1

Appraisal of:

1217 E. Preston Street Baltimore, Maryland 21202

Prepared for:

Alvin Smith c/o M&M Development LLC 1818 New York Avenue NE Washington, DC 20002-1848

Prepared by:

Michael A. Wilson, Certified General Appraiser #04-8088

Concord Appraisal Co. 1238 Alexander Avenue

Catonsville, Maryland 21228

Date of Valuation: September 10, 2019 (“As-Is)

Date of Prospective Market Value: January 1, 2020 (“As-If Completed & Stabilized”)

Date of Report: September 16, 2019

2

September 16, 2019

Alvin Smith c/o M&M Development LLC 1818 New York Avenue NE Washington, DC 20002-1848 Re: Market Value As-Is, fee simple interest 1217 E. Preston Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21202 Dear Mr. Smith: Concord Appraisal Company – Catonsville is pleased to submit the accompanying Restricted Appraisal Report of the referenced property. The purpose of the appraisal is to develop an opinion of the market value as is of the fee simple interest in the property. I have the knowledge and experience to competently undertake and complete this assignment and meet the requirements of the USPAP Competency Rule. The subject is located in the East Baltimore community known as “Oliver”. The community of Johnston Square lies due west, Latrobe Homes is due south, and Gay Street is southeast. The subject’s zoning is Residential R8. The subject is legally described as Map 10, Section 01, Block 1160, Lot 031. The site is approximately 83’5” by 99’3” or 8,279 sf (approximately .19 acre). The site is improved by a 3-story attached apartment building (Circa 1900-1908 est.) which comprises approximately 17,000 rentable square feet. The subject structure is masonry brick construction of average quality. The building is being rehabilitated and will feature two (2) commercial spaces (each 1,000 square feet) below grade, and three residential stories fully above-grade to comprise fourteen (14) apartments. There will be a mix of six (6) three-bedroom, one and half bath apartments (1,250 sf each); three (3) two-bedroom, one bath apartments (1,000 sf each), three (3) one-bedroom, one bath apartments (800 sf each), and two (2) efficiency-handicap units (650 sf each). The building’s usable area is approximately 16,200 sf. The common area for the complex will be approximately 800 sf (core factor 4.7%). Unit Space Unit SF/Each Total Unit

Count Bedroom/ Bathrooms

Total Rooms Market Rent

Commercial 1,000 sf 2 0 1 $17/sf 3Br,1.5 Bath 1,250 sf 6 1.5 6 each $1,500

$1.20/sf 2Br,1.0 Bath 1,000 sf 3 1.0 5 each $1,200

$1.20/sf 1Br,1.0 Bath 800 sf 3 1.0 4 each $1,000

$1.25/sf Efficiency Handicap

650 sf 2 1.0 3 each $1,200 $1.85/sf

3

The tax identification number is 0310011160 031. The scheduled, annual real estate tax bill is $2,770 currently. The estimated tax after renovations is estimated at $2,200/unit or $35,200 annually. The property ownership of record is M&M Development LLC. The owner acquired the subject in a non-arm’s length transaction as reported on public records April 6, 2016, for $70,000. The grantor was REVS-PS, LLC. Since acquisition, the owner has estimated a rehabilitation budget of $650,000 to renovate the building. The total to complete the renovation is approximately $250,000. Since acquisition the ownership has completed demolition, replacement of exterior windows, repointed and cleaned brick, replaced roof, rough-in electric, HVAC and plumbing; installed interior framing and subflooring. The site has no off-street parking. The subject’s census tract is q00q.00. The subject is not located in a flood hazard area (reference FEMA Map 240087 0018F, dated 4/2/14, zone X. In developing my opinion of value, I developed the Direct Sales Comparison Approach and Income Approach. The Cost Approach is not applicable nor a reliable indicator of value for the subject property. Additionally, my opinion of value is based on market participant interviews (buyers and sellers of comparable properties, property managers, real estate agents/brokers) active in the market area. Although I am of the opinion that my findings and conclusions are reasonable based on available evidence and market data, the appraiser is not responsible for the effects of future occurrences that cannot reasonably be foreseen at this time, on the effective date of the appraisal. I am satisfied that I have achieved an acceptable scope of work according to USPAP Advisory Opinion 29. I used the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice’s (USPAP) definition of market value. Alvin Smith and M&M Development LLC, is the client. The Intended user is the client only and the report is a Restricted Appraisal. I understand that the client will use the report to evaluate the property for potential acquisition and negotiating sale price. I performed the appraisal according to the client’s supplemental standards and according to USPAP, the Ethics and Standards of the Appraisal Institute and the American Society of Appraisers, and Title XI of the Financial Institutions Reform and Recovery Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA). To comply with the requirements of USPAP and FIRREA, my value conclusion is not contingent upon the successful completion of a loan, the occurrence of a stipulated event, or a preconceived opinion of value. My opinion of the subject’s “As-Is” Market Value and Prospective “As-If Completed & Stabilized” Market Value are subject to the assumptions and limiting conditions contained in the report. There are no hypothetical conditions. The report is subject to extraordinary assumptions as outlined in the body of the report. My report is a Restricted Appraisal Report, as defined in USPAP, and is supported by additional data and materials retained in our work files. My work file will be kept for a period of five years as required by USPAP. To understand the report fully, it may be necessary to refer to my work file. It will be available for your review upon request.

4

My report describes the analyses and includes my opinion of the respective values of the fee simple estate of the subject property. Photographs of the subject property and the comparables I used are in the report. For your convenience, I am willing to provide a pdf electronic copy of the report, which can be transmitted to you via the Internet. Signatures on this electronic copy are password controlled and comply with USPAP standards for electronic signatures. Copies of my report printed from this file may be considered original copies. The fee for this assignment does not include any provision for testimony before a court or other government or private entity. A separate fee must be negotiated for any such additional service.

Hypothetical Condition

None First, it is my opinion that the As-Is Market Value of the subject property, in fee simple, as of September 10, 2019, is:

$1,880,000 Estimated Exposure Time – 12 Months

Second, it is my opinion that the As-If Completed & Stabilized Market Value of the subject property, leased fee, as of January 1, 2020, is:

$2,200,0001 Estimated Exposure Time – 12 Months

I appreciate the opportunity to be of service. Should you have any questions about this report or my conclusions, or if I can provide additional information, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely,

Michael A. Wilson Certified General Real Estate Appraiser State of Maryland No.: 04-8088 Phone: 410 935-0486 e-mail: quintdog@aol.com

1 The As-Is Value is derived by subtracting the estimated remaining renovation costs of $250,000 from the As-If Completed and Stabilized value. Because the project is nearing completion and more than 50% complete, most of the entrepreneurial profit has been earned. Lease-up costs include loss rent during the remainder of the construction phase to stabilization January 1, 2020, and leasing commissions (estimated at $21,000/month x 3 months equals $63,000). Therefore the As-Is Value is estimated to be ($2,200,000 value As-If Completed and Stabilized less remaining renovation costs of $250,000 and lease-up costs and entrepreneurial profit rounded to $70,000 equals $1,880,000.

5

SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Property Location: 1217 E. Preston Street Baltimore, Maryland 21202 Owner of Record: M&M Development LLC Census Tract: 1001.00 Flood Zone: FEMA Flood Map No. 240087 0018F Dated 9/26/08, Zone AE Subject is within a flood hazard area Effective Date: September 10, 2019 Value Estimated: As-Is Market Value Prospective Date: January 1, 2020 Value Estimated: As-If Completed & Stabilized Property Rights Appraised: Fee simple interest (As-Is) Leased fee interest (As-If Completed & Stabilized) Lot Size: 8,279 sf (.19 Acre) Improvement: 3-story Masonry, Attached Building (Mixed-Use) 2-Commercial Units & 14-Apartments Comprising approximately 17,000 sf rentable area Proposed Land Use: Mixed-Use (retail/residential) Zoning: R8-Residential Highest and Best Use (vacant/improved): Proposed Mixed-Use (2-retail & 14-apartments) Strengths: Renovated, above average residential unit sizes, proximity

to downtown Weaknesses: Economically challenged neighborhood

6

As-If Completed & Stabilized Market Value

Indications: Direct Sales Comparison Approach: $2,160,000 Income Capitalization Approach

$2,200,000 Cost Approach N/A FINAL VALUE $2,200,000 Estimated Marketing Time – 6 Months

7

Property Rights Appraised

Fee simple estate is defined as: “Absolute ownership unencumbered by any other interest or estate, subject only to the limitations imposed by the governmental powers of taxation, eminent domain, police power, and escheat.”2 Leased fee estate is defined as: “Ownership interest held by a landlord with specified rights that include the right of use and occupancy conveyed by lease to others; the rights of lessor (the leased fee owner), and lessee (leaseholder) are specified by contract terms contained within the lease.3

The property rights appraised is the fee simple interest “As-Is” and leased fee interest “As-If Completed & Stabilized”. The underlying assumptions and limiting conditions that govern my conclusions of value are documented at the end of this report.

APPRAISAL DEVELOPMENT AND REPORTING PROCESS (SCOPE OF WORK):

In preparing this appraisal:

(1) I inspected the subject August 14, 2019, accompanied by Latonya Dickerson, Listing Agent(410) 500-1871, Rock Blue Homes, broker for the ownership.

(2) I interviewed the client who provided information regarding the prior history of the property, current summary the project renovation costs, unit mix, unit square footages, and unit room counts.

(3) I reviewed the Bright/MLS residential and commercial rentals and comparable multiple family and mixed-use property sales to estimate the subject’s market rent for the Income Approach development and unit values for the Direct Sales Comparison Approach Development.

(4) There is an extraordinary assumption that the subject is to be completed within approximately 2 months of the effective date of the Appraisal with approximately $250,000 needed to complete the renovations. The appraiser estimates the subject to be fully-leased by January 2, 2020 at market rent levels. All work to be completed in a workmanlike manner with above average finish and construction quality that meets the lower-tier luxury apartment market expectations, and the ownership has proper tenant occupancy permits. The extraordinary assumptions also is predicated upon no unforeseen circumstances or changes involving the physical characteristics of the subject or the prevailing economic market conditions on the date of this report.

(5) No hypothetical conditions are employed in this report.

2 The Appraisal of Real Estate. Eleventh Edition. Appraisal Institute. 3 ibid

8

(6) I researched Maryland Department of Assessments and Taxation databases, and the land records of Baltimore City to determine the subject’s tax assessment, ownership of record, and zoning. I verified the legal description on Bright/MLS and referenced the deed liber and folio in this report’s transmittal letter.

(7) I conducted a daytime and evening neighborhood tour to determine by visual inspection the current land uses in the immediate area, the vacancy rates of nearby residential homes and commercial business establishments, traffic patterns, and demographics.

(8) I considered and analyzed the subject property and developed an opinion about its highest and best use.

(9) I researched Bright/MLS and Loopnet to obtain relevant comparable sales, rentals and listing data for the subject.

(10) After collecting, sorting and analyzing the data, I developed an opinion regarding the methodologies that are appropriate to estimated As-Is Market Value and Prospective Market Value As-If Completed & Stabilized.

(11) The Cost Approach is not applicable nor a reliable indicator of value. (12) The Income Approach is developed by direct capitalization. (13) I employed the Direct Sales Comparison Approach by use of similar

multiple family and mixed-use properties with similar densities and similar physical characteristics, amenities, and location that were the most representative in the local and general market area.

(14) Data research and analysis is a process to collect, verify, and analyze relevant data. The detail is included in the appropriate sections of the report. Although the appraiser made a concerted effort to confirm the arms-length nature of each sale with a party to the transaction, it is sometimes necessary to rely on secondary verification from sources deemed reliable. I reconciled the indicated values of the Sales Approach and Income Approach and determined the final estimated values As-Is and As-If Completed & Stabilized.

(15) I included the census tract number, photographs, maps, and sales adjustment grid in the report to assist in understanding my analysis of the comparable data and my conclusions I am satisfied that I have developed an acceptable scope of work for my opinion of value, as defined by USPAP. According to the USPAP Advisory Opinion 29, an acceptable scope of work depends on its meeting or exceeding both (1) the expectations of parties who are regularly intended users for similar assignments; and (2) what an appraiser’s peers’ actions would be in performing the same or a similar assignment.

9

DEFINITIONS OF VALUE

An opinion of market value is the major focus of most real property appraisal assignments. The most widely accepted components of Market Value are incorporated in the following definition:

“The most probable price, as of a specified date, in cash, or in terms equivalent to cash, or in other precisely revealed terms, for which the specified property rights should sell after reasonable exposure in a competitive market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, with the buyer and seller each acting prudently, knowledgeably, and for self-interest, and assuming that neither is under undue duress.”4

Market value is defined and further expanded in several ways in USPAP. USPAP also requires that certain specified items be included in every appraisal report.

The following definition of market value is used by agencies that regulate federally insured financial institutions in the United States and is the principal definition used in this report:

“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 are the consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby:

1. Buyer and seller are typically motivated; 2. Both parties are well informed or well advised, and acting in what they

consider their best interests; 3. A reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market; 4. Payment is made in terms of cash in U.S. dollars or in terms of financial

arrangements comparable thereto; and 5. 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.”5

My opinion of value is based this definition.

4 The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Fourth Edition, (Chicago: The Appraisal Institute, 2002), page 177.

5 Ibid, page 177; 12 C.F.R. Part 34.42(g); 55 Federal Register 34696, August 24, 1990, as amended at 57 Federal Register 12202, April 9, 1992; 59 Federal Register 29499, June 7, 1994.

10

OTHER IMPORTANT DEFINITIONS: A property’s highest and best use is:

“The reasonably probable and legal use of vacant land or an improved property, which is physically possible, appropriately supported, financially feasible, and that results in the highest value. The four criteria the highest and best use must meet are legal permissibility, physical possibility, financial feasibility, and maximum productivity.”6

The highest and best use of land or a site as though vacant is:

“Among all reasonable, alternative uses, the use that yields the highest present land value, after payments are made for labor, capital, and coordination. The use of a property based on the assumption that the parcel of land is vacant or can be made vacant by demolishing any improvements.”7

The highest and best use of property as improved is:

“The use that should be made of a property as it exists. An existing improvement should be renovated or retained as is so long as it continues to contribute to the total market value of the property, or until the return from a new improvement would more than offset the cost of demolishing the existing building and constructing a new one.”8

An interim use is:

“The temporary use to which a site or improved property is put until it is ready to be put to its future highest and best use.”9

JURISDICTIONAL EXCEPTION RULE If any part of the USPAP Standards is contrary to the law or public policy of the state of Maryland or Baltimore City, only that part shall be void and of no force or effect in that jurisdiction. The purpose of the JURISDICTIONAL EXCEPTION RULE is strictly limited to providing a saving or severability clause intended to preserve the balance of USPAP if one or more of its parts are determined to be contrary to law or public policy of a jurisdiction. By logical extension, there can be no violation of USPAP by an appraiser disregarding, with proper disclosure, only the part or parts of USPAP that are void and of no force and effect in a particular assignment by operation of legal authority. It is misleading for an appraiser to disregard a part or parts of USPAP as void and of no force and effect in a particular assignment without identifying in the appraiser’s report the part or parts disregarded and the legal authority justifying this action. 6 Ibid, page 135. 7 Ibid, page 135. 8 Ibid, page 135. 9 Ibid, page 149.

11

As used in the JURISDICTIONAL EXCEPTION RULE, law means a body of rules with binding legal force established by controlling governmental authority. This broad meaning includes, without limitation, the federal and state constitutions; legislative and court-made law; and administrative rules, regulations, and ordinances. Public policy refers to more or less well defined moral and ethical standards of conduct, currently and generally accepted by the community as a whole, and recognized by the courts with the aid of statutes, judicial precedents, and other similar available evidence. Jurisdiction refers to the legal authority to legislate, apply, or interpret law in any form at the federal, state, and local levels of government. The definition of market value or fair market value described in USPAP is used for this appraisal. COMPETENCY RULE Prior to accepting an assignment or entering into an agreement to perform any assignment, an appraiser must properly identify the problem to be addressed and have the knowledge and experience to complete the assignment competently; or alternatively, must:

1. disclose the lack of knowledge and/or experience to the client before accepting the assignment;

2. take all steps necessary or appropriate to complete the assignment competently; and

3. describe the lack of knowledge and/or experience and the steps taken to complete the assignment competently in the report.

I am satisfied that I have complied with the USPAP COMPETENCY RULE and have the knowledge, experience, and capability to complete this assignment competently. Refer also to my Appraiser Qualifications Statement and Certification.

12

SUBJECT LOCATION MAP

SUBJECT TAX ASSESSMENT

13

14

DIRECT SALES COMPARISON APPROACH

In estimating value of the subject’s real estate, the Direct Sales Comparison Approach is utilized to derive an indicated value. In the following pages, each sale has been presented and analyzed for comparison to the subject property. The appraiser utilized sales in the subject's general market area. The sales selected are considered to be the most recent, similar in actual or potential land use, and proximate to the subject at the time of this report. The Sales Comparison Approach is generally considered the most reliable approach, because it compares actual activity of buyers and sellers.

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

SUMMARY OF COMPARABLE SALES

The data supports a value range between $112,500 and $153,333 per unit. The appraiser has considered the subject’s location in a predominantly economically challenged submarket and neighborhood, construction quality, unit mix and unit density, as well as unit sizes and amenities and estimate the subject’s overall value by the Direct Sales Comparison Approach (qualitatively) at the mid-range or $135,000 per unit. The subject’s 16 units multiplied by $135,000 per unit indicates a Prospective Value As-If Completed & Stabilized by the Direct Sales Comparison Approach in the amount of $2,160,000. TWO MILLION ONE HUNDRED SIXTY THOUSAND DOLLARS

27

SUPPORTING COMMERCIAL RENTALS

The competitive set of commercial rentals range between $16.00/sf triple net and $26.53/sf full-service. The subject’s location in an economically challenged submarket of East Baltimore, project density, unit sizes, construction quality and amenities indicate a market rent at the lower-range is most feasible to obtain in the current market conditions. Therefore, the subject’s two commercial units of 1,000 sf each are projected to lease at a market rent of $17/sf full service.

28

SUPPORTING RESIDENTIAL RENTALS

29

2Br, 2 Bath unit approx.. 1,083 sf rents for $1,950/mo or $1.80/sf

30

31

2Br 2.5 bath unit approximately 2,430 sf rents for $2,933/mo or $1.21/sf

32

33

1Br appox., 500 sf and 2Br approx. 717 sf rent an average of $1.30/sf10

10 Additional rentals: 222 W Monument 2Br, 1 Bath units rent for $1,250/mo average; 1226 Saint Paul Street 1Br2 Bath units rent for $1,350 to $1,650 per month and a 2 Br, 2 Bath unit rents for $1,585/mo

34

INCOME APPROACH

Gross Potential Income 3BR, 1.5 Bath (1,250 sf each) x $1,500/mo. X 12 x 6 units $108,000 2BR, 1.0 Bath (1,000 sf each) x $1,200/mo. X 12 x 3 units $ 43,200 1BR, 1.0 Bath ( 800 sf each) x $1,000/mo. X 12 x 3 units $ 36,000 Effcy,1.0 Bath ( 650 sf each) x $1,200/mo. X 12 x 2 units $ 28,800 Retail Units (1,000 sf each) x $17/sf/yr/nnn $ 34,000 $250,000 Vacancy/Credit Loss

- 25,000 10%11 Effective Gross Income

$225,000 Management/Leasing (6% EGI) $13,500 Real Property Taxes (current assessment) $35,200 Property Casualty Insurance ($.35/sf x 17,000 sf) $ 5,950 Common Area Maintenance ($1.50/sf x 17,000 sf) $25,500 Utilities/Non-Structural Maintenance paid by tenants Structural Maintenance/Reserve ($.50/sf x 17,00 sf) $ 8,500 Miscellaneous (legal/administrative- 2% Of Effective Gross Income) $ 4,500 Operating Expenses $93,150 Net Operating Income $131,850 Overall Rate12(6.0%) Value Indicated By Income Approach

$2,197,500 ROUNDED

$2,200,000

11 Direct Vacancy Estimated at 10% for East Baltimore Oliver 12 PwC Real Estate Investor Survey Q1 2019 (Institutional Grade Apartments 3.5% to 7.0%, average 5.03%)

35

36

FINAL RECONCILIATION

In the preceding pages of this report, the three generally accepted approaches to value:

Cost, Income Approach, and Direct Sales Comparison Approach were considered. The following

chart summarizes the values indicated by each approach:

As-If Complete & Stabilized Direct Sales Comparison Approach $2,160,000 Income Capitalization Approach $2,200,000 Cost Approach N/A The Cost Approach is not developed nor considered a reliable methodology for estimating the

subject’s market value. My peers would not consider the Cost Approach applicable or reliable.

The Income Approach is good reliability of income producing properties that are at stabilized

occupancy. The subject property is projected to be at stabilized occupancy by January 1, 2020.

The Income Approach is given greatest weight because most investors rely upon the Income

Approach by projecting net operating income and by direct capitalization at a reasonable

capitalization rate. The Direct Sales Comparison Approach is predicated upon a sufficient

number of quality comparable sales to also be a reliable indicator. Thus the variance between

the two approaches is minimal. The final value is reasonable and adequately supported.

37

First, it is my opinion that the As-Is Market Value of the subject property, in fee simple, as of September 10, 2019, is:

$1,880,000

Estimated Exposure Time – 12 Months

Second, it is my opinion that the As-If Completed & Stabilized Market Value of the subject property, leased fee, as of January 1, 2020, is:

$2,200,00013

Estimated Exposure Time – 12 Months I appreciate the opportunity to be of service. Should you have any questions about this report or my conclusions, or if I can provide additional information, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely,

Michael A. Wilson Certified General Real Estate Appraiser State of Maryland No.: 04-8088 Phone: 410 935-0486 e-mail: quintdog@aol.com

13 The As-Is Value is derived by subtracting the estimated remaining renovation costs of $250,000 from the As-If Completed and Stabilized value. Because the project is nearing completion and more than 50% complete, most of the entrepreneurial profit has been earned. Lease-up costs include loss rent during the remainder of the construction phase to stabilization January 1, 2020, and leasing commissions (estimated at $21,000/month x 3 months equals $63,000). Therefore the As-Is Value is estimated to be ($2,200,000 value As-If Completed and Stabilized less remaining renovation costs of $250,000 and lease-up costs and entrepreneurial profit rounded to $70,000 equals $1,880,000.

38

UNDERLYING ASSUMPTIONS AND CONTINGENT CONDITIONS

In conducting this appraisal, the appraiser has assumed that:

1. Title to the land is good and marketable. 2. The property is appraised as though under competent management in responsible

ownership and is free and clear of all encumbrances and liens other than those mentioned in this report.

3. The information supplied by others is correct, and the revenue stamps placed on deeds

used to indicate the sale prices are in correct relation to the actual dollar amount of the individual transactions.

4. There are no hidden or undisclosed sub-soil conditions. No consideration has been given

to oil or mineral rights, if outstanding.

5. All general codes, ordinances, regulations or statutes affecting the property have been and will be enforced and the property is not subject to flood plain or utility restrictions or moratoriums excepts as reported to the appraiser and contained in this report.

6. No responsibility is assumed by the appraiser for legal matters, nor is any opinion on the

title rendered herewith.

7. The appraiser herein, by reason of this report, is not to be required to give testimony in court with reference to the property appraised, unless arrangements have been previously made thereof.

8. The appraiser has made no survey of the property and assumes no responsibility in

connection with such matters. Any sketch or identified survey of the property included in this report is only for purposes of assisting the reader visualize the property. The areas and dimensions as shown herein are assumed to be correct.

9. The distribution of the total valuation in this report between land and improvements

applies only under the reported highest and best use of the property. The allocations of value for land and improvements must not be used in conjunction with any other report and are invalid if so used.

10. No environmental impact studies were either requested or made in conjunction with this

report, and the appraiser hereby reserves the right to alter, amend, revise or rescind any of the value opinions based upon any subsequent environmental impact studies, research or investigation.

39

11. In this appraisal assignment, the existence of potentially hazardous material used in the construction or maintenance of the subject improvements, such as the presence of urea formaldehyde foam or asbestos insulation, and/or lead paint and the existence of toxic waste, which may or may not be present on the property, has not been considered. The appraiser is not qualified to detect such substances. If desired, it is recommended that the client retain an expert in this field.

12. The Americans With Disability Act with an effective date of January 26, 1992, can have

a dramatic effect on the value of real estate. I have not performed a condition survey as it relates to the ADA and for the purposes of my appraisal, I have assumed that the property is in full compliance with this act. If it is subsequently determined that non-compliance exists, the appraiser hereby reserves the right to alter, amend, revise or rescind any of the value opinions based on such determination.

13. The appraiser will not disclose the contents of the appraisal report except as provided for

in the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice.

14. No personal property, trade fixtures, equipment, licenses or other intangible property has been given value in the report.

40

CERTIFICATION OF THE APPRAISER 

I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

The statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct. The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported

assumptions and limiting conditions and are my personal, impartial, and unbiased professional analyses, opinions, and conclusions.

I have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report and no personal interest with respect to the parties involved.

I have no bias with respect to the property that is the subject of this report or to the parties involved with this assignment.

My engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting predetermined results.

My compensation for completing this assignment is not contingent upon the development or reporting of a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client, the amount of the value opinion, the attainment of a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event directly related to the intended use of this appraisal.

The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the requirements of the Code of Professional Ethics & Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute.

The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice

The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to review by its duly authorized representatives.

I have made a personal inspection of the property that is the subject of this report. No one provided significant real property appraisal assistance to the person signing this

certification - I have not previously performed an appraisal service on the subject in the 3 year period

preceding the effective date of the appraisal. __________ ___________________________

Michael A. Wilson Certified General Appraiser/04-8088

41

42