- 29 -
actual sale prices to the estimated pro rata share of market
value, Mr. Gilman concluded that a 15-percent discount would be
appropriate for decedent's 50- and 51-percent interests (parcels
5, 6, and 10), and that a 20-percent discount was appropriate for
decedent's 25-percent interest in parcel 8.12 Mr. Gilman
multiplied the estimated value of a fee simple interest in each
property by decedent's pro rata ownership interest and reduced
the product by his indicated discount rate. We find Mr. Gilman’s
analysis regarding the partial interest discounts helpful and
incorporate that analysis into our findings.
In contrast, we do not find the portion of Mr. Gilman’s
report that analyzed the per-acre values of the Nipomo properties
helpful. In that section, the report is far too conclusory and
suffers generally from a dearth of data. While the report lists
comparable properties, it lacks any detailed analysis of those
properties in relationship to the subject properties. We also
have concern over Mr. Gilman's choice of comparable properties.
Some of the properties are hundreds of miles away from the
subject properties. Although Mr. Gilman explained his selection
of these properties as providing the value based on grazing use
12Mr. Gilman's analysis that a partial interest discount was
warranted for parcel 10 was predicated on his assumption that
decedent owned 51 percent of that property. As discussed infra
sec. III.D.2, on the record before us, we find that decedent
owned 100 percent of parcel 10.
Page: Previous 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011