BSRR Sierra Bancorp

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

June 30, 2017

(Unaudited)

Note 1 – The Business of Sierra Bancorp

Sierra Bancorp (the “Company”) is a California corporation headquartered in Porterville, California, and is a registered bank holding company under federal banking laws. The Company was formed to serve as the holding company for Bank of the Sierra (the “Bank”), and has been the Bank’s sole shareholder since August 2001. The Company exists primarily for the purpose of holding the stock of the Bank and of such other subsidiaries it may acquire or establish. As of June 30, 2017, the Company’s only other subsidiaries were Sierra Statutory Trust II, Sierra Capital Trust III, and Coast Bancorp Statutory Trust II, which exist solely to facilitate the issuance of capital trust pass-through securities (“TRUPS”). Pursuant to the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) standard on the consolidation of variable interest entities, these trusts are not reflected on a consolidated basis in the Company’s financial statements. References herein to the “Company” include Sierra Bancorp and its consolidated subsidiary, the Bank, unless the context indicates otherwise.

Bank of the Sierra, a California state-chartered bank headquartered in Porterville, California, offers a full range of retail and commercial banking services in California’s South San Joaquin Valley, the Central Coast, Ventura County, and neighboring communities. The Bank was incorporated in September 1977, and opened for business in January 1978 as a one-branch bank with $1.5 million in capital. Our growth in the ensuing years has largely been organic in nature, but includes three whole-bank acquisitions: Sierra National Bank in 2000, Santa Clara Valley Bank in 2014, and Coast National Bank in July of 2016. The Bank now operates 34 full-service branches, a loan production office, and an online branch, and maintains ATMs at all branch locations and seven non-branch locations. Our most recent branching activity occurred in the first quarter of 2017, with a de novo branch opened on California Avenue in Bakersfield and our Paso Robles branch relocated to a superior site in reasonably close proximity to the previous location. The Company plans to expand even further in the fourth quarter of 2017 with the acquisition of OCB Bancorp, the holding company for Ojai Community Bank, and the purchase of the Woodlake branch of Citizens Business Bank (see Note 13 to the financial statements, Recent Developments, for more details on the proposed acquisitions). We have also received regulatory approvals for a de novo branch in Pismo Beach, California, although the timing for that branch opening remains uncertain, and have plans to relocate our Fresno Herndon branch to a nearby location with easier access and better visibility. In addition to our stand-alone offices the Bank has specialized lending units which include a real estate industries center, an agricultural credit center, and an SBA lending unit. We were close to $2.1 billion in total assets as of June 30, 2017, and for the past several years have claimed the distinction of being the largest bank headquartered in the South San Joaquin Valley. The Bank’s deposit accounts, which totaled almost $1.8 billion at June 30, 2017, are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) up to maximum insurable amounts.

Note 2 – Basis of Presentation

The accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements have been prepared in a condensed format, and therefore do not include all of the information and footnotes required by U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) for complete financial statements. The information furnished in these interim statements reflects all adjustments that are, in the opinion of Management, necessary for a fair statement of the results for such periods. Such adjustments can generally be considered as normal and recurring unless otherwise disclosed in this Form 10-Q. In preparing the accompanying financial statements, Management has taken subsequent events into consideration and recognized them where appropriate. The results of operations in the interim statements are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for any other quarter, or for the full year. Certain amounts reported for 2016 have been reclassified to be consistent with the reporting for 2017. The interim financial information should be read in conjunction with the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”).

Note 3 – Current Accounting Developments

In May 2014, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606) . This ASU is the result of a joint project initiated by the FASB and the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) to clarify the principles for recognizing revenue, and to develop common revenue standards and disclosure requirements that would: (1) remove inconsistencies and weaknesses in revenue requirements; (2) provide a more robust framework for addressing revenue issues; (3) improve comparability of revenue recognition practices across entities, industries, jurisdictions, and capital markets; (4) provide more useful information to users of financial statements through improved disclosures; and (5) simplify the preparation of financial statements by reducing the number of requirements to which an entity must refer. The guidance affects any entity that either enters into contracts with customers to transfer goods or services or enters into contracts for the transfer of nonfinancial assets. The core principle is that an entity should recognize revenue to depict the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. The guidance provides steps to follow to achieve the core principle. An entity should disclose sufficient information to enable users of financial statements to understand the nature, amount, timing and uncertainty of revenue and cash flows arising from contracts with customers. Qualitative and quantitative information is required with regard to contracts with customers, significant judgments and changes in judgments, and assets recognized from the costs to obtain or fulfill a contract. This ASU is effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods therein, with early adoption permitted for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016. The Company plans to adopt ASU 2014-09 on January 1, 2018 utilizing the modified retrospective approach. Since the guidance does not apply to revenue associated with financial instruments such as loans and investments, which are accounted for under other provisions of GAAP, we do not expect it to impact interest income, our largest component of income. The Company is currently performing an overall assessment of revenue streams potentially affected by the ASU, including certain deposit related fees and interchange fees, to determine the potential impact of this guidance on our consolidated financial statements.

In January 2016 the FASB issued ASU 2016-01, Financial Instruments–Overall: Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities . This guidance primarily affects the accounting for equity securities with readily determinable fair values, by requiring that the changes in fair value for such securities will be reflected in earnings rather than in other comprehensive income. The accounting for other financial instruments such as loans, debt securities, and financial liabilities is largely unchanged. ASU 2016-01 also changes the presentation and disclosure requirements for financial instruments, including a requirement that public business entities use exit pricing when estimating fair values for financial instruments measured at amortized cost for disclosure purposes. ASU 2016-01 is generally effective for public business entities in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Based on Management’s evaluation of the provisions of ASU 2016-01, we have determined that the difference between the amortized cost and fair market value of our equity securities, which constitutes a $993,000 gain at June 30, 2017, would be credited to retained earnings, net of tax as a one-time cumulative-effect adjustment upon our adoption of this ASU on January 1, 2018, with any subsequent changes in fair market value reflected in our income statement. There would likely be no other impact on our consolidated financial statements or disclosures. We are exploring the possibility of selling most of our equity securities during the current fiscal year, in which case there would be no impact on our consolidated financial statements upon adoption of ASU 2016-01.

In February 2016 the FASB issued ASU 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842) . The intention of this standard is to increase the transparency and comparability around lease obligations. Previously unrecorded off-balance sheet obligations will now be brought more prominently to light by presenting lease liabilities on the face of the balance sheet, accompanied by enhanced qualitative and quantitative disclosures in the notes to the financial statements. ASU 2016-02 is generally effective for public business entities in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company has leases on 17 branch locations, a loan production office, and an administrative office, which are considered operating leases and are not currently reflected in our financial statements. We expect that these lease agreements will be recognized on our consolidated statements of condition as right-of-use assets and corresponding lease liabilities subsequent to implementing ASU 2016-02, but we are still evaluating the extent to which this will impact our consolidated financial statements.

In March 2016 the FASB issued ASU 2016-09, Compensation–Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting , as part of its simplification initiative. ASU 2016-09 became effective for public business entities for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016, and interim periods within that reporting period. The Company adopted ASU 2016-09 effective January 1, 2017. Prior guidance dictated that as they relate to share-based payments, tax benefits in excess of compensation costs (“windfalls”) were to be recorded in equity, and tax deficiencies (“shortfalls”) were to be recorded in equity to the extent of previous windfalls and then to the income statement. ASU 2016-09 reduced some of the administrative complexities by eliminating the need to track a windfall “pool,” but as we have already experienced, it also increases the volatility of income tax expense. ASU 2016-09 also removed the requirement to delay recognition of a windfall tax benefit until such time as it reduces current taxes payable. Under the new guidance, the benefit is recorded when it arises, subject to normal valuation allowance considerations. This change was applied by us on a modified retrospective basis, as required, with a cumulative-effect adjustment to opening retained earnings. Furthermore, all tax-related cash flows resulting from share-based payments are now reported as operating activities on the statement of cash flows, a change from the previous requirement to present windfall tax benefits as an inflow from financing activities and an outflow from operating activities. However, cash paid by an employer when directly withholding shares for tax withholding purposes is classified as a financing activity. Under the new guidance, entities were permitted to make an accounting policy election for the impact of forfeitures on expense recognition for share-based payment awards. Forfeitures can be estimated in advance, as required previously, or recognized as they occur. Estimates are still required in certain circumstances, such as at the time of modification of an award or issuance of a replacement award in a business combination. If elected, the change to recognize forfeitures when they occur would have been adopted using a modified retrospective approach, with a cumulative effect adjustment recorded to opening retained earnings. We did not elect to recognize forfeitures as they occur, and continue to estimate potential forfeitures in advance.

In June 2016 the FASB issued ASU 2016-13, Financial Instruments – Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments , which eliminates the probable initial recognition threshold for credit losses in current U.S. GAAP, and instead requires an organization to record a current estimate of all expected credit losses over the contractual term for financial assets carried at amortized cost. This is commonly referred to as the current expected credit losses (“CECL”) methodology. Expected credit losses for financial assets held at the reporting date will be measured based on historical experience, current conditions, and reasonable and supportable forecasts. Another change from existing U.S. GAAP involves the treatment of purchased credit deteriorated assets, which are more broadly defined than purchased credit impaired assets in current accounting standards. When such assets are purchased, institutions will estimate and record an allowance for credit losses that is added to the purchase price rather than being reported as a credit loss expense. Furthermore, ASU 2016-13 updates the measurement of credit losses on available-for-sale debt securities, by mandating that institutions record credit losses on available-for-sale debt securities through an allowance for credit losses rather than the current practice of writing down securities for other-than-temporary impairment. ASU 2016-13 will also require the enhancement of financial statement disclosures regarding estimates used in calculating credit losses. ASU 2016-13 does not change the existing write-off principle in U.S. GAAP or current nonaccrual practices, nor does it change accounting requirements for loans held for sale or certain other financial assets which are measured at the lower of amortized cost or fair value. As a public business entity that is an SEC filer, ASU 2016-13 becomes effective for the Company on January 1, 2020, although early application is permitted for 2019. On the effective date, institutions will apply the new accounting standard as follows: for financial assets carried at amortized cost, a cumulative-effect adjustment will be recognized on the balance sheet for any change in the related allowance for loan and lease losses generated by the adoption of the new standard; financial assets classified as purchased credit impaired assets prior to the effective date will be reclassified as purchased credit deteriorated assets as of the effective date, and will be grossed up for the related allowance for expected credit losses created as of the effective date; and, debt securities on which other-than-temporary impairment had been recognized prior to the effective date will transition to the new guidance prospectively with no change in their amortized cost basis. The Company has commenced its transition efforts by establishing an implementation team, comprised of the Company’s executive officers and certain other members of our credit administration and finance departments and chaired by our Chief Credit Officer. The Company’s preliminary evaluation indicates that the provisions of ASU 2016-13 will impact our consolidated financial statements, in particular the level of our reserve for credit losses and shareholders’ equity. However, we continue to evaluate the potential extent of that impact.

In January 2017 the FASB issued ASU 2017-01, Business Combinations (Topic 805): Clarifying the Definition of a Business . Currently, Topic 805 specifies three elements of a business – inputs, processes, and outputs. While an integrated set of assets and activities (collectively referred to as a “set”) that is a business usually has outputs, outputs are not required. In addition, all the inputs and processes that a seller uses in operating a set are not required if market participants can acquire the set and continue to produce outputs, for example, by integrating the acquired set with their own inputs and processes. This led many transactions to be accounted for as business combinations rather than asset purchases under legacy GAAP. The primary goal of ASU 2017-01 is to narrow the definition of a business, and the guidance in this update provides a screen to determine when a set is not a business. The screen requires that when substantially all of the fair value of the gross assets acquired (or disposed of) is concentrated in a single identifiable asset or a group of similar identifiable assets, the set is not a business. This screen reduces the number of transactions that need to be further evaluated. The amendments in this update are effective for public business entities for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years. The amendments in this update should be applied prospectively on or after the effective date. The Company is currently evaluating this ASU to determine the impact on its consolidated financial position, results of operations and cash flows.

In January 2017 the FASB issued ASU 2017-04, Intangibles – Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Simplifying the Accounting for Goodwill Impairment . This guidance removes Step 2 of the goodwill impairment test, which requires a hypothetical purchase price allocation, and goodwill impairment will simply be the amount by which a reporting unit’s carrying value exceeds its fair value, not to exceed the carrying amount of goodwill. All other goodwill impairment guidance will remain largely unchanged. Entities will continue to have the option to perform a qualitative assessment to determine if a quantitative impairment test is necessary. The same one-step impairment test will be applied to goodwill at all reporting units, even those with zero or negative carrying amounts. Entities will be required to disclose the amount of goodwill at reporting units with zero or negative carrying amounts. The amendments in this update are effective for public business entities for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019. We have not been required to record any goodwill impairment to date, and after a preliminary review do not expect that this guidance would require us to do so given current circumstances. Nevertheless, we will continue to evaluate ASU 2017-04 to more definitely determine its potential impact on the Company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations and cash flows.

In March 2017 the FASB issued ASU 2017-08, Receivables – Nonrefundable Fees and Other Costs (Subtopic 310-20): Premium Amortization on Purchased Callable Debt Securities . The amendments in this update shorten the amortization period for certain callable debt securities held at a premium, by requiring the premium to be amortized to the earliest call date. Under current guidance, the premium on a callable debt security is generally amortized as an adjustment to yield over the contractual life of the instrument, and any unamortized premium is recorded as a loss in earnings upon the debtor’s exercise of a call provision. Under ASU 2017-08, because the premium will be amortized to the earliest call date, entities will no longer recognize a loss in earnings if a debt security is called prior to the contractual maturity date. The amendments do not require an accounting change for securities held at a discount; discounts will continue to be amortized as an adjustment to yield over the contractual life of the debt instrument. ASU 2017-08 is effective for public business entities, including the Company, for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2018. Early adoption is permitted, including adoption in an interim period. If an entity early adopts in an interim period, any adjustments must be reflected as of the beginning of the fiscal year that includes that interim period. To apply ASU 2017-08, entities must use a modified retrospective approach, with the cumulative-effect adjustment recognized to retained earnings at the beginning of the period of adoption. Entities are also required to provide disclosures about a change in accounting principle in the period of adoption. The Company has evaluated the potential impact of this guidance, and does not expect the adoption of ASU 2017-08 to have a material impact on our financial statements or operations.

In May 2017 the FASB issued ASU 2017-09, Compensation—Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Scope of Modification Accounting . This update was issued to provide clarity, reduce diversity in practice, and lower cost and complexity when applying the guidance in Topic 718. Under the updated guidance, an entity will be expected to account for the effects of an equity award modification unless all the following are met: 1) the fair value of the modified award is the same as the fair value of the original award immediately before the original award is modified; 2) the vesting conditions of the modified award are the same as the vesting conditions of the original award immediately before the original award is modified; 3) the classification of the modified award as an equity instrument or a liability instrument is the same as the classification of the original award immediately before the original award is modified. The current disclosure requirements in Topic 718 continue to apply. ASU 2017-09 is effective for public business entities, including the Company, for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2017. Early adoption is permitted, including adoption in an interim period for public business entities for reporting periods for which financial statements have not yet been issued. Since the Company has not modified equity awards in the past and does not expect to do so in the future, we do not anticipate any impact on our financial statements or operations from the adoption of ASU 2017-09.

Note 4 – Supplemental Disclosure of Cash Flow Information

During the six months ended June 30, 2017 and 2016, cash paid for interest due on interest-bearing liabilities was $2.273 million and $1.423 million, respectively. There was $5.647 million in cash paid for income taxes during the six months ended June 30, 2017, and $2.500 million for the six months ended June 30, 2016. Assets totaling $115,000 and $694,000 were acquired in settlement of loans for the six months ended June 30, 2017 and June 30, 2016, respectively. We received $99,000 in cash from the sale of foreclosed assets during the first six months of 2017 relative to $729,000 during the first six months of 2016, which represents sales proceeds less loans (if any) extended to finance such sales.

Note 5 – Share Based Compensation

On March 16, 2017 the Company’s Board of Directors approved and adopted the 2017 Stock Incentive Plan (the “2017 Plan”), which became effective May 24, 2017 pursuant to the approval of the Company’s shareholders. The 2017 Plan replaced the Company’s 2007 Stock Incentive Plan (the “2007 Plan”), which expired by its own terms on March 15, 2017. Options to purchase 500,120 shares that were granted under the 2007 Plan were still outstanding as of June 30, 2017, and remain unaffected by that plan’s expiration. The 2017 Plan provides for the issuance of both “incentive” and “nonqualified” stock options to officers and employees, and of “nonqualified” stock options to non-employee directors and consultants of the Company. The 2017 Plan also provides for the issuance of restricted stock awards to these same classes of eligible participants, although no restricted stock awards have ever been issued by the Company. The total number of shares of the Company’s authorized but unissued stock reserved for issuance pursuant to awards under the 2017 Plan is 850,000 shares. The dilutive impact of stock options outstanding is discussed below in Note 6, Earnings per Share.

Pursuant to FASB’s standards on stock compensation, the value of each stock option granted is reflected in our income statement as employee compensation or directors’ expense by expensing its fair value as of the grant date in the case of immediately vested options, or by amortizing its grant date fair value over the vesting period for options with graded vesting. The Company is utilizing the Black-Scholes model to value stock options, and the “multiple option” approach is used to allocate the resulting valuation to actual expense. Under the multiple option approach an employee’s options for each vesting period are separately valued and amortized, which appears to be the preferred method for option grants with graded vesting. A pre-tax charge of $18,000 was reflected in the Company’s income statement during the second quarter of 2017 and $12,000 was charged during the second quarter of 2016, as expense related to stock options. For the first half, the charges totaled $441,000 in 2017 and $169,000 in 2016.

Note 6 – Earnings per Share

The computation of earnings per share, as presented in the Consolidated Statements of Income, is based on the weighted average number of shares outstanding during each period. There were 13,831,345 weighted average shares outstanding during the second quarter of 2017, and 13,280,433 during the second quarter of 2016. There were 13,816,576 weighted average shares outstanding during the first six months of 2017, and 13,272,903 during the first six months of 2016.

Diluted earnings per share include the effect of the potential issuance of common shares, which for the Company is limited to shares that would be issued on the exercise of “in-the-money” stock options. For the second quarter of 2017, calculations under the treasury stock method resulted in the equivalent of 178,983 shares being added to basic weighted average shares outstanding for purposes of determining diluted earnings per share, while a weighted average of 120,700 stock options were excluded from the calculation because they were underwater and thus anti-dilutive. For the second quarter of 2016 the equivalent of 113,015 shares were added in calculating diluted earnings per share, while 162,700 anti-dilutive stock options were not factored into the computation. Likewise, for the first half of 2017 the equivalent of 192,909 shares were added to basic weighted average shares outstanding in calculating diluted earnings per share and a weighted average of 120,700 stock options that were anti-dilutive for the period were not included, compared to the addition of the equivalent of 115,761 shares and non-inclusion of 212,700 anti-dilutive options in calculating diluted earnings per share for first half of 2016.

Note 7 – Comprehensive Income

As presented in the Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income, comprehensive income includes net income and other comprehensive income. The Company’s only source of other comprehensive income is unrealized gains and losses on available-for-sale investment securities. Gains or losses on investment securities that were realized and reflected in net income of the current period, which had previously been included in other comprehensive income as unrealized holding gains or losses in the period in which they arose, are considered to be reclassification adjustments that are excluded from other comprehensive income in the current period.

Note 8 – Financial Instruments with Off-Balance-Sheet Risk

The Company is a party to financial instruments with off-balance-sheet risk in the normal course of business. Those financial instruments currently consist of unused commitments to extend credit and standby letters of credit. They involve, to varying degrees, elements of risk in excess of the amount recognized in the balance sheet. The Company’s exposure to credit loss in the event of nonperformance by counterparties for commitments to extend credit and letters of credit is represented by the contractual amount of those instruments. The Company uses the same credit policies in making commitments and issuing letters of credit as it does for originating loans included on the balance sheet. The following financial instruments represent off-balance-sheet credit risk (dollars in thousands):

Commitments to extend credit consist primarily of the unused or unfunded portions of the following: home equity lines of credit; commercial real estate construction loans, where disbursements are made over the course of construction; commercial revolving lines of credit; mortgage warehouse lines of credit; unsecured personal lines of credit; and formalized (disclosed) deposit account overdraft lines. Commitments generally have fixed expiration dates or other termination clauses and may require payment of a fee. Since many commitments are expected to expire without being drawn upon, the unused portions of committed amounts do not necessarily represent future cash requirements. Standby letters of credit are generally unsecured and are issued by the Company to guarantee the performance of a customer to a third party, and the credit risk involved in issuing letters of credit is essentially the same as the risk involved in extending loans to customers.

At June 30, 2017, the Company was also utilizing a letter of credit in the amount of $87 million issued by the Federal Home Loan Bank on the Company’s behalf as security for certain deposits and to facilitate certain credit arrangements with the Company’s customers. That letter of credit is backed by loans which are pledged to the FHLB by the Company.

Note 9 – Fair Value Disclosures and Reporting, the Fair Value Option and Fair Value Measurements

FASB’s standards on financial instruments, and on fair value measurements and disclosures, require all entities to disclose in their financial statement footnotes the estimated fair values of financial instruments for which it is practicable to estimate such. In addition to disclosure requirements, FASB’s standard on investments requires that our debt securities which are classified as available for sale and our equity securities that have readily determinable fair values be measured and reported at fair value in our statement of financial position. Certain impaired loans are also reported at fair value, as explained in greater detail below, and foreclosed assets are carried at the lower of cost or fair value. FASB’s standard on financial instruments permits companies to report certain other financial assets and liabilities at fair value, but we have not elected the fair value option for any of those financial instruments.

Fair value measurement and disclosure standards also establish a framework for measuring fair values. Fair value is defined as the exchange price that would be received for an asset or paid to transfer a liability (an exit price) in the principal or most advantageous market for the asset or liability, in an orderly transaction between market participants on the measurement date. Further, the standards establish a fair value hierarchy that encourages an entity to maximize the use of observable inputs and limit the use of unobservable inputs when measuring fair values. The standards describe three levels of inputs that may be used to measure fair values:

Fair value estimates are made at a specific point in time based on relevant market data and information about the financial instruments. The estimates do not reflect any premium or discount that could result from offering the Company’s entire holdings of a particular financial instrument for sale at one time, nor do they attempt to estimate the value of anticipated future business related to the instruments. In addition, the tax ramifications related to realized gains and losses could have a significant effect on fair value estimates but have not been considered in those estimates. Because no active market exists for a significant portion of our financial instruments, fair value disclosures are based on judgments regarding current economic conditions, risk characteristics of various financial instruments and other factors. The estimates are subjective and involve uncertainties and matters of significant judgment, and therefore cannot be determined with precision. Changes in assumptions could significantly alter the fair values presented. The following methods and assumptions were used by the Company to estimate its financial instrument fair values disclosed at June 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016:

Estimated fair values for the Company’s financial instruments are as follows, as of the dates noted:

For financial asset categories that were actually reported at fair value as of June 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016, the Company used the following methods and significant assumptions:

Assets reported at fair value on a recurring basis are summarized below:

Assets reported at fair value on a nonrecurring basis are summarized below: