sale # Compare Sale # Compare Sale # Compare Sale # Compare Sale # Conclude: djustment Subtotal with Sale # with Sale # with Sale # = = = difference difference difference Comments and Conclusions: See the Evernote about this page for explanation how numbers drop in. The Concluded djustment amounts are the key data from this page. Must use the Land nalysis pages for data; not the Sale djustment pages. 9

11 File No. # Detail: Pairing Summary (Sales 1-5) These color-coded boxes indicate how the data flow into the fields.

12 File No. # Data nalysis Finished - Begin ppraisal Report The "DT NLYSIS" portion the demonstration has been completed. gain, the appraiser may elect to include all, parts, or none the prior information and analysis. They may also elect to place the pages in a different part the appraisal (Forms rrange Forms). The pages to follow could be viewed as a "typical report package" -- if such a thing exists. This is only a "suggested" setup. The appraiser has the full capability to modify or construct a report from scratch. The presentation here is for illustrative purposes only. It is the appraiser's responsibility to provide sufficient data, analysis, and support for the estimate value presented for the client. The UR report processor will accept a variety comment pages, exhibit pages, etc., so that the report can be several hundred pages long --- or, the report can be tailored to the bare minimum. The appraiser can copy from a word processing document and paste into the various comment pages. lso, scanned maps and exhibits can be imported as images into the Exhibit or Photo pages. Standard definition pages, assumptionslimiting conditions pages, etc., can be selected or customized to the appraiser's needs. Suggestions: For condemnation assignments, complete the "before" report, then clone the original report for the "after" report and change the subject description in the "after" condition and add the summary or allocation taking and damages to the second report. In the demonstration report included in this manual, five unimproved and five improved sales were used to illustrate the mechanics the form. Only simple and abbreviated examples are presented to assist the appraiser to understand the intent the stware mechanics. For a comprehensive explanation the calculations included in the various approaches, please consider the following courses: merican Society Farm Managers and Rural ppraisers -2 merican Society Farm Managers and Rural ppraisers -3 1

13 File No. Uniform Rural ppraisal Report Complete ppraisal ssignment in Summary Format 64 Plaino, SD Prepared For: UR Demo Report PO Box 138 Piedmont, SD Intended User: UR Class Demo Prepared By: gware, R, MI gware, Inc. PO Box 138 Piedmont, SD Date Prepared: Revised: Sep 211 (196)

14 File No. Table Contents Title This is a UR case study. Land Table WorkSheet Part I - Summary Map ddendum Photos Report Summary Detail: Report Summary Value Definition rea Description Part II - Subject Information Subject Land Description Subject Improvements Subject History and Use Part III - djustment Summary Part IV - Valuation Cost pproach Detail: Cost pproach Improvements Detail: Improvement Contribution (1-1) Cost ppr Time djustment Detail: C-T-WS Depreciation nalysis Depreciation Diagram Income pproach Detail: Income pproach Sales Comparison pproach Detail: Sales Comparison pproach Reconciliation Limiting Conditions Certification Part V - ddenda Excel Example Sales djustment 1 Comments - Sales djustment s Detail: Sales djustment 1 Sale # 1 Sale # 2 Sale # 3 Sale # 4 Sale # 5 Sale # 6 Sale # 7 Sale # 8 Sale # 9 Sale # 1 #

15 File No. Table Contents Continued Title Sale CS.2 # 51

16 File No. #

17 File No. # Map ddendum COMP 1 SUBJECT CO M P2 13

18 BOVE: RIGHT: LEFT: 14

19 Uniform gricultural ppraisal Report James Wilson RR 1 Box 11 SD Pennington 12 ESE Plaino griculture "s If" Vacant griculture "s Improved" County griculture Property Identification OwnerOccupant: Property ddress: StateCounty: Property Location: Highest & Best Use: Total Deeded : Effective Unit Size: Zip Code: Property Code #: FMC Comd'ity Gp: Primary Land Type: Primary Commodity: Cropland Hay Crops Zoning: Economic Sized Unit Unit Type: Supplementaldd-On Unit No FEM Community # FEM Map # FEM ZoneDate: ll Legal Description: SEC 16 TWP 1N RNG 12E ttached Estimate market value rights held by Purpose Report: UseIntended User(s): Financial Planning. Fee simple subject to easements and reservations record. Rights ppraised: Value Definition: ttached N: Use "ppraisal" or leave blank. Report Type: Summary ssignment: Extent ProcessScope Work: I have appraised land in the area on several occasions over the last 1-15 years and viewed the subject on the ground with Mr. Wilson. I have taken aerial photos sales in the same area since For this assignment, I contacted Plaino Water Rights Consultants, local water commissioners, other appraisers, Farm Credit, and researched records in several counties for sales with similar characteristics as those exhibited on the property appraised. I have collected, verified, analyzed, and photographed over 35 sales for this project that were ultimately included in the BSE DT BOOK (Book #2); however, only sales 1-5 (unimproved) and sales 7-11 (improved) were documented for this report. Summary Facts and Conclusions 196 Date Inspection: 196 Effective Date ppraisal: Value Indication - Cost pproach: - Income pproach: - Sales Comparison pproach: Opinion Value: (Estimated Marketing Time ppraisal Report Summary Cost Repairs: 6-12 months ) Cost dditions: llocation: Land: Land Improvements: Structural Improvement Contribution: Non-Realty Items: Leased Fee Value (Remaining term encumbrance Leasehold Value: 275, 135, ) Overall Value: Cash Rent Income and Other Data Summary: ( ) 19, Income Multiplier Expense Ratio 3.12 Overall Cap Rate: rea-regional-market rea Data and Trends: bove vg. vg. Below vg. Value Trend Sales ctivity Trend Property Compatability Effective Purchase Power Demand Development Potential Desirability 428, 44, 41, 41, Share OwnerOperator Income Estimate: Expense Estimate: Net Property Income: cre cre cre ( 67 ( ( 33 ( ( ( ( 1 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) FMC Suppl. ttached (unit) (unit) (unit) Subject Property Rating: N bove vg. Location Soil QualityProductivity Improvement Rating Compatibility Rentability Market ppeal Overall Property Rating vg. Below vg. N 15

20 File No. # Detail: Report Summary

21 MRKET VLUE DEFINITION Regulations published by federal regulatory agencies pursuant to title I the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement ct (FIRRE) The most probable price which a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller each acting prudently and knowledgeably, and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition is the consummation a sale as a specified date and the passing title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby: Buyer and seller are typically motivated; Both parties are well informed or well advised, and acting in what they consider their best interests; reasonable time is allowed for exposure on the open market; Payment is made in terms cash in United States dollars or in terms financial arrangements comparable thereto; and The price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale. Other: EPOSURE ND MRKETING TIME ESTIMTES Market value (see above definition) conclusion and the costs and other estimates used in arriving at conclusion value is as the date the appraisal. Because markets upon which these estimates and conclusions are based upon are dynamic in nature, they are subject to change over time. Further, the report and value conclusion is subject to change if future physical, financial, or other conditions differ from conditions as the date appraisal In applying the market value definition to this appraisal, a reasonable exposure time months has been estimated. Exposure time is the estimated length time the property interest being appraised would have been fered in the market prior to the hypothetical consummation a sale at market value on the effective date the appraisal; exposure time is always presumed to precede the effective date the appraisal. Marketing time, however, is an estimate the amount time it takes to sell a property interest at the market value conclusion during the period after the effective date the appraisal. n estimate marketing time is not intended to be a prediction a date sale. It is inappropriate to assume that the value as the effective date appraisal remains stable during a marketing period. dditionally, the appraiser(s) have considered market factors external to this appraisal report and have concluded that a reasonable marketing 6-12 time for the property is months. Comments: 16

22 rea-regional Boundary: rea with 1 miles Plaino, consisting parts YY, ZZ, and WW counties. Major Commodities: Up Market vailability: rea-regional Description bove vg. vg. Unlikely Likely Under Over No Supply Balanced Supply Influence Cropland Units: Livestock Units: Recreational Tracts: (Discuss social, economic, governmental, and environmental forces.) Discuss the pertinent forces affecting value Exposure Time: Specific Market rea Boundaries: Market rea: Type Rural Value Trend Sales ctivity Trend Population Trend Development Trend nalysiscomments: months. (See attached definition and discussion) Name portions YY, ZZ, and WW counties. Suburb Urban Market rea: Up Market rea Description Taking Place N Down Change in Economic Base: From To Forces Value: Below vg. Off Property Employment: Stable Value Trend: Sales ctivity Trend: Population Trend: Employment Trend: Small grains, hay, and livestock. On and Off Property: Stable Down Property Compatability Effective Purchase Power Demand Development Potential Desirability bove vg. vg. Below vg. N (Discuss positive and negative aspects market area.) Discuss pertinent neighborhood factors that have an impact on the subject's value... 17

23 File No. #

24 Property Description: (Location, use and physical characteristics) Improved cropland unit typical the area. Location close to Plaino is a positive factor with good access. The majority the property income is generated from 4 acres dry cropland with some livestock grazing on about 24 acres. Stock water is provided from wells and seasonal dams. Domestic water is from a 25 well near the buildings. Cropland quality varies from good to average. The structural improvements are minimal for a property which is 6 cropland. Size is typical for this locale. Overall, this is a quality property in a good location and could be purchased as a stand-alone tract, sold as two parcels (agricultural land and residential homesite), or acquired as a supplemental tract to add to other units in the area. Land Use Subject Land Description D Crop D Crop B MeadowHay Pasture Pasture B RoadsWaste Total Deeded Deeded Unit Type Total Units Unit Size. ( 54.7) 7.8) ( 3.9) ( ( 15.6) ( 18.).) (.) (.) (.) (.) ( ( 1 ) Subject Description: Location Legal ccess Physical ccess Contiguity ShapeEase Mgt. dequacy Utilities Services Rentability Compatibility Market ppeal FEM ZoneDate Building Location Comments Cropland production has been mostly small grains with some cash Land Improvements: wheat averaging about 4 bushels per acre. The pasture land is fenced separately Domestic Water with a capacity.6 UMsacre and.5 UMsacre, respectively for each category. Livestock Water The meadowhay is producing about 1.5 UMsacre and can be harvested for hay in Interior Roads most years, depending on livestock management. Drainage No NENE 16 bove Below vg. vg. vg. N Undulat- Roll- SlopLevel ing ing ing Topography: No Water Rights: Yes Supplement ttached No Mineral Rights: Yes Supplement ttached Comments: None known that would measurably affect value. bove Below vg. vg. vg. N D Crop D Crop B MeadowHay Pasture Pasture B RoadsWaste Overall Topography Soils Description: Silty clay loams Soil QualityProduction: bove vg. vg. Below vg. N Supplement ttached 3 11 ' to 115 ' Elevation 2 Climatic: " nnual Precipitation Frost-Free Days WD Water Coop Electric Septic Sewer LP UG Telephone Utilities: Gas Distance To: Schools Hospital Markets Major Hwy. Service Center None known that would be rated "atypical" for the EasementsEncroachments: (Conservation, Utility, Preservation, etc.) market. Hazards and Detriments: None known outside the characteristics and factors represented by the sales selected for comparison purposes. 18

25 Type House Garage Shop Bins Subject Improvement Description Size 1, , 3, Construction Qlty Foundation Ro Floor Frame Frame Metal Span Metal Mixed CC CC CC G CC CC CC CC Metal Metal Metal Metal Exterior ct. Eff. Rem. Conge ge Life formity Utility Cond. Siding Siding Metal Metal G G G Improvement Comments: (Discuss andor expand any items affecting value structure-by-structure, if necessary) The house and garage are typical the market and could be sold separately given the positive location near Plaino. The shop and bins were constructed about 9-12 years ago and the shop is in good condition. INSTRUCTOR NOTE: The fields in the grid autill from the QS page. Paved drive to the house, garage, and shop from State Highway 33. There is a grove trees on the north and west sides the farmstead. The septic system was replaced about two years ago and the underground phone was recently upgraded. bove vg. Site Improvements: Overall Structural Balance Overall Structural Condition Improvement Rating Overall Property Rating Overall Building REL 2-3 vg. Below vg. N 19 years

26 Years RecordingReference Zoning History Owner Taxes Ownership Longer Than Date Previous: Present: Price Paid Terms Currently: Buyer: Optioned Under Contract Currently Listed Contract Price: Listing Price: Listing Date: County griculture Current Zoning: Zoning Conformity: Yes No Unlikely Zoning Change: Probable To: Comments: While there is some potential for rural residential uses along the main arteries to Plaino, growth is very limited to stable. Further there are 4-5 miles vacant with only spot development to uses higher than agriculture along Highway 33. Tax Basis: gricultural ssessment Year Land Building(s) Parcel #: Total ssessed Value , 15, Forecast: Current Tax EstimatedStabilized 64. Or ( ) = 375, Trend: Comments: 3,5 3,2 5. acre Up Down Stable Taxes moving up gradually and estimated at 3,2 for 26. Highest & Best Use is defined as that reasonable and probable use that supports the highest present value, as defined, as the effective date the appraisal. lternatively, that use, from among reasonably probable and legally alternative uses, found to be physically possible, appropriately supported, financially feasible, and which results in the highest land value. Highest & Best Use nalysis nalysis: (Discuss legally permissible, physically possible, financially feasible, and maximally productive uses) There are no legal restraints on the subject to my knowledge -- either zoning or private deed restrictions. The rough terrain along the seasonal drainages limits the property's ultimate usage to some degree. Financially, there are no limitations relating to competition and demand for higher uses, i.e., properties are being purchased for expansion, rural homesites, etc. Commercial and industrial uses are confined to the populated areas like Plaino. There are spot commercial types on the major highways closer to the population centers; however, there are no commercial uses within several miles the subject. Thus, lacking competition for higher uses, the most likely financially feasible and maximally productive use the property is for mixed agricultural and spot rural residential uses. Highest and Best Use: "s if" Vacant griculture "s Improved" griculture Discussion: The improvements are similar to those found on adjacent properties for agricultural uses and as isolated rural Value Methods residences on small acreages. buyer vacant land would construct somewhat similar improvements; thus, the subject's structures contribute value. Cost pproach Income pproach Valuation Methods: (Explain and support exclusion one or more approaches) Sales Comparison pproach 2

27 File No. #

28 File No. #

29 Cost pproach (Sales 1-5) Item: Sale #1 ics.1 Sale #2 ics.2 Sale #3 Sale Land llocation Doreland Grantor Bier Grantee Buyer Source 35 Date 317,2 CEV Price 64. Deeded 3S Smalltown Location Historic llocation Time djusted llocation D Crop llocated Value ( 1 ) D Crop B llocated Value ( 8 ) MeadowHay llocated Value ( 7 ) Pasture llocated Value ( 5 ) Pasture B llocated Value ( 4 ) RoadsWaste llocated Value ( Karman Wilson Buyer ,5 2,. S Smalltown Manulas Kee-Nan Buyer 45 14,5 32. E Smalltown ) llocated Value ( ) llocated Value ( ) D Crop D Crop B MeadowHay Pasture Pasture B RoadsWaste Total : cre Unit Type Total Units: Unit Size llocated Value ( ) 1, ics.5 Schnelle Ghrambs Buyer ,85 6. W Smalltown ) llocated Value ( Land Use Subject Land Estimate Wenkus Miles BuyerSeller , 6. NW Smalltown ics.3 Sale #4 ics.4 Sale #5 Unit Total 23,. 23,75. 7, ,. 26, ,825. Cost pproach Summary: (Check one the following methods applicable to the subject and sale analyses). Improvement Contribution Indication gelife Depreciation Improvement Contribution Indication 137,979 Lump Sum Depreciation: Improvement Contribution Breakdown Depreciation: Breakdown Depreciation: Cost Estimate OTHER COST PPROCH INDICTION (Land & Improvements) 428, 21

30 File No. # Detail: Cost pproach

31 Improvement Contribution (1-1) IMPROVEMENT Type Size ge Remaining Life RCN Unit RCN Unit Contribution Total Depreciation Total Depreciation House 1, , ,8 4 Garage , ,6 4 Shop 3, , , Bins 3, ,.67 9,9 33 Physical Physical Depreciation 4 44,8 67,2 4 7,6 11, ,125 39, ,9 2,1 Functional Obsolescence RCN Rem. fter Phys.Funct. Depr. 67,2 11,34 39,375 2,1 External External Obsolescence Improvement Contribution 67,2 11,34 39,375 2, RCN Rem. fter Phys. Depr. 5 Cost pproach Improvements Functional IMPROVEMENT 1 Type Size ge Remaining Life RCN Unit RCN Unit Contribution Total Depreciation Total Depreciation Physical Physical Depreciation RCN Rem. fter Phys. Depr. Functional Functional Obsolescence RCN Rem. fter Phys.Funct. Depr. External External Obsolescence gelife Depreciation Improvement Contribution Overall Contribution (ll Improvements) Total RCN 137, ,34 428, Cost pproach Est. 32 Improvement Contribution 75,361 Total Total 35 Total Total Physical Depreciation Functional Obsolescence Cost: Replacement Total Total External Obsolescence Reproduction Total Total 75, Depreciation 22

32 File No. # Detail: Improvement Contribution (1-1)

33 Cost pproach Time djustment Worksheet Rate Change: Simple Compound Periods: uto Calc Periods Manually Calc Periods nnual Monthly SLE No.: Date Sale Eff. Date ppraisal Periods, Rate D Crop Time djusted Value D Crop B Time djusted Value MeadowHay Time djusted Value Pasture Time djusted Value Pasture B Time djusted Value RoadsWaste Time djusted Value Time djusted Value Time djusted Value Time djusted Value Time djusted Value SLE No.: Date Sale 16 Eff. Date ppraisal Periods, Rate D Crop Time djusted Value D Crop B Time djusted Value MeadowHay Time djusted Value Pasture Time djusted Value Pasture B Time djusted Value RoadsWaste Time djusted Value Time djusted Value Time djusted Value Time djusted Value Time djusted Value 23

34 File No. # Detail: C-T-WS

35 Improvement bstraction Depreciation nalysis Item: CEV Price Land Total Improvement Contribution Improvement Price Replacement Cost Reproduction Cost Depreciation nalysis 6 Mauerle Brown Cash SE Smalltown 7 State Bank Bubbiack Cash SE Smalltown Sale #1 Grantor Grantee Date Size Financing Location 373,5 297,82 75, Haggart Miller 125 1,9 Cash W Smalltown Sale #2 329,5 238,476 91, State Bank Moe Cash SE Smalltown Sale #3 825,35 76, , Klapp Nicholas Cash NW Smalltown Sale #4 18,1 12,85 77, Sale #5 269,85 1, , RCN Improvements: Improvement Contribution Total Depreciation Depreciation RCN 171,6 75, ,695 91, ,26 118, ,4 77, ,6 115,961 6 Depreciation llocation: RCN Improvements: Less: Physical: 171,6 ( 56 ) 96,96 Physical Depreciated RCN: Less: Functional: ( 28,695 ( 38 ) 79,34 346,26 ( 66 ) 228,2 125,4 ( 38 ) 47,515 ) 75,54 129,391 ( ) 117,728 ( ) ( ) 77,525 ( ) 117,728 ( ) ( ) 77,525 ( ) 77, ,84 Physical and Functional Depreciated RCN: Less: External: ( ) 75,54 129,391 ( ) Improvement Contribution 75,54 129, , ,6 ( 6 ) 173,76 115,84 115,84 nalysis and Comments: The sales show overall rates depreciation from 38 to 66. The subject's building are newer Depreciation Discussion and would fall at the lower end the range. The subj improvement page shows the subject's depreciation rate at a rate which is supported by the improved sales above given the superior overall condition. 24

36

37 Income pproach Basis Income Estimate: Cash Share Unit Income Source Gross Income Estimate Cash Rent Units Measure 64. Improvements Included in Land Rent Expenses Stabilized Yield Rent: FMC Total Production See ttached CashShareOwner's Income Stabilized Unit Gross Income Share 3. 19,2 1 mo., yr. Income 19,2 19,2 Stabilized Gross Income = (Typical area rental terms and conditions) Cash leases found in the surrounding area are attached in ddenda #. Most cash leases vary from 3-5 years with strong competition from several adjacent operators. Comments: Expense Items: Cap Rate Info OwnerOperator Real Estate Tax Insurance Maintenance Management Sale Date ics.6 ics.7 ics.8 ics.9 ics dditional Expenses: 3,2 1,75 8 1,79 Size , dditional Expenses: Impvt dditional Expenses: Total Expenses = Gross Income Exp. Ratio 18,29 15,95 39,9 8,48 12, ,63 ( ) Net Income CEV Price 12,212 1,277 24,413 4,93 7,76 373,5 329,5 825,35 18,1 269,85 Cap Rate nalysiscomments: The cap rates vary from 2.62 to 3.27 while the expense ratios varied from to The subject's expenses at is near low-end. I have applied a 3.12 rate stressing Sale 7 -- the sale most similar in size, improvement, and expense ratio. Total Deeded : 64. Gross Income: 19,2 = 3. 6,63 ) = 1.32 Expenses: ( Net Income: 12,597 = cre cre cre Net Income Cap Rate 12, = Indicated Value 43,75 = Income pproach Indication = 44, 25

38 File No. # Detail: Income pproach If the user wants to include Stabilized Yield as part the calculations, do not check the Cash Basis checkbox.

39 Sales Comparison pproach (1-5) Sale Data Sale Data Subject Grantor (Seller) Grantee (Buyer) Source Date Eff Unit SizeUnit Sale Price Finance djusted CEV Price Multiplier Expense Ratio Sale #1 ics.6 Mauerle Brown Buyer Eff ,5 Cash 373, Sale #2 ics.7 Sale #3 ics.8 State Bank Bubbiack Buyer ,5 Cash 329, Haggart Miller Realtor 125 1,9 851,15 Cash 825, Sale #4 ics.9 Sale #5 ics.1 State Bank Moe Buyer ,1 Klapp Nicholas Buyer ,85 Cash Cash 18, , The ppraiser has cited sales similar property to the subject and considered these in the market analysis. The description below includes a dollar adjustment reflecting market reaction to those items significant variation between the subject and the sales documented. When significant items are superior to the property appraised, a negative adjustment is applied. If the item is inferior, a positive adjustment is applied. Thus, each sale is adjusted for the measurable dissimilarities and each sale producing a separate value indication. The indications from each sale are then reconciled into one indication value for this approach. CEV Price Land djustment Impvt. djustment djusted Price Yr Smpl uto Sale Comparison Location Mo Periods Cmp Rate Man Time djustment Time dj. Price Good djustment 64 Size djustment ccess djustment Good LND ND IMPROVEMENT DJUSTMENTS TIME DJUSTMENTS OTHER DJUSTMENTS Good Poor Good Good Good Good Good Poor Good Poor djustment djustment Net djustments DJUSTED PRICE nalysiscomments: (Discuss positive and negative aspects each sale as they affect value) User must enter the T rate on this page; it does NOT transfer in from anywhere else. Multiplier Basis - meant as a sort check the Income pproach value; the number comes in from the I page and is based on net or gross income data. GRM (gross rent multiplier) is most commonly used. The multiple is derived from the values above that transferred in from the sale sheets. The Impvt djmt values migrate from the Land dj pg. The user sets the Other djustment values based on the pairing adjmnt value conclusion. Sales Comparison pproach Summary: 68. Property Basis (Value Range): to = cre Unit Basis: 21. Multiplier Basis: 19,2. (multiple) = ,6. 43,2. Sales Comparison Indication: 41, 26

40 File No. # Detail: Sales Comparison pproach ** ** **The Value Range comes from the djusted Price numbers.**

41 Summary Reconciliation and Opinion Value Cost pproach 428, Income pproach 44, Sales Comparison pproach 41, nalysis Each pproach and Opinion Value: This portion the report is intended to be "an appraisal" the appraisal where the strengths each approach are reviewed. Discussion & Correlation Values ppraiser explains why a particular approach or data within an appraoch can be relied upon. User enters llocation values. They are derived from info from approaches used in the report and they transfer back to the Report Summary page. The -age numbers are based on contribution to overall value. The Overall Value is a sum the column values above that field. *There is a "trap" for trainees to find with the Overall alue 41, (from the SC). For this project, the value 135, for the Structural Improvement Contribution came from the Cost pproach! But the favored approach in this sample appraisal was the SC--NOT the C! Tsk Tsk! The appraiser keys in the percentages for the llocation section. Total Deeded Units transfers in from the QS page. llocation Value Opinion Of Value (Estimated Marketing Time Cost Repairs Cost dditions llocation: (Total Deeded Units: 6-12 months, see attached) 64. ) Land: Land Improvements: Structural Improvement Contribution: Value Estimate Non-Realty Items: Value Personal Property (local market basis) Value Other Non-Realty Interests: Non-Realty Items: Leased Fee Value (Remaining Term Encumbrance ) Leasehold Value Overall Value 275, cre ( 135, 41, 641 ( ( ( cre ( 41, ( cre ( 67 ) ) 33 ) ) ) ) 1 ) 27

42 ssumptions and Limiting Conditions The certification the ppraiser(s) appearing in the appraisal report is subject to the following conditions and to such other specific and limiting conditions as are set forth in the report. 1. The ppraiser(s) assume no responsibility for matters a legal nature affecting the property appraised or the title thereto, nor does the ppraiser(s) render any opinion as to title, which is assumed to be good and marketable. The property is appraised as though under responsible ownership. 2. Sketches in the report may show approximate dimensions and are included only to assist the reader in visualizing the property. The ppraiser(s) have made no survey the property. Drawings andor plats are not represented as an engineer's work product, nor are they provided for legal reference. 3. The ppraiser(s) are not required to give testimony or appear in court because having made the appraisal with reference to the property in question, unless arrangements have been previously made. 4. ny distribution the valuation in the report applies only under the existing program utilization. The separate valuations components must not be used outside this appraisal and are invalid if so used. 5. The ppraiser(s) have, in the process exercising due diligence, requested, reviewed, and considered information provided by the ownership the property and client, and the ppraiser(s) have relied on such information and assumes there are no hidden or unapparent conditions the property, subsoil, or structures, which would render it more or less valuable. The ppraiser(s) assume no responsibility for such conditions, for engineering which might be required to discover such factors, or the cost discovery or correction. 6. While the ppraiser(s) have have not inspected the subject property and have have not considered the information developed in the course such inspection, together with the information provided by the ownership and client, the ppraiser(s) are not qualified to verify or detect the presence hazardous substances by visual inspection or otherwise, nor qualified to determine the effect, if any, known or unknown substances present. Unless otherwise stated, the final value conclusion is based on the subject property being free hazardous waste contaminations, and it is specifically assumed that present and subsequent ownerships will exercise due diligence to ensure that the property does not become otherwise contaminated. 7. Information, estimates, and opinions furnished to the ppraiser(s), and contained in the report, were obtained from sources considered reliable and believed to be true and correct. However, no responsibility for accuracy such items furnished the ppraiser(s) can be assumed by the ppraiser(s). 8. Unless specifically cited, no value has been allocated to mineral rights or deposits. 9. Water requirements and information provided has been relied on and, unless otherwise stated, it is assumed that: a. ll water rights to the property have been secured or perfected, that there are no adverse easements or encumbrances, and the property complies with Bureau Reclamation or other state and federal agencies; b. Irrigation and domestic water and drainage system components, including distribution equipment and piping, are real estate fixtures; c. ny mobile surface piping or equipment essential for water distribution, recovery, or drainage is secured with the title to real estate; and d. Title to all such property conveys with the land. 1. Disclosure the contents this report is governed by applicable law andor by the Bylaws and Regulations the pressional appraisal organization(s) with which the ppraiser(s) are affiliated. 11. Neither all nor any part the report, or copy there, shall be used for any purposes by anyone but the client specified in the report without the written consent the ppraiser. 12. Where the appraisal conclusions are subject to satisfactory completion, repairs, or alterations, the appraisal report and value conclusion are contingent upon completion the improvements in a workmanlike manner consistent with the plans, specifications andor scope work relied upon in the appraisal. 13. creage land types and measurements improvements are based on physical inspection the subject property unless otherwise noted in this appraisal report. 14. ECLUSIONS. The ppraiser(s) considered and used the three independent approaches to value (cost, income, and sales comparison) where applicable in valuing the resources the subject property for determining a final value conclusion. Explanation for the exclusion any the three independent approaches to value in determining a final value conclusion has been disclosed in this report. 15. SCOPE OF WORK RULE. The scope work was developed based on information from the client. This appraisal and report was prepared for the client, at their sole discretion, within the framework the intended use. The use the appraisal and report for any other purpose, or use by any party not identified as an intended user, is beyond the scope work contemplated in the appraisal, and does not create an obligation for the ppraiser. 16. cceptance the report by the client constitutes acceptance all assumptions and limiting conditions contained in the report. 17. Other Contingent and Limiting Conditions: 28

43 ppraiser Certification I certify that, to the best my knowledge and belief: 1. the statements fact contained in this report are true and correct. 2. the reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting conditions, and are my personal, impartial and unbiased pressional analysis, opinions, and conclusions. no 3. I have the specified present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject this report and no I have the specified personal interest with respect to the parties involved. 4. I have performed no the specified services, as an appraiser or in any other capacity, regarding the property that is the subject this report within the three-year period immediately preceding acceptance this assignment. 5. I have no bias with respect to the property that is the subject this report or to the parties involved with this assignment. 6. my engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting predetermined results. 7. my compensation for completing this assignment is not contingent upon the development or reporting a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause the client, the amount the value opinion, the attainment a stipulated result, or the occurrence a subsequent event directly related to the intended use this appraisal. 8. my analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the Uniform Standards Pressional ppraisal Practice. have 9. I have not made a personal inspection the property that is the subject this report. 1. no one certification. the specified persons provided significant real property appraisal assistance to the person signing this This is the 212 updated certification page. Effective Date ppraisal: 196 Opinion Value: 41, ppraiser: Signature: Deborah. Martin Name: License #: Certification #: Property Inspection: Inspection Date: Yes 196 ppraiser has inspected the sales contained herein. No verified analyzed Date Signed: 29

44 File No. #

45 File No. # Excel Example 3

46 Sales Comparison pproach - Land djustment for Sale# 1 djust each sale to the subject's land mix (land adjustment) using unimproved sales. This page allows for a "quantitative land adjustment" only. ics Sales Comparison - Sale #1 Land djustment mt. Land Use Sale cre Sale Unit Type Sale Units Unit Subj. cre D Crop D Crop B MeadowHay Pasture Pasture B RoadsWaste Sale Land Contrib. 297,82. Eff. Unit Size 59. = Total Subj. Unit Unit Total , ,497 22,8 9,975 28,5 26,22 Eff. Unit Size 64. = Sales Comparison pproach - Improvement djustment for Sale# 1 Compare each set sale improvements to the subject improvements making judgments regarding utility and condition. Then arrive at an improvement adjustment for each sale on a per acre or per unit basis. These adjustments are shown on the Sales Comparison Grid. Note: ppraiser must manually enter the Unit for the Subject Improvements -- either individually or as a lump sum. ics.6 Sales Comparison - Sale #1 Sale Impt. UtlCond. Size Unit House Garage Shop F F Bins F F Sale Effective Unit Size: Total Improvement Value = 19.7 Improvement djustment mt. : Contrib. Value Subject Impt. UtlCond. Size Unit 399 House 1,6 35. = 917 Garage = 185 Shop G G 3, 5. = 8567 Bins 3,.4 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 75, Subject Effective Unit Size: Total Improvement Value = Contrib. Value = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 56, 11,34 15, 12, 94,34 Data from this page migrates to the SC page. ppraiser must enter the Unit values or a lump sum Contrib Value for the Subject Impvts. These migrate to the SC pg also. NOTE: THE UNIT VLUES MUST BE ENTERED SEPRTELY FOR ECH DJUSTMENT PGE! THE VLUES SHOULD NOT BE IDENTICL FROM ONE COMP TO THE OTHER! NLYSIS IS HED TO HED, ONE TO ONE!!! 31

47 File No. # Comments - Sales djustment s The appraiser sets the Unit values for the improvements for each sale individually. The Unit should NOT be exactly duplicated for every sale. The numbers are determined individually for each comparison sale. RECONCILITION COMES T THE END FOR THE SC!!!!!!!!!!! NOTE: Some appraisers wrongly believe that it's acceptable practice to set the Unit values once and then duplicate them for all adjustment pages: bsoultely NOT SFMR methodology! gware always incorporates SFMR principles and practices.

48 File No. # Detail: Sales djustment 1

49 Sales Comparison pproach - Land djustment for Sale# 2 djust each sale to the subject's land mix (land adjustment) using unimproved sales. This page allows for a "quantitative land adjustment" only. ics Sales Comparison - Sale #2 Land djustment mt. Land Use Sale cre Sale Unit Type Sale Units Unit Subj. cre D Crop D Crop B MeadowHay Pasture Pasture B RoadsWaste Sale Land Contrib. 238,476. Eff. Unit Size = Total Subj. Units Unit ,275 Total 175,35 2,5 8,775 25,1 23, Eff. Unit Size 64. = Sales Comparison pproach - Improvement djustment for Sale# 2 Compare each set sale improvements to the subject improvements making judgments regarding utility and condition. Then arrive at an improvement adjustment for each sale on a per acre or per unit basis. These adjustments are shown on the Sales Comparison Grid. Note: ppraiser must manually enter the Unit for the Subject Improvements -- either individually or as a lump sum. ics Sales Comparison - Sale #2 Improvement djustment mt. : Sale Impt. UtlCond. Size Unit Contrib. Value Subject Impt. UtlCond. Size Unit Contrib. Value House G G = House 1,6 4. = 64, Garage G G Garage = 14,13 = Shop F F = 5 Shop G G 3, 2.5 = 7,5 Bins P 4 Bins 3,. = = Hanger P 18 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 58 91, ,63 Sale Effective Unit Size: Subject Effective Unit Size: Total Improvement Value = Total Improvement Value = 32

50 Sales Comparison pproach - Land djustment for Sale# 3 djust each sale to the subject's land mix (land adjustment) using unimproved sales. This page allows for a "quantitative land adjustment" only. ics Sales Comparison - Sale #3 Land djustment mt. Land Use Sale cre Sale Unit Type Sale Units Unit Subj. cre D Crop D Crop B MeadowHay Pasture Pasture B RoadsWaste Sale Land Contrib. 76,692. Eff. Unit Size 1,9. = Total Subj. Units Unit ,563 Total 161,662 18,476 8,83 23,95 21,247 Eff. Unit Size 64. = Sales Comparison pproach - Improvement djustment for Sale# 3 Compare each set sale improvements to the subject improvements making judgments regarding utility and condition. Then arrive at an improvement adjustment for each sale on a per acre or per unit basis. These adjustments are shown on the Sales Comparison Grid. Note: ppraiser must manually enter the Unit for the Subject Improvements -- either individually or as a lump sum. ics.8 Sales Comparison - Sale #3 Sale Impt. UtlCond. Size Unit House F Garage F Shop Bins F F Sale Effective Unit Size: Total Improvement Value = 61.1 Improvement djustment mt. : Contrib. Value Subject Impt. UtlCond. Size Unit Contrib. Value House 1,6 23. = 36,8 = 768 Garage = 6,28 = 2875 Shop G G 3, 7. = 21, = 363 Bins 3,.5 = 15, = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 118, ,8 Subject Effective Unit Size: Total Improvement Value = 33

51 Sales Comparison pproach - Land djustment for Sale# 4 djust each sale to the subject's land mix (land adjustment) using unimproved sales. This page allows for a "quantitative land adjustment" only. ics Sales Comparison - Sale #4 Land djustment mt. Land Use Sale cre Sale Unit Type Sale Units Unit Subj. cre D Crop D Crop B MeadowHay Pasture Pasture B RoadsWaste Sale Land Contrib. 12,85. Eff. Unit Size 32. = Total Subj. Units Unit ,925 Total 192,5 22, 9,625 27,5 25,3 Eff. Unit Size 64. = Sales Comparison pproach - Improvement djustment for Sale# 4 Compare each set sale improvements to the subject improvements making judgments regarding utility and condition. Then arrive at an improvement adjustment for each sale on a per acre or per unit basis. These adjustments are shown on the Sales Comparison Grid. Note: ppraiser must manually enter the Unit for the Subject Improvements -- either individually or as a lump sum. ics.9 Sales Comparison - Sale #4 Sale Impt. UtlCond. Size Unit House G G Garage G G 6 12 Shed F Bins F Sale Effective Unit Size: Total Improvement Value = -96. Improvement djustment mt. : Contrib. Value Subject Impt. UtlCond. Size Unit House 1,6 4. = 72 Garage = 24 Shop G G 3, 4. = 132 Bins 3,.4 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 77, Subject Effective Unit Size: Total Improvement Value = Contrib. Value = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 64, 5,24 12, 12, 93,24 34

52 Sales Comparison pproach - Land djustment for Sale# 5 djust each sale to the subject's land mix (land adjustment) using unimproved sales. This page allows for a "quantitative land adjustment" only. ics Sales Comparison - Sale #5 Land djustment mt. Land Use Sale cre Sale Unit Type Sale Units Unit Subj. cre D Crop D Crop B MeadowHay Pasture Pasture B RoadsWaste Sale Land Contrib. 1,889. Eff. Unit Size = Total Subj. Units Unit ,467 Total 113,631 12,987 5,682 16,233 14,934 Eff. Unit Size 64. = Sales Comparison pproach - Improvement djustment for Sale# 5 Compare each set sale improvements to the subject improvements making judgments regarding utility and condition. Then arrive at an improvement adjustment for each sale on a per acre or per unit basis. These adjustments are shown on the Sales Comparison Grid. Note: ppraiser must manually enter the Unit for the Subject Improvements -- either individually or as a lump sum. ics Sales Comparison - Sale #5 Improvement djustment mt. : Sale Impt. UtlCond. Size Unit Contrib. Value Subject Impt. UtlCond. Size Unit House = 6 House 1, M.Shed F F = Garage Bins F 4.33 = 132 Shop G G 3, 6. Bins 3,.4 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = , Sale Effective Unit Size: Subject Effective Unit Size: Total Improvement Value = Total Improvement Value = Contrib. Value = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 6, 4,71 18, 12, 94,71 35

53 Property Facts Index # Database # CS.1 Doreland Bier Grantor Grantee Deeded Sale DateDOM Prior Sale Date Prior CEV Price nalysis Code Source Motivation Highest & Best Use ddress City County StateZip Sales Price Other Contrib. Net Sale Price Deeded cre Financing Fin. dj. CEV Price SC Unit Type Eff. Unit Size SC Unit Multiplier Unit Multiplier No. Legal ccess Physical ccess View Utilities ,8 74 Buyer Expansion griculture Pennington SD RegionreaZone Location Legal Description: NE4 1 3S Smalltown Sale # ,2 Property Type Primary Land Use 317, Cash ccess Location Topography Water Rights Utilities Fences Recreational ppeal 317, GRM Tax IDRecording SecTwpRge Unimproved Resale Farm Irrigated Good Good 14 3N 3E Land-Mix nalysis Land nalysis Land Use Ratios D Crop D Crop B MeadowHay Pasture Pasture B RoadsWaste Totals CEV Price 317,2 cre Land Contribution Unit Size ,2 Unit Type Unit Total Unit Value = 239,396 = 22,8 = 31,919 = 12,825 = 1,26 = = = = = = 317,2 = Improvement Contribution CostIncome Cost and Depreciation Summary Physical Depreciation Total RCN Functional Obsolescence External Obsolescence Total Depreciation Total Improvement Contribution: Improvement s Price Income Summary Summary Total Expenses 5,114 Net Income 9,66 Stabilized G.I. 14,72 CEV Price 317,2 = Expense Ratio Total Expenses = = Cap Rate 3.3 Net Income = 5,114 9,66 Comments Large, unimproved tract land in good area. The location is generally good with several expanding buyers. Physical access is gravel maintained by the county. Buyer typically motivated and paid cash. No 'non-ag' influences in the immediate area with the exception the city limits Mascot. 36

54 Property Facts Index # Database # CS.2 Wenkus Miles Grantor Grantee Deeded Sale DateDOM Prior Sale Date Prior CEV Price nalysis Code Source Motivation Highest & Best Use ddress City County StateZip Sales Price Other Contrib. Net Sale Price Deeded cre Financing Fin. dj. CEV Price SC Unit Type Eff. Unit Size SC Unit Multiplier Unit Multiplier No. Legal ccess Physical ccess View Utilities ,1 74 BuyerSeller Expansion griculture Pennington SD 1 Location NW Smalltown Legal Description: N2, SE, E 23rds RegionreaZone Sale # , Property Type Primary Land Use 238, Cash ccess Location Unimproved Resale Farm Irrigated Good Good 238, GRM 2.88 Tax IDRecording SecTwpRge 3N 8 3E Land-Mix nalysis Land nalysis Land Use Ratios D Crop D Crop B MeadowHay Pasture Pasture B RoadsWaste Totals CEV Price 238, cre Land Contribution Unit Size ,999 Unit Type Unit Total Unit Value = 125,262 = 4,84 = 52,611 = = 2,42 = = = = = = 237,999 = Improvement Contribution 1 CostIncome Cost and Depreciation Summary Physical Depreciation Total RCN Functional Obsolescence External Obsolescence Total Depreciation Total Improvement Contribution: Improvement s Price 1 Income Summary Summary Total Expenses 4,482 Net Income 6,918 Stabilized G.I. 11,4 CEV Price 238, = Expense Ratio Total Expenses = = Cap Rate 2.91 Net Income = 4,482 6,918 Comments Large, unimproved tract land in good area. The location is generally good with several expanding buyers. Physical access is gravel maintained by the county. Buyer typically motivated and paid cash. No 'non-ag' influences in the immediate area with the exception the city limits Mascot. 37

55 Property Facts Index # Database # CS.3 Karman Wilson Grantor Grantee Deeded Sale DateDOM Prior Sale Date Prior CEV Price nalysis Code Source Motivation Highest & Best Use ddress City County StateZip Sales Price Other Contrib. Net Sale Price Deeded cre Financing Fin. dj. CEV Price SC Unit Type Eff. Unit Size SC Unit Multiplier Unit Multiplier No. Legal ccess Physical ccess View Utilities 2, , 74 Buyer Expansion griculture Pennington SD RegionreaZone Location Legal Description: NE4 1 S Smalltown Sale # ,5 Property Type Primary Land Use 757, Cash ccess Location Unimproved Resale Farm Irrigated Good Good 757,5 2, GRM Tax IDRecording SecTwpRge 15 2N 3E Land-Mix nalysis Land nalysis Land Use Ratios D Crop D Crop B MeadowHay Pasture Pasture B RoadsWaste Totals CEV Price 757,5 cre , Land Contribution Unit Size 1, ,51 Unit Type Unit Total Unit Value = 554,268 = 11,8 = = = 92,38 = = = = = = 757,51 = Improvement Contribution 1 CostIncome Cost and Depreciation Summary Physical Depreciation Total RCN Functional Obsolescence External Obsolescence Total Depreciation Total Improvement Contribution: Improvement s Price 1 Income Summary Summary Total Expenses 15,2 Net Income 24,8 Stabilized G.I. 4, CEV Price 757,5 = Expense Ratio 38. Total Expenses = = Cap Rate 3.27 Net Income = 15,2 24,8 Comments Large, unimproved tract land in good area. The location is generally good with several expanding buyers in the area. Physical access is gravel maintained by the county. Buyer typically mortivated and paid cash. No 'non-ag' influence in the immediate area with the exception the city limits Mascot. 38

56 Property Facts Index # Database # CS.4 Manulas Kee-Nan Grantor Grantee Deeded Sale DateDOM Prior Sale Date Prior CEV Price nalysis Code Source Motivation Highest & Best Use ddress City County StateZip Sales Price Other Contrib. Net Sale Price Deeded cre Financing Fin. dj. CEV Price SC Unit Type Eff. Unit Size SC Unit Multiplier Unit Multiplier No. Legal ccess Physical ccess View Utilities , 74 Buyer Expansion griculture Meade SD RegionreaZone Location Legal Description: E2 1 E Smalltown Sale # ,5 Property Type Primary Land Use 14, Cash ccess Location Unimproved Resale Farm Irrigated Good Good 14,5 cre GRM Tax IDRecording SecTwpRge 3N 4 9E Land-Mix nalysis Land nalysis Land Use Ratios D Crop D Crop B MeadowHay Pasture Pasture B RoadsWaste Totals CEV Price 14,5 cre Land Contribution Unit Size ,5 Unit Type Unit Total Unit Value = 11, = 44, = = 27,5 = 22, = = = = = = 14,5 = Improvement Contribution CostIncome Cost and Depreciation Summary Physical Depreciation Total RCN Functional Obsolescence External Obsolescence Total Depreciation Total Improvement Contribution: Improvement s Price Income Summary Summary Total Expenses 2,224 Net Income 2,576 Stabilized G.I. 4,8 CEV Price 14,5 = Expense Ratio Total Expenses = = Cap Rate 2.47 Net Income = 2,224 2,576 Comments Large, unimproved tract land in good area. The location is generally good with several expanding buyers in the area. Physical access is gravel maintained by the county. Buyer typically mortivated and paid cash. No 'non-ag' influence in the immediate area with the exception the city limits Mascot. 39

57 Property Facts Index # Database # CS.5 Schnelle Ghrambs Grantor Grantee Deeded Sale DateDOM Prior Sale Date Prior CEV Price nalysis Code Source Motivation Highest & Best Use ddress City County StateZip Sales Price Other Contrib. Net Sale Price Deeded cre Financing Fin. dj. CEV Price SC Unit Type Eff. Unit Size SC Unit Multiplier Unit Multiplier No. Legal ccess Physical ccess View Utilities , 74 Buyer Expansion griculture Meade SD 1 Location W Smalltown Legal Description: W2 and NW4NW4 RegionreaZone Sale # Property Type Primary Land Use 157,85 15, 142, Cash ccess Location Unimproved Resale Farm Irrigated Poor Poor 142, GRM Tax IDRecording SecTwpRge 29 3N 3E Land-Mix nalysis Land nalysis Land Use Ratios D Crop D Crop B MeadowHay Pasture Pasture B RoadsWaste Totals CEV Price 142,85 cre Land Contribution Unit Size ,85 Unit Type Unit Total Unit Value = 64,932 = 25,973 = 22,726 = 16,233 = 12,986 = = = = = = 142,85 = Improvement Contribution CostIncome Cost and Depreciation Summary Physical Depreciation Total RCN Functional Obsolescence External Obsolescence Total Depreciation Total Improvement Contribution: Improvement s Price Income Summary Summary Total Expenses 4,56 Net Income 7,44 Stabilized G.I. 12, CEV Price 142,85 = Expense Ratio 38. Total Expenses = = Cap Rate 5.21 Net Income = 4,56 7,44 Comments Large, unimproved tract land in good area. The location is generally good with several expanding buyers in the area. Physical access is gravel maintained by the county. Buyer typically mortivated and paid cash. No 'non-ag' influence in the immediate area with the exception the city limits Mascot. 4

58 Sale nalysis Index # Database # CS.6 Mauerle Brown Grantor Grantee Deeded Sale DateDOM Prior Sale Date Prior CEV Price nalysis Code Source Motivation Highest & Best Use ddress City County StateZip , 74 Buyer Expansion griculture Meade SD 1 Location SE Smalltown Legal Description: S2, SE4NE4, ND E2SW4NE4 RegionreaZone Sale # 566 Sales Price Other Contrib. Net Sale Price Deeded cre Financing Fin. dj. CEV Price SC Unit Type Eff. Unit Size SC Unit Multiplier Unit Multiplier No. Legal ccess Physical ccess View Utilities 6 373,5 Property Type Primary Land Use 373, Cash ccess Location Improved Resale Farm D Crop Good Good 373, GRM 2.42 Tax IDRecording SecTwpRge 36 3N 3E Land-Mix nalysis Land Mix nalysis Land Use D Crop D Crop B MeadowHay Pasture Pasture B RoadsWaste Ratios Totals CEV Price 373,5 cre Land Contribution Unit Size ,82 Unit Type Unit Total Unit Value = 233,696 = 18,24 = 27,929 = 9,975 = 7,98 = = = = = = 297,82 = Improvement Contribution 75,68 Income nalysis Income Estimate Basis: Income Source ctual Estimated Income nalysis Unit Improvements Units Cash Unit Measure 59. cre Share Stabilized Yield Improvements Included in Land Rent OwnerOperator Total Production CashShareOwner Income Stabilized Unit Gross Income Share Income 31. mo Expense Items: Expenses (cont.): Real Estate Tax 2,95 Insurance 75 Maintenance 549 Management 1,829 Total Expenses Stabilized G.I. = Expense Ratio 6,78 18,29 Net Income CEV Price = Cap Rate 12, ,5 18,29 1 yr Stabilized Gross Income = Expenses (cont.): Total Expenses = Net Income = ,29 18,29 6,78 12,212 41

59 Index # Database # CS.6 6 Sale # 566 Improvement nalysis Improvement nalysis Item: Type Size Unit Utility Condition ge Remaining Life RCNUnit RCN Physical Depreciation RCN Remainder fter Phys. Depr. Functional Obsolescence RCN Rem. fter Phys.Funct. Depr. External Obsolescence Total Impt. Contribution Contribution Unit Physical Depreciation 56 Total RCN 171,6 Impt. #1 Impt. #2 Impt. #3 Impt. #4 House 1,14 Sq Ft ,8 5 39,9 Garage 524 Sq Ft ,34 5 9,17 Shop 3,8 Sq Ft F F , ,5 Bins 25,96 BU F F , ,567 39,9 9,17 18,5 8,567 39, , , , Impt. #5 Impt. #6 Impt. #7 Impt. #8 Impt. #9 Impt. #1 Functional Obsolescence External Obsolescence Total Depreciation 56 Total Improvement Contribution: Improvement s Price 75,68 2 Comments Large, unimproved tract land in good area. The location is generally good with several expanding buyers in the area. Physical access is gravel maintained by the county. Buyer typically mortivated and paid cash. No 'non-ag' influence in the immediate area with the exception the city limits Mascot. 42

60 Sale nalysis Index # Database # CS.7 State Bank Bubbiack Grantor Grantee Deeded Sale DateDOM Prior Sale Date Prior CEV Price nalysis Code Source Motivation Highest & Best Use ddress City County StateZip Sales Price Other Contrib. Net Sale Price Deeded cre Financing Fin. dj. CEV Price SC Unit Type Eff. Unit Size SC Unit Multiplier Unit Multiplier No. Legal ccess Physical ccess View Utilities , 74 Buyer Expansion griculture Fall River SD RegionreaZone Location Legal Description: N2 Sale # SE Smalltown 7 329,5 Property Type Primary Land Use 329,5 568 Cash ccess Location Improved Resale Farm D Crop Good Poor 329, GRM 2.66 Tax IDRecording SecTwpRge 33 3N 3E Land-Mix nalysis Land Mix nalysis Land Use D Crop D Crop B MeadowHay Pasture Pasture B RoadsWaste Ratios Totals CEV Price 329,5 cre Land Contribution Unit Size ,476 Unit Type Unit Total Unit Value = 13,26 = 48,96 = 42,84 = 1,2 = 8,16 = = = = = = 238,476 = Improvement Contribution 91,24 Income nalysis Income Estimate Basis: Income Source ctual Estimated Income nalysis Unit Improvements Units Cash Unit Measure 58. cre Share Stabilized Yield Improvements Included in Land Rent OwnerOperator Total Production CashShareOwner Income Stabilized Unit Gross Income Share Income 27.5 mo Expense Items: Expenses (cont.): Real Estate Tax 2,9 Insurance 7 Maintenance 478 Management 1,595 Total Expenses Stabilized G.I. = Expense Ratio 5,673 15,95 Net Income CEV Price = Cap Rate 1, ,5 15,95 1 yr Stabilized Gross Income = Expenses (cont.): Total Expenses = Net Income = ,95 15,95 5,673 1,277 43

61 Index # Database # CS.7 7 Sale # 568 Improvement nalysis Improvement nalysis Item: Type Size Unit Utility Condition ge Remaining Life RCNUnit RCN Physical Depreciation RCN Remainder fter Phys. Depr. Functional Obsolescence RCN Rem. fter Phys.Funct. Depr. External Obsolescence Total Impt. Contribution Contribution Unit Physical Depreciation 38 Total RCN 28,695 Impt. #1 Impt. #2 Impt. #3 Impt. #4 Impt. #5 House 1,186 Sq Ft G G ,2 2 66,416 Garage 75 Sq Ft G G , ,74 Shop 2, Sq Ft F F , 8 5, Bins 4, BU P Hanger 1,8 Sq Ft P 1. 4, 5 2, 2. 36, 5 18, 66,416 19,74 5, 2, 1 18, 1 66, , , 2.5 Impt. #6 Replacement Cost Impt. #7 Impt. #8 Impt. #9 Impt. #1 Functional Obsolescence External Obsolescence Total Depreciation 56 Total Improvement Contribution: Improvement s Price 91, Comments The hanger and grain bins based on "building residual" did not contribute to selling price. Land abstraction and contribution remaining buildings accounted for all the value. 44

62 Sale nalysis Index # Database # CS.8 Haggart Miller Grantor Grantee Deeded Sale DateDOM Prior Sale Date Prior CEV Price nalysis Code Source Motivation Highest & Best Use ddress City County StateZip Sales Price Other Contrib. Net Sale Price Deeded cre Financing Fin. dj. CEV Price SC Unit Type Eff. Unit Size SC Unit Multiplier Unit Multiplier No. Legal ccess Physical ccess View Utilities 1, Realtor Expansion griculture Fall River SD Sale # ,15 25,8 825, Cash Property Type Primary Land Use ccess Location Improved Sale Farm D Crop Good Good 825,35 1, GRM Location W Smalltown Legal Description: S2, NE, S2NE4NW4, S2S2NE4NW4 RegionreaZone 8 Tax IDRecording SecTwpRge 19 3N 3E Land-Mix nalysis Land Mix nalysis Land Use D Crop D Crop B MeadowHay Pasture Pasture B RoadsWaste Ratios Totals CEV Price 825,35 cre , Land Contribution Unit Size ,692 Unit Type Unit Total Unit Value = 415,71 = 23,23 = = 23,95 = 64,666 = = = = = = 76,692 = Improvement Contribution 118,658 Income nalysis Income Estimate Basis: Income Source ctual Estimated Income nalysis Unit Improvements Units Cash Unit Measure 1,9. cre Share Stabilized Yield Improvements Included in Land Rent OwnerOperator Total Production CashShareOwner Income Stabilized Unit Gross Income Share Income 21. mo Expense Items: Expenses (cont.): Real Estate Tax 9,5 Insurance 8 Maintenance 1,197 Management 3,99 Total Expenses Stabilized G.I. = Expense Ratio 15,487 39,9 Net Income CEV Price = Cap Rate 24, ,35 39,9 1 yr Stabilized Gross Income = Expenses (cont.): Total Expenses = Net Income = ,9 39,9 15,487 24,413 45

63 Index # Database # CS.8 8 Sale # 562 Improvement nalysis Improvement nalysis Item: Impt. #1 Impt. #2 Impt. #3 Impt. #4 Type Size Unit Utility Condition ge Remaining Life RCNUnit RCN Physical Depreciation RCN Remainder fter Phys. Depr. Functional Obsolescence RCN Rem. fter Phys.Funct. Depr. External Obsolescence Total Impt. Contribution Contribution Unit House 2,188 Sq Ft F , ,948 Garage 8 Sq Ft F ,6 7 7,68 Shop 5, Sq Ft ,5 5 28,75 Bins 11, BU F F , 67 36,3 45,948 7,68 28,75 36,3 45, , , ,3.33 Physical Depreciation 66 Total RCN 346,26 Impt. #5 Impt. #6 Replacement Cost Impt. #7 Impt. #8 Impt. #9 Impt. #1 Functional Obsolescence External Obsolescence Total Depreciation 66 Total Improvement Contribution: Improvement s Price 118, Comments Large, unimproved tract land in good area. The location is generally good with several expanding buyers in the area. Physical access is gravel maintained by the county. Buyer typically mortivated and paid cash. No 'non-ag' influence in the immediate area with the exception the city limits Mascot. 46

64 Sale nalysis Index # Database # CS.9 State Bank Moe Grantor Grantee Deeded Sale DateDOM Prior Sale Date Prior CEV Price nalysis Code Source Motivation Highest & Best Use ddress City County StateZip Buyer Expansion griculture Fall River SD 1 Location SE Smalltown Legal Description: W2, NW4NE4, and W2SW4NE4 RegionreaZone Sale # 569 Sales Price Other Contrib. Net Sale Price Deeded cre Financing Fin. dj. CEV Price SC Unit Type Eff. Unit Size SC Unit Multiplier Unit Multiplier No. Legal ccess Physical ccess View Utilities 9 18,1 Property Type Primary Land Use 18, Cash ccess Location Improved Sale Farm D Crop Good Good 18, GRM Tax IDRecording SecTwpRge 26 3N 3E Land-Mix nalysis Land Mix nalysis Land Use D Crop D Crop B MeadowHay Pasture Pasture B RoadsWaste Ratios Totals CEV Price 18,1 cre Land Contribution Unit Size ,85 Unit Type Unit Total Unit Value = 11, = 35,2 = 3,85 = 33, = 19,8 = = = = = = 12,85 = Improvement Contribution 77,25 Income nalysis Income Estimate Basis: Income Source ctual Estimated Income nalysis Unit Improvements Units Cash Unit Measure 32. cre Share Stabilized Yield Improvements Included in Land Rent OwnerOperator Total Production CashShareOwner Income Stabilized Unit Gross Income Share Income 26.5 mo Expense Items: Expenses (cont.): Real Estate Tax 1,6 Insurance 875 Maintenance 254 Management 848 Total Expenses Stabilized G.I. = Expense Ratio 3,577 8,48 Net Income CEV Price = Cap Rate 4,93 18,1 8,48 1 yr Stabilized Gross Income = Expenses (cont.): Total Expenses = Net Income = ,48 8,48 3,577 4,93 47

65 Index # Database # CS.9 9 Sale # 569 Improvement nalysis Improvement nalysis Item: Type Size Unit Utility Condition ge Remaining Life RCNUnit RCN Physical Depreciation RCN Remainder fter Phys. Depr. Functional Obsolescence RCN Rem. fter Phys.Funct. Depr. External Obsolescence Total Impt. Contribution Contribution Unit Physical Depreciation 38 Total RCN 125,4 Impt. #1 Impt. #2 Impt. #3 Impt. #4 House 972 Sq Ft G G ,4 2 54,432 Garage 6 Sq Ft G G , 2 7,2 Shed 2, Sq Ft F , 7 2,4 Bins 4, BU F , 67 13,2 54,432 7,2 2,4 13,2 54, , , ,2.33 Impt. #5 Impt. #6 Replacement Cost Impt. #7 Impt. #8 Impt. #9 Impt. #1 Functional Obsolescence External Obsolescence Total Depreciation 38 Total Improvement Contribution: Improvement s Price 77,25 43 Comments Large, unimproved tract land in good area. The location is generally good with several expanding buyers in the area. Physical access is gravel maintained by the county. Buyer typically mortivated and paid cash. No 'non-ag' influence in the immediate area with the exception the city limits Mascot. 48

66 Sale nalysis Index # Database # CS.1 Klapp Nicholas Grantor Grantee Deeded Sale DateDOM Prior Sale Date Prior CEV Price nalysis Code Source Motivation Highest & Best Use ddress City County StateZip Sales Price Other Contrib. Net Sale Price Deeded cre Financing Fin. dj. CEV Price SC Unit Type Eff. Unit Size SC Unit Multiplier Unit Multiplier No. Legal ccess Physical ccess View Utilities , 74 Buyer Expansion griculture Fall River SD Sale # Location NW Smalltown Legal Description: S2, NW, W34th NE RegionreaZone 1 269,85 Property Type Primary Land Use 269, Cash ccess Location Improved Resale Farm D Crop Poor Poor 269, GRM 21.8 Tax IDRecording SecTwpRge 8 3N 3E Land-Mix nalysis Land Mix nalysis Land Use D Crop D Crop B MeadowHay Pasture Pasture B RoadsWaste Ratios Totals CEV Price 269,85 cre Land Contribution Unit Size ,889 Unit Type Unit Total Unit Value = 71,425 = 31,168 = 18,181 = 22,726 = 1,389 = = = = = = 1,889 = Improvement Contribution 115,961 Income nalysis Income Estimate Basis: Income Source ctual Estimated Income nalysis Unit Improvements Units Cash Unit Measure 64. cre Share Stabilized Yield Improvements Included in Land Rent OwnerOperator Total Production CashShareOwner Income Stabilized Unit Gross Income Share Income 2. mo Expense Items: Expenses (cont.): Real Estate Tax 3,2 Insurance 86 Maintenance 384 Management 1,28 Total Expenses Stabilized G.I. = Expense Ratio 5,724 12,8 Net Income CEV Price = Cap Rate 7,76 269,85 12,8 1 yr Stabilized Gross Income = Expenses (cont.): Total Expenses = Net Income = ,8 12,8 5,724 7,76 49

67 Index # Database # CS.1 1 Sale # 564 Improvement nalysis Improvement nalysis Item: Impt. #1 Impt. #2 Impt. #3 Type Size Unit Utility Condition ge Remaining Life RCNUnit RCN Physical Depreciation RCN Remainder fter Phys. Depr. Functional Obsolescence RCN Rem. fter Phys.Funct. Depr. External Obsolescence Total Impt. Contribution Contribution Unit House 1,6 Sq Ft , 5 6, M.Shed 7,2 Sq Ft F F , ,768 Bins 4, BU F , 67 13,2 6, 42,768 13,2 6, , ,2.33 Physical Depreciation 6 Total RCN 289,6 Impt. #4 Impt. #5 Impt. #6 Replacement Cost Impt. #7 Impt. #8 Impt. #9 Impt. #1 Functional Obsolescence External Obsolescence Total Depreciation 6 Total Improvement Contribution: Improvement s Price 115, Large, unimproved tract land in good area. The location is generally good with several expanding buyers in the area. Physical access is gravel maintained by the county. Buyer typically mortivated and paid cash. No 'non-ag' influence in the immediate area with the exception the city limits Mascot. Comments Large, unimproved tract land in good area. 5

68 INVOICE Date: Prepared for:, Property ppraised:, Work Performed: Total mount Due: Please make checks payable to: gware PO Box 138 Piedmont, SD 57769

69 Sale nalysis Index # Database # CS.2 Wenkus Miles Grantor Grantee Deeded Sale DateDOM Prior Sale Date Prior CEV Price nalysis Code Source Motivation Highest & Best Use ddress City County StateZip Sale # 34 Sales Price Other Contrib. Net Sale Price Deeded cre Financing Fin. dj. CEV Price SC Unit Type Eff. Unit Size SC Unit Multiplier Unit Multiplier No. Legal ccess Physical ccess View Utilities ,1 74 BuyerSeller Expansion griculture Pennington SD 1 RegionreaZone NW Smalltown Location Legal Description: N2, SE, E 23rds 238, 1, 228, 38. Cash Property Type Primary Land Use ccess Location Unimproved Resale Farm Irrigated Good e 228, GRM 2. Tax IDRecording SecTwpRge 8 3N 3E Land Mix nalysis Land-Mix nalysis Land Use D Crop D Crop B MeadowHay Pasture Pasture B RoadsWaste Ratios Totals CEV Price 228, cre Land Contribution Unit Size 241,835 Unit Type Unit Total Unit Value 125,262 = 36,429 = 43,715 = = 36,429 = = = = = = 241,835 = -13,835 = Improvement Contribution Income nalysis Income nalysis Income Estimate Basis: Income Source ctual Estimated Unit Units 6. Cash Unit Measure cre Share Stabilized Yield Improvements Improvements Included in Land Rent OwnerOperator Total Production CashShareOwner Income Stabilized Unit Gross Income Share Income ,4 1 11,4 mo Expense Items: Expenses (cont.): 3, Real Estate Tax Insurance 342 Maintenance 1,14 Management 4,482 11,4 Total Expenses Stabilized G.I. = Expense Ratio 6, , Net Income CEV Price = Cap Rate yr Stabilized Gross Income = Expenses (cont.): Total Expenses = 3.3 Net Income = 11,4 4,482 6,918 51

70 Index # Database # CS.2 Sale # 34 Improvement nalysis Improvement nalysis Item: Impt. #1 Impt. #2 Impt. #3 Impt. #4 Impt. #5 Impt. #6 Impt. #7 Impt. #8 Impt. #9 Impt. #1 Type Size Unit Utility Condition ge Remaining Life RCNUnit RCN Physical Depreciation RCN Remainder fter Phys. Depr. Functional Obsolescence RCN Rem. fter Phys.Funct. Depr. External Obsolescence Total Impt. Contribution Contribution Unit Physical Depreciation Total RCN Functional Obsolescence External Obsolescence Total Depreciation 1 Total Improvement Contribution: Improvement s Price Comments Large, unimproved tract land in good area. The location is generally good with several expanding buyers. Physical access is gravel maintained by the county. Buyer typically motivated and paid cash. No 'non-ag' influences in the immediate area with the exception the city limits Mascot. 52

71 Index # CS.2 Database # 34 Sale # CaptionTitle Here RIGHT Type comments here. LEFT RIGHT