SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

                             WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

                                   FORM 10-KSB

                    Annual Report Under Section 13 or 15(d) of
                        The Securities Exchange Act of 1934

For the Fiscal Year Ended                                      Commission File
December 31, 2006                                               Number 0-16856

                         BIGGEST LITTLE INVESTMENTS L.P.
       -------------------------------------------------------------------
                  (Name of Small Business Issuer in Its Charter)

	           DELAWARE                                              13-3368726
---------------------------------                           -------------------
 (State or Other Jurisdiction of                               (IRS Employer
  Incorporation or Organization)                            Identification No.)


    1175 W. MOANA LANE, RENO, NEVADA                               89509
-----------------------------------------                     ----------------
 (Address of Principal Executive Offices)                         (Zip Code)

                                  775-825-3355
                                ----------------
                (Issuer's Telephone Number, Including Area Code)


          Securities registered under Section 12(b) of the Exchange Act:

                                       NONE

          Securities registered under Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act:

                       UNITS OF LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INTEREST

     Check whether the issuer: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed
by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act during the past 12 months, and (2)
has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.

                    YES    X                     NO
                         -----                      -----

     Check if there is no disclosure of delinquent filers in response to Item
405 of Regulation S-B is not contained in this form, and no disclosure will be
contained, to the best of Partnership's knowledge, in definitive proxy or
information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-
KSB or any amendment to this Form 10-KSB [X].

     Indicate by check mark whether the small business issuer is a shell
company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act)  YES [ ]  NO [X]


     Issuer's revenues for its most recent fiscal year were $2,115,035.

     There is no public market for the Limited Partnership Units. Accordingly,
information with respect to the aggregate market value of Limited Partnership
Units held by non-affiliates of Partnership has not been supplied.



                    DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
                    -----------------------------------
                                   None

  Transitional Small Business Disclosure Format:  Yes ____;  No    x  .




     Certain matters discussed herein are forward-looking statements. We have
based these forward-looking statements on our current expectations and
projections about future events. Certain, but not necessarily all, of such
forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of forward-looking
terminology, such as "believes," "expects," "may," "will," "should,"
"estimates," or "anticipates," or the negative thereof or other variations
thereof or comparable terminology. All forward-looking statements involve
known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause our
actual transactions, results, performance or achievements to be materially
different from any future transactions, results, performance or achievements
expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Although we believe
the expectations reflected in such forward-looking statements are based upon
reasonable assumptions, we can give no assurance that our expectations will be
attained or that any deviations will not be material. We disclaim any
obligations or undertaking to publicly release any updates or revisions to any
forward-looking statement contained in this annual report on Form 10-KSB to
reflect any change in our expectations with regard thereto or any change in
events, conditions or circumstances on which any such statement is based.


                                   PART I

ITEM 1. DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS

GENERAL

     Biggest Little Investments L.P. (the "Partnership"), formerly Resources
Accrued Mortgage Investors 2, L.P., Resources Accrued Mortgage Investors L.P.
Series 87 and Resources Accrued Mortgage Investors L.P. Series 88, was
organized as a Delaware limited partnership on August 14, 1986. Until January
1, 2002, the general partners of the Partnership were RAM Funding, Inc. ("RAM
Funding") and Presidio AGP Corp. ("Presidio AGP"). Effective January 1, 2002,
the managing general partner interest and the associate general partner
interest were acquired by Maxum LLC, a Nevada limited liability company (the
"General Partner"). See "Change in Control" below. On October 8, 2003, the
Partnership received consents from the holders of a majority of its
outstanding units of limited partnership interest ("Units") to adopt the
Partnership's Second Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership
(the "Amended LP Agreement"). Pursuant to the Amended LP Agreement, the
Partnership was renamed "Biggest Little Investments, L.P." In addition, the
Amended LP Agreement provides the Partnership with the ability to leverage its
property in an effort to increase the value of the Partnership, to purchase
additional real estate for investment and/or development and to make or
acquire additional mortgage loans or short-term loans, as well as to reinvest
operating income and proceeds from the sale or refinancing of its properties
or the disposition of its mortgage loans. Finally, the Amended LP Agreement
permits the Partnership to repurchase Units from the limited partners. In
2004, the Partnership repurchased a total of 6,982 Units from two separate
repurchase programs and subsequently retired all 6,982 Units. No Units have
been repurchased since 2004.

     In 1988, the Partnership sold, pursuant to a registration statement filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission, 187,919 Units for gross proceeds
aggregating $46,979,750. Pursuant to the terms of the Partnership's original
partnership agreement, any subscription proceeds not invested by April 12, 1990
were required to be returned to the investors. At April 12, 1990, the
Partnership had not invested $18,405,847 of the original gross proceeds.
Accordingly, such amount was returned to the investors.

CHANGE IN CONTROL

     As of January 1, 2002, the General Partner acquired both the managing
general partner interest and the associate general partner interest in the
Partnership from RAM Funding and Presidio AGP, respectively, pursuant to the
General and Limited Partner Interest Assignment Agreement (the "Assignment
Agreement"), dated as of October 10, 2001, between the General Partner,
Western Real Estate Investments, LLC, an affiliate of the General Partner
("Western"), RAM Funding and Presidio AGP as well as Presidio Capital
Investment Company LLC, Presidio Partnership II Corp. and Bighorn Associates

                                     -2-



LLC, each of which is affiliated with RAM Funding and Presidio AGP Corp. and
was a limited partner of the Partnership prior to January 1, 2002 (the "Former
LPs"). Also pursuant to the Assignment Agreement, as of January 1, 2002,
Western purchased all of the Units owned by the Former LPs ("Former LP
Units").

     As a result of the transactions described above, the General Partner owns
100% of the general partner interests in the Partnership, and Western
beneficially owns approximately 50.8% of the outstanding Units on the date
hereof (see ?Recent Events? under Item 6 below). In addition, as of January 1,
2002, the General Partner was appointed as the managing agent at the Sierra
Property (as hereinafter defined), replacing an affiliate of RAM Funding,
Presidio AGP and the Former LPs.

     Pursuant to the Assignment Agreement, RAM Funding was admitted as a non-
equity special manager of the General Partner whose only right was to have the
sole and exclusive authority to settle a class action litigation involving the
Partnership; however, RAM Funding was not entitled to enter into any
settlement agreement with respect to the class action if the Partnership would
have been required to make any settlement payment unless the General Partner
agreed to such proposed payment by the Partnership. On June 4, 2002, the class
action was dismissed, and RAM Funding was subsequently removed as the special
manager.

     In connection with the transfer of the Partnership's general partner
interests to the General Partner, the principal executive offices of the
Partnership were moved to 1175 W. Moana Lane, Reno, Nevada  89509, and the
Partnership's telephone number was changed to (775) 825-3355.


MANAGEMENT/EMPLOYEES

     The Partnership has three employees; two of them work full time, one
works part time. The business of the Partnership is managed by the General
Partner and its affiliates and agents.


INVESTMENTS OF PARTNERSHIP

     The Partnership had an investment in a mortgage loan (the "Sierra Loan")
issued on February 10, 1989 in the amount of $6,500,000 to High Cash Partners,
L.P. (the "Sierra Borrower"), a public limited partnership originally
sponsored by Integrated Resources, Inc., which declared bankruptcy in 1994.
The total amount, including fees, allocated to the Sierra Loan from the gross
proceeds of the Partnership's offering was $7,715,134 including payment to RAM
Funding of a mortgage placement fee of $385,757. Commencing on March 1, 2001,
the Partnership began receiving interest payments on the Sierra Loan, which
payments represented 16% of the Partnership's 2002 revenue. On March 3, 2003,
the Partnership acquired the deed to the property securing the Sierra Loan, a
shopping center commonly known as the Sierra Marketplace located in Reno,
Nevada (the "Sierra Property"), in lieu of foreclosing on the Sierra Loan.
The Sierra Property consists of approximately 213,000 square feet of net
rentable area and occupies 18.67 acres, consisting primarily of two main
buildings with spaces for two anchor tenants, with surface parking for
approximately 1,100 automobiles.

     In an effort to maximize the financial viability of the Sierra Property,
the Partnership began to remodel and renovate the Property during 2004. See
"Item 2. Description of Property" for a description of the Sierra Property and
its tenants, and the Partnership's renovation plans to date.


COMPETITION

     The real estate business is highly competitive and the Sierra Property has
active competition for tenants from similar properties in the vicinity. See
"Item 6. Management's Discussion and Analysis or Plan of Operation."



                                     -3-



TENDER OFFERS

     On June 6, 2006, Mr. Ben Farahi, the Manager of the General Parnter but
acting in his individual capacity, commenced a tender offer (the "Offer") to
purchase up to 65,000 Units at a price of $140 per Unit. The Offer expired on
August 29, 2006, and resulted in the tender by limited partners, and purchase
by Mr. Farahi, of 8,821 Units. As a result of such purchases, Mr. Farahi
beneficially owns 49,797 Units, constituting approximately 27.5% of the
outstanding Units, in addition to 61,268 Units of which he disclaims
beneficial ownership.

     As of March 15, 2007, the Partnership had 180,937 Units outstanding.


ITEM 2. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY

     The Partnership's sole property is the Sierra Property, located at South
Virginia Street and East Moana Lane, one of the busiest intersections in Reno,
Nevada. The Partnership owns the Sierra Property in fee simple and the Sierra
Property is not subject to any mortgages, liens or other encumbrances. The
General Partner believes that the Sierra Property is adequately covered by
insurance.

Tenants of the Sierra Property

     Bell Furniture, Inc. ("Bell"), a furniture retailer, vacated its leased
premises on December 4, 2006. Bell occupied 52,660 square feet, or
approximately 24.8%, of the Sierra Property?s leasable space and paid a
monthly base rent of $31,000. Bell's lease terminated on October 31, 2006, and
remained as a tenant of the Sierra Property on a month-to-month basis until
vacating.

     On April 12, 2004, the Partnership took legal action against Smith?s Food
King (?Smith?s?), a supermarket retail chain and the Sierra Property?s last
remaining anchor tenant, as it was in default of its obligation to pay common
area charges and other covenants of its lease. The courts ruled in favor of
the Partnership. On October 1, 2004, the Partnership was notified by Smith?s,
that Smith?s would vacate its leased space on October 12, 2004. Smith?s had
been leasing a 68,972 square-foot space at the Sierra Property, representing
approximately 32.4% of the Sierra Property?s rentable square footage. Smith?s
was contractually obligated to continue paying rent and common area
maintenance charges, as well as to fulfill its other obligations under its
lease agreement through expiration in August 2008. On April 25, 2005, the
Partnership settled its lawsuit with Smith?s. Per the terms of the settlement,
Smith?s paid the Partnership the sum of $1.2 million in settlement of all
charges owed, future rent and early termination of its lease at the Sierra
Property. As a result of the settlement in favor of the Partnership, the
Partnership regained control of the premises previously occupied by Smith?s.
In March 2006, the space previously occupied by Smith?s was broken into and
vandalized resulting in damage in excess of $200,000. The Partnership filed an
insurance claim on the loss and, in 2007, received approximately $161,000 in
settlement proceeds from the insurance company. The Partnership has increased
its security measures at the Sierra Property and is in the process of
evaluating repair and lease options for the damaged space.


Renovation

     In an effort to maximize the financial viability of the Sierra Property,
the Partnership demolished and rebuilt part of the Sierra Property, and may
demolish, rebuild, remodel and renovate other parts of the Sierra Property
(the "Renovation"). As part of the Renovation, the portion of the shopping
center previously occupied by Good Guys, an electronics retailer and former
anchor tenant of the Sierra Property whose lease expired on November 30, 2003,
was demolished for the purpose of creating in its place a new driveway (and
traffic signal) directly between the Sierra Property and the property adjacent
to the Sierra Property (the ?Adjacent Property?). The Partnership took an
impairment charge in 2003 on the portion of the building of the Sierra
Property that was demolished for this purpose. The driveway was constructed

                                    -4-



and put into use on September 30, 2004, and is being shared by, and provides a
connection between, the Sierra Property and the Adjacent Property. In January
2004, the Adjacent Property entered into a lease with the Partnership for a
37,368 square foot section of the Sierra Property (including the new
driveway). The Adjacent Property pays rent and has a minimum lease term of 15
years at a monthly rent of $25,000, subject to increase every 60 months based
on the Consumer Price Index. The Adjacent Property also uses part of the
common area of the Sierra Property and pays its proportionate share of the
common area expense of the Sierra Property. The Adjacent Property has the
option to renew the lease for three five-year terms, and at the end of the
extension periods, has the option to purchase the leased section of the Sierra
Property at a price to be determined based on an MAI Appraisal. The space
being leased by the Adjacent Property provides pedestrian and vehicle access
to the Adjacent Property, and the Adjacent Property has use of a portion of
the parking spaces at the Sierra Property. The total cost of the project was
$2.0 million and the Adjacent Property was responsible for two-thirds of the
total cost, or $1.35 million.

     Further phases of the Renovation are currently being studied. Until firm
plans are established for the development of the Sierra Property, we are
marketing vacant spaces only to tenants willing to sign short-term leases.

     As of March 15, 2007, 31.9% of the Sierra Property's rentable square
footage was occupied. The average effective monthly rent is $1.19 per occupied
square foot. This does not include the driveway leased to the Adjacent
Property.


Lease Expirations

     The following table details the number of tenants whose leases will
expire for each of the next ten years and related information:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                   Total Sq. Ft.    Annual Rent of      % of Gross Annual
               Number of Leases    of Expiring      Expiring Leases     Rent of Expiring
Year           Expiring            Leases           at Current Rates    Leases
----           ----------------    -------------    ----------------    -----------------
<C>            <C>                 <C>              <C>                 <C>
2007                  6               13,026            268,269              21.2%
2008                  9               19,829            368,900              29.2%
2009                  2                2,875             52,724               4.2%
2010                  0                   -                  -                  -
2011 through
2016                  1                7,224             59,598               4.7%
</TABLE>

     In addition, there are eight spaces totaling approximately 25,750 square
feet and representing approximately $20,500 in monthly rent that are currently
being leased on a month-to-month basis.


Depreciation

     Set forth below is a table showing the carrying value, accumulated
depreciation and federal tax basis (in thousands) of the Sierra Property as of
December 31, 2006:

 Carrying     Accumulated                                   Federal Tax
   Value      Depreciation       Rate          Method          Basis
-----------   ------------     --------     -------------   -----------
 $ 15,586        $1,799        5-30 yrs     Straight Line    $ 16,573


Realty Taxes

     The realty tax rate for the Sierra Property for July 1, 2006 through June
30, 2007, is approximately 3.6462% of appraised value and the real estate
taxes to be paid are $250,685.


                                    -5-



Real Estate Investment Policies of the Partnership

     It is the Partnership's policy to acquire assets both for possible
capital gain and for income. There are no limitations on the percentage of the
Partnership's assets, which may be invested in any one investment.


Investments in Real Estate or Interests in Real Estate

     The Partnership may invest in properties including commercial or multi-
family, real, personal or mixed, choses in action, or any interest therein,
including any non-income producing properties, throughout the United States.
The Partnership may finance its purchase of real estate, including from
affiliates, provided that the maximum amount of permanent indebtedness secured
by the Partnership's fixed assets may not exceed, with respect to any such
fixed asset, 80% of the appraised value of that asset. The Partnership may
lease, own, mortgage, encumber, improve or cause to be improved, use, lend,
operate, service, maintain, develop, convey and otherwise dispose of and sell,
handle, subdivide, plat, trade and deal in any property it acquires.


Investments in Real Estate Mortgages

     The Partnership may invest in, hold, sell, dispose of and otherwise act
with respect to first and junior mortgage loans on fee or leasehold interests
in real property or other beneficial interests essentially equivalent to a
mortgage on real property, as well as loans secured by interests in
partnerships, real estate investment trusts, joint ventures or other entities.
The Partnership may not, however, invest in or make mortgage loans on any one
property if the aggregate amount of all mortgage loans outstanding on the
property including the principal amount of the Partnership's mortgage loan,
would exceed an amount equal to 80% of the appraised value of the property at
the time the loan is made unless substantial justification exists because of
the presence of other underwriting criteria, subject to certain exceptions.


Securities of or Interests in Persons Primarily Engaged in Real Estate
Activities

     The Partnership may invest in entities primarily engaged in real estate
activities, provided that the Partnership acquires a controlling interest in
such entity (or joint venture), or the Partnership has reserved for itself the
right to control the entity (or joint venture) through its right to withhold
approval of decisions having a material effect on the property held.
Investments by the Partnership in junior trust deeds and other similar
obligations are prohibited, except for junior trust deeds which arise from the
sale of the Partnership's fixed assets.


ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

     On April 12, 2004, the Partnership took legal action against Smith?s Food
King (?Smith?s?), a supermarket retail chain, as it was in default of its
obligation to pay common area charges and other covenants of its lease. The
courts ruled in favor of the Partnership. On October 1, 2004, the Partnership
was notified by Smith?s, that Smith?s would vacate its leased space on October
12, 2004. Smith?s had been leasing a 68,972 square-foot space at the Sierra
Property, representing approximately 32.4% of the Sierra Property?s rentable
square footage. Smith?s was contractually obligated to continue paying rent
and common area maintenance charges, as well as to fulfill its other
obligations under its lease agreement through expiration in August 2008. On
April 25, 2005, the Partnership settled its lawsuit with Smith?s. Per the
terms of the settlement, Smith?s paid the Partnership the sum of $1.2 million
in settlement of all charges owed, future rent and early termination of its
lease at the Sierra Property. As a result of the settlement in favor of the
Partnership, the Partnership regained control of the premises previously
occupied by Smith?s.



                                     -6-



ITEM 4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS

     None.

                                   PART II

ITEM 5. MARKET FOR COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND SMALL
        BUSINESS ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES

     There is no established public trading market for the Units of the
Partnership. As of March 15, 2007, there were approximately 1,326 holders of
Units owning an aggregate of 180,937 Units (including Units held by affiliates
of the General Partner).


ITEM 6. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OR PLAN OF OPERATION

     The matters discussed in this Form 10-KSB contain certain forward-looking
statements and involve risks and uncertainties. The Partnership could be
affected by declining economic conditions as a result of various factors that
affect the real estate business including the financial condition of tenants,
competition, the ability to lease vacant space within the Sierra Property or
renew existing leases, increased operating costs (including insurance costs),
and the costs associated with, and results of, the Partnership's plan to
renovate and reposition the Sierra Property, as detailed in the filings with
the Securities and Exchange Commission made by the Partnership from time to
time. The discussion of the Partnership's liquidity, capital resources and
results of operations, including forward-looking statements pertaining to such
matters, is based on management's current expectations and does not take into
account the effects of any changes to the Partnership's operations resulting
from risks and uncertainties. Accordingly, actual results could differ
materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements.

     This item should be read in conjunction with the financial statements and
other items contained elsewhere in this report.

Recent Events

     On May 23, 2006, Ben Farahi resigned as an executive officer and director
of Monarch Casino & Resort, Inc. (?Monarch?), which controls a hotel casino
property located next to the Sierra Property (the "Adjacent Property"). Mr.
Farahi resigned, in part, to eliminate any potential conflict of interest with
respect to his position with the General Partner and his ownership of Units
and with the intent of focusing on the best interests of the Partnership.
Currently, Ben Farahi beneficially owns approximately 10.5% of Monarch?s
outstanding common stock.

     On July 20, 2006, Monarch filed a Form 8-K stating that Monarch's Board
of Directors had been ?accumulating information relative to a potential
purchase offer? for the Sierra Property. On July 26, 2006, the Partnership
received a letter from counsel to Monarch setting forth the terms of a
proposal by Monarch to purchase the Sierra Property at a cash price of $27
million (the ?Offer?).

     The Partnership has received expressions of interest in the Sierra
Property from Monarch and other third parties in the past but no prior offers
were ever made, nor were any significant negotiations ever commenced. In
October 2005, a representative of a publicly held casino operator met with Ben
Farahi, in his capacity as the sole manager of the General Partner, and stated
that his company was interested in purchasing the Adjacent Property and,
contingent upon such purchase, also desired to purchase the Sierra Property.
However, negotiations between the casino operator and Monarch, the owner of
the Adjacent Property, were unsuccessful and, accordingly, no offer was ever
made to purchase the Sierra Property. In addition, on May 3, 2006, the
Partnership received a letter from counsel to Monarch confirming a prior
telephone conversation in which such counsel had advised Ben Farahi that the
Monarch Board of Directors wished immediately to commence negotiations for the
Sierra Property. During the referenced telephone conversation, a member of the
Board of Directors of Monarch informed Ben Farahi that Monarch was interested

                                    -7-



in negotiating to purchase the Sierra Property. Ben Farahi, on behalf of the
General Partner, responded to the representative of Monarch that the
Partnership was not interested in selling the Sierra Property but would,
instead, consider entering into a long-term lease arrangement.

     On August 4, 2006, the Partnership entered into a letter agreement (the
"Agreement") with Marshall & Stevens Incorporated ("Marshall & Stevens")
pursuant to which the Partnership retained Marshall & Stevens to assist the
Partnership in analyzing Monarch?s offer to purchase the Sierra Property and
the Partnership's strategic alternatives compared to the Offer.

     The Agreement stated that Marshall & Stevens was to provide the
Partnership with financial advisory services for a fee of $20,000, and an
objective, supportable fairness opinion from a financial point of view for a
fee of $50,000, to the partners of the Partnership as to the Offer. The
Agreement required payment of a $20,000 retainer and, if the opinion was not
delivered, the Partnership would be required to pay Marshall & Stevens on an
hourly basis for its time spent on the engagement. The Agreement also provided
for the Partnership to indemnify Marshall & Stevens against claims involving
its services furnished to the Partnership and included a mandatory arbitration
provision.

     On October 16, 2006, the General Partner decided, after completing a
thorough review of the Offer, that such Offer was not in the best interest of
the Partnership's limited partners and, therefore, would not be entering into
negotiations with Monarch.

     Bell Furniture, Inc. ("Bell"), a furniture retailer, vacated its leased
premises at the Sierra property on December 4, 2006. Bell occupied 52,660
square feet, or approximately 24.8%, of the Sierra Property?s leasable space
and paid a monthly base rent of $31,000. Bell's lease terminated on October
31, 2006, and remained as a tenant of the Sierra Property on a month-to-month
basis until vacating.

     On June 22, 2006, Ben Farahi, as the sole managing member of Western,
filed Articles of Dissolution with the Secretary of State of the State of
Nevada with respect to Western, which beneficially owns 91,902 Units. On June
30, 2006, the Articles of Dissolution were challenged by Ben Farahi?s
brothers, each of whom owns a one-third interest in Western. In the event that
Western has been properly dissolved, Ben Farahi beneficially owns one-third of
the Units formerly owned by Western, constituting 30,634 Units, based on his
ownership of a one-third interest in Western. If, alternatively, the
dissolution issue is considered to be unresolved, Ben Farahi disclaims
beneficial ownership of two-thirds of the Units owned by Western pursuant to
Rule 13d-4 promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
In either of these events, Ben Farahi owns an aggregate of 49,797 Units,
representing 27.5% of the outstanding Units. In the event that it is
eventually determined under Nevada law that Ben Farahi?s brothers control
Western's actions, on the other hand, it is possible, although unlikely, they
would control 91,902 Units on behalf of Western, constituting a 50.8% majority
interest in the Partnership's outstanding Units. In such event, they could
remove and replace the General Partner and control whether, and on what terms,
the Sierra Property is sold. Ben Farahi is no longer acting in concert with,
or considered for securities law purposes to be part of a ?group? with, either
of his brothers with respect to his ownership of Units. The sole managing
member of Western made a request to the Partnership to transfer 90% of
Western's Units to each of the three members proportionately. After
considering this request, the Partnership decided that, based on the situation
described above, it would be inappropriate to allow such transfer.

     On June 6, 2006, Mr. Ben Farahi, the Manager of the General Partner but
acting in his individual capacity, commenced a tender offer (the "Offer") to
purchase up to 65,000 Units at a price of $140 per Unit. The Offer expired on
August 29, 2006, and resulted in the tender by limited partners, and purchase
by Mr. Farahi, of 8,821 Units. As a result of such purchases, Mr. Farahi
beneficially owns 49,797 Units, constituting approximately 27.5% of the
outstanding Units, in addition to 61,268 Units of which he disclaims
beneficial ownership.



                                    -8-



     On April 14, 2006, a distribution of $2.50 per Unit was paid to limited
partners of record as of the close of business on March 31, 2006, and
affiliates of the Partnership, including the General Partner, received an
aggregate of $267,209 from this distribution.

     Effective April 1, 2006, Ben Farahi resigned as Co-Trustee of the Jila
Farahi Trust, which beneficially owned 155 Units at such date. As such, Mr.
Farahi no longer owns shared voting or dispositive power with respect to such
Units.

     In March 2006, the space previously occupied by Smith?s was broken into
and vandalized resulting in damage in excess of $200,000. The Partnership
filed an insurance claim on the loss and, in 2007, received approximately
$161,000 in settlement proceeds from the insurance company. The Partnership
has increased its security measures at the Sierra Property and is in the
process of evaluating repair and lease options for the damaged space.

     During 2006, the Partnership paid $50,000 in consulting fees to the
General Partner for work related to the Sierra Property?s zoning change
application that was approved by the City of Reno in January 2006.

     During 2006, Mr. Ben Farahi, acting in his individual capacity, acquired
84 Units in a series of open market transactions.


Real Estate Market

     The Partnership's sole fixed asset as of December 31, 2006 was the Sierra
Property, which is currently in need of several new tenants. There has been
substantial development of retail space in the Reno area over the past few
years especially in close vicinity to the Sierra Property, which has created
substantial competition for the Sierra Property. Also, in the past few years,
the Sierra Property has lost all of its original anchor tenants and has not
been able to locate new anchor tenants with similar lease terms; two of the
spaces are currently vacant. The third anchor tenant space was demolished for
the purpose of creating in its place a new driveway (and traffic signal)
directly between the Sierra Property and the Adjacent Property, and the
portion of the Sierra Property that was demolished has been leased to the
owner of the Adjacent Property since September 30, 2004, enabling the
Partnership to make up much of the lost rental revenue previously generated by
Good Guys, an electronics retailer and former anchor tenant of the Sierra
Property whose lease expired on November 30, 2003.

     There can be no assurances that the Partnership's plan to improve the
Sierra Property's occupancy will be successful. Until firm plans are
established for the renovation and/or redevelopment of the Sierra Property, we
are marketing vacant spaces only to tenants willing to sign short-term leases.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

     The Partnership's level of liquidity based on cash and cash equivalents
increased by $730,397 to $7,264,486 during the year ended December 31, 2006 as
compared to December 31, 2005. The increase was due to cash provided by
operating activities of $1,194,339, which were partially offset by $463,942 of
cash used in the $2.50-per-Unit distribution (see below). Cash and cash
equivalents are invested in short-term instruments and are expected to be
sufficient to pay administrative expenses. See "Item 7. Financial Statements -
Note 2."

     On April 14, 2006, a distribution of $2.50 per Unit was paid to limited
partners of record as of the close of business on March 31, 2006, and
affiliates of the Partnership, including the General Partner, received an
aggregate of $267,209 from this distribution. The balance of this
distribution, $196,733, was paid to the Partnership?s non-affiliated limited
partners. The Partnership does not anticipate making any distributions of net
cash provided by operating activities in the near future because such cash
will be needed for renovations and enhancements to the Sierra Property, as
well as for other possible investments.

                                    -9-



RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

Comparison of operating results for the year ended December 31, 2006 as
compared to December 31, 2005.

     Net income decreased by $932,522 to $629,763 for the year ended
December 31, 2006 as compared to 2005. Revenues decreased by $975,145 to
$2,115,035 for the year ended December 31, 2006 as compared to the same period
in 2005. The decrease in net income is due to the decrease in revenues
partially offset by a $42,623 decrease in costs and expenses. The decrease in
revenues was primarily due to the receipt of $990,634 in escalations and
settlement proceeds from the Partnership?s lawsuit with Smith?s during 2005,
combined with a decrease of $163,433 in rental income due to lower occupancy
partially offset by an increase in rental rates at the Sierra property during
2006 compared to 2005. These decreases were partially offset by higher
interest income during 2006 due to higher cash balances and higher interest
rates.

     The decrease in costs and expenses in 2006 as compared to 2005, was due
to decreased operating and property management fee expenses, as well as a
$138,871 decrease in write-offs in costs of development not consummated
(related to design and engineering expenses for potential renovation plans to
the Sierra Property that were subsequently cancelled due to changes in market
conditions that caused the maximum potential of the Sierra Property to
change). These decreases were partially offset by a $174,994 increase in
general and administrative expenses mainly due to increased legal and
accounting expenses in 2006, the $50,000 consulting fee paid to the General
Partner in the 2006 second quarter for its work related to the Sierra
Property?s zoning change application, and the fees related to the financial
advisory services provided by Marshall & Stevens in relation to Monarch?s
offer to purchase the Sierra Property. Operating expenses decreased due to
overall decreases in costs associated with operating the Sierra Property in
2006 as compared to the prior year. Depreciation expense remained relatively
unchanged in 2006 as compared to 2005. Property management fees decreased due
to the decrease in rental income during 2006 as compared to 2005.


Critical Accounting Policies

     The Partnership's only significant critical accounting policy relates to
the evaluation of the fair value of real estate. The Partnership evaluates the
need for an impairment loss on its real estate assets when indicators of
impairment are present and the undiscounted cash flows are not sufficient to
recover the asset's carrying amount. The impairment loss is measured by
comparing the fair value of the asset to its carrying amount. The evaluation
of the fair value of real estate is an estimate that is susceptible to change
and actual results could differ from those estimates. The sufficiency of
existing liquid assets to meet future liquidity and capital expenditure
requirements is directly related to the level of capital expenditures required
at the property to adequately maintain the physical assets and the other
operating needs of the Partnership. Such assets are currently thought to be
sufficient for any near-term and long-term needs of the Partnership, except
that the Partnership may need to obtain financing for the later phases of the
Renovation. During 2003, the Partnership incurred approximately $1.1 million
in impairment charges.

     None of the recently issued accounting standards had any effect on the
Partnership?s financial statements.

Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk

     The Partnership is not subject to market risk as its cash and cash
equivalents are invested in short-term money market mutual funds. The
Partnership has no loans outstanding.






                                     -10-



ITEM 7. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS




            Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Partners of
Biggest Little Investments, L.P.:

We have audited the accompanying balance sheet of Biggest Little Investments,
L.P. (the ?Partnership?) as of December 31, 2006 and the related statements of
income, partners? equity and cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2006.
These financial statements are the responsibility of the Partnership?s
management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial
statements based on our audit.

We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we
plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the
financial statements are free of material misstatement. The Partnership is not
required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal
control over financial reporting.  Our audit included consideration of
procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purposes
of expressing an opinion of the effectiveness of the Partnership?s internal
control over financial reporting.  Accordingly, we express no such opinion.
An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the
amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes
assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement
presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our
opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in
all material respects, the financial position of Biggest Little Investments,
L.P. as of December 31, 2006, and the results of its operations and its cash
flows for the year then ended in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America.


Mark Bailey & Co, Ltd.
Reno, Nevada
March 23, 2007



























                                    -11-










            Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
            -------------------------------------------------------


To the Partners of
Biggest Little Investments, L.P.:



We have audited the accompanying balance sheet of Biggest Little Investments,
L.P. (a limited partnership) (the ?Partnership?) as of December 31, 2005, and
the related statement of operations, partners? equity and cash flows for the
year then ended. These financial statements are the responsibility of the
Partnership?s management.  Our responsibility is to express an opinion on
these financial statements based on our audit.

We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States).  Those standards require that we
plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the
financial statements are free of material misstatement.  The Partnership is
not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal
control over financial reporting.  Our audit included consideration of
internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit
procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purposes
of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Partnership?s internal
control over financial reporting.  Accordingly, we express no such opinion.
An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the
amounts and disclosures in the financial statements.  An audit also includes
assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement
presentation.  We believe that our audit provided a reasonable basis for our
opinion.

As described in notes 1 and 3 to the financial statements, the Partnership has
had significant transactions with related parties.  Related party transactions
are not arms length transactions and may not represent fair market value.

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in
all material respects, the financial position of Biggest Little Investments,
L.P. (a limited partnership) as of December 31, 2005, and the results of its
operations and cash flows for the year then ended in conformity with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.






/s/ Imowitz, Koenig & Co., LLP

New York, New York
March 24, 2007











                                    -12-



                        BIGGEST LITTLE INVESTMENTS L.P.
                                 BALANCE SHEETS


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                       December 31,
                                               -------------------------
                                                   2006         2005
                                               ------------ ------------
<S>                                            <C>          <C>
ASSETS

  Real estate, net............................ $ 13,787,444  $ 14,319,695
  Cash and cash equivalents...................    7,264,486     6,534,089
  Receivables.................................       24,785        21,156
                                               ------------  ------------
     Total assets............................. $ 21,076,715  $ 20,874,940
                                               ============  ============

LIABILITIES AND PARTNERS' EQUITY

  Liabilities

    Accounts payable and accrued expenses..... $     86,910  $     42,228
    Rent prepaid..............................       12,882        19,205
    Tenant deposits...........................       39,444        41,849
                                               ------------  ------------
  Total liabilities...........................      139,236       103,282
                                               ------------  ------------

  Commitments and contingencies

    Partners' equity

    Limited partners' equity (180,937 units at
     12/31/06 and 12/31/05 issued and
     outstanding).............................   20,401,204    20,239,528
    General partners' equity..................      536,275       532,130
                                               ------------  ------------
  Total partners' equity......................   20,937,479    20,771,658
                                               ------------  ------------
     Total liabilities and partners' equity... $ 21,076,715  $ 20,874,940
                                               ============  ============
</TABLE>



The accompanying Notes to Financial Statements are an integral part of these
statements.



















                                    -13-



                       BIGGEST LITTLE INVESTMENTS L.P.
                           STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                            Years ended December 31,
                                           ---------------------------
                                               2006           2005
                                           ------------   ------------
<S>                                        <C>            <C>
Revenues
  Rental income.........................   $  1,745,166   $  1,908,599
  Other income..........................         17,608        990,634
  Interest income.......................        352,261        190,947
                                           ------------   ------------
     Net revenues.......................      2,115,035      3,090,180
                                           ------------   ------------
Costs and Expenses

  Operating expenses....................        537,711        551,034
  General and administrative............        303,513        128,519
  Depreciation..........................        522,251        522,081
  Property management fees..............        111,797        177,390
  Costs of development not consummated..         10,000        148,871
                                           ------------   ------------
     Total costs and expenses...........      1,485,272      1,527,895
                                           ------------   ------------
     Net income ........................   $    629,763   $  1,562,285
                                           ============   ============

Net income attributable to:

     Limited partners...................   $    614,019   $  1,523,227

     General partner....................         15,744         39,058
                                           ------------   ------------
                                           $    629,763   $  1,562,285
                                           ============   ============


NET INCOME PER UNIT OF LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
    INTEREST                               $       3.39   $       8.42
                                           ============   ============

WEIGHTED AVERAGE UNITS OUTSTANDING              180,937        180,937
                                           ============   ============
</TABLE>



The accompanying Notes to Financial Statements are an integral part of these
statements.

















                                    -14-



                     BIGGEST LITTLE INVESTMENTS L.P.
                      STATEMENTS OF PARTNERS' EQUITY
                  YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2006 AND 2005


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                             Limited         General        Total
                            Partners'       Partner?s     Partners'
                              Equity         Equity        Equity
                           ------------   ------------   -----------
<S>                        <C>            <C>            <C>
Balance, December 31, 2004 $ 18,716,301   $    493,072   $19,209,373
  Net income..............    1,523,227         39,058     1,562,285
                           ------------   ------------   -----------
Balance, December 31, 2005   20,239,528        532,130    20,771,658
  Distribution............     (452,343)       (11,599)     (463,942)
  Net income..............      614,019         15,744       629,763
                           ------------   ------------   -----------
Balance, December 31, 2006 $ 20,401,204   $    536,275   $20,937,479
                           ============   ============   ===========
</TABLE>


The accompanying Notes to Financial Statements are an integral part of these
statements.










































                                    -15-



                      BIGGEST LITTLE INVESTMENTS L.P.
                          STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS



<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                Years ended December 31,
                                                -------------------------
                                                    2006          2005
                                                ------------  -----------
<S>                                             <C>           <C>
Cash flows from operating activities:
  Net income .................................. $    629,763  $ 1,562,285
   Adjustments to reconcile net income to net
    cash provided by operating activities:
      Depreciation.............................      522,251      522,081
      Costs of development not consummated.....       10,000      148,871
   Changes in assets and liabilities:
      (Increase) decrease in receivables.......       (3,629)     133,702
      Increase (decrease) in accounts payable,
        accrued expenses, prepaid rent and rent
        deposits...............................       35,954      (12,285)
                                                ------------  -----------
    Net cash provided by
      operating activities.....................    1,194,339    2,354,654
                                                ------------  -----------

Cash flows from investing activities
  Capital improvements.........................           -       (12,771)
                                                ------------  -----------
     Cash used in investing activities.........           -       (12,771)
                                                ------------  -----------
Cash flows from financing activities:
  Cash used for distribution...................     (463,942)          -
                                                ------------  -----------
     Cash used in financing activities.........     (463,942)          -
                                                ------------  -----------

Net increase in cash...........................      730,397    2,341,883

Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of year...    6,534,089    4,192,206
                                                ------------  -----------
Cash and cash equivalents, end of year......... $  7,264,486  $ 6,534,089
                                                ============  ===========
</TABLE>





The accompanying Notes to Financial Statements are an integral part of these
statements.
















                                    -16-



                       BIGGEST LITTLE INVESTMENTS L.P.
                        NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

NOTE 1. ORGANIZATION AND PLAN OF OPERATION

     Biggest Little Investments L.P. (the "Partnership"), formerly Resources
Accrued Mortgage Investors 2, L.P., Resources Accrued Mortgage Investors L.P.
Series 87 and Resources Accrued Mortgage Investors L.P. Series 88, a Delaware
limited partnership, was formed in August 1986 under the Delaware Revised
Uniform Limited Partnership Law for the purpose of investing primarily in
senior and junior accrued interest mortgage loans on properties owned or
acquired principally by publicly or privately syndicated limited partnerships
sponsored by affiliates of Integrated Resources, Inc. ("Integrated"). During
1994, Integrated's indirect ownership of the managing general partner was
purchased by Presidio Capital Corp. ("Presidio"). Through December 31, 2001,
the managing general partner of the Partnership was RAM Funding, Inc. and the
associate general partner was Presidio AGP Corp., which are wholly-owned
subsidiaries of Presidio. Effective January 1, 2002, pursuant to the General
and Limited Partner Interest Assignment Agreement (the "Assignment
Agreement"), the managing general partner and associate general partner
interests in the Partnership were acquired by Maxum LLC ("Maxum" or the
"General Partner").

     The Partnership originally offered 400,000 units of limited partnership
interest (the "Units") pursuant to the prospectus dated April 12, 1988 (the
"Prospectus"). Since all gross proceeds that were raised had not been invested
or committed for investment, the Partnership was obligated, under the terms of
the Prospectus, to return such uninvested funds. The Partnership distributed
these funds in the amount of $19,263,445, including interest of $857,598, in
August 1990. Additionally, the Partnership made a second related distribution
of $606,978 on October 30, 1990.

     From October 21, 1999 through December 31, 2001, Presidio had entered
into a Services Agreement with AP-PCC III, L.P. (the "Agent") pursuant to
which the Agent was retained and was compensated by Presidio to provide asset
management and investor relation services to the Partnership and other
entities affiliated with the Partnership. Effective January 1, 2002, these
services are being provided by affiliates of the General Partner.

     In accordance with the Partnership's Agreement of Limited Partnership
(the "Partnership Agreement"), net income and loss, adjusted cash from
operations and disposition proceeds are allocated 97.5% to the limited
partners and 2.5% to the general partner.

     On October 8, 2003, the Partnership received consents from the holders of
a majority of its outstanding Units to adopt the Partnership's Second Amended
and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership (the "Amended LP Agreement").
Pursuant to the Amended LP Agreement the Partnership was renamed "Biggest
Little Investments L.P." In addition, the Amended LP Agreement provides the
Partnership with the ability to leverage its property in an effort to increase
the value of the Partnership, to purchase additional real estate for
investment and/or development and to make or acquire additional mortgage loans
or short-term loans, as well as to reinvest operating income and proceeds from
the sale or refinancing of its properties or the disposition of its mortgage
loans. Finally, the Amended LP Agreement permits the Partnership to repurchase
Units from the limited partners.

     On December 17, 2003, the Partnership commenced a program (the "Initial
Repurchase Program") to redeem Units from all limited partners owning fewer
than 100 Units at a price of $76 per Unit in cash. Units held in employee
benefit plans were not eligible for the Initial Repurchase Program. The
Initial Repurchase Program was originally scheduled to terminate on January
27, 2004. On January 21, 2004, the Initial Repurchase Program was extended
until March 10, 2004, and terminated on such date. The effective date of the
Initial Repurchase Program was January 1, 2004. The Partnership acquired 4,744
Units as a result of the Initial Repurchase Program and subsequently retired
all 4,744 Units.


                                    -17-



     On October 14, 2004, the Partnership commenced a program (the "Repurchase
Program") to redeem Units from all limited partners owning fewer than 100
Units at a price of $69 per Unit in cash. Units held in employee benefit
plans were not eligible for the Repurchase Program. The Repurchase Program was
originally scheduled to terminate on November 18, 2004. On November 18, 2004,
the Repurchase Program was extended until December 20, 2004, and terminated on
such date. The effective date of the Repurchase Program was October 1, 2004.
The Partnership acquired 2,238 Units as a result of the Repurchase Program and
subsequently retired all 2,238 Units.

     On September 1, 2005, the Partnership?s Amended LP Agreement was amended
to provide the General Partner with a right of first refusal to purchase Units
from selling limited partners who propose to sell the Units to a purchaser,
which is not an existing limited partner of the Partnership.

     On November 1, 2005, the Partnership filed an application with the City
of Reno to change the zoning of the Sierra Property from ?Commercial? to
?Hotel Casino.? The Sierra Property has historically enjoyed ?Tourist
Commercial? designation under the City?s master plan. The City of Reno is
considering changing the master plan for the area where the Sierra Property is
located. The application to change the zoning was made in order to protect the
rights of the Sierra Property, to match the City?s current master plan
designation and to ensure that the Sierra Property?s master plan does not get
changed. The ?Hotel Casino? zoning allows for more uses than ?Commercial?
zoning. On January 25, 2006, the City of Reno approved the zoning change
application.

     Until firm plans are established for the development of the Sierra
Property, the Partnership is marketing vacant spaces only to tenants willing
to sign short-term leases. The Sierra Property is approximately 68% vacant.


NOTE 2. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

Property and Provision for Impairment

     Property is stated at cost, less accumulated depreciation. Since
acquisition, property has been depreciated principally on a straight-line
basis over the estimated service lives as follows:

     Land improvements ...........    5 years
     Buildings ...................   30 years
     Building improvements ....... 5-30 years

     The Partnership evaluates the carrying value of its long-lived assets for
impairment at least annually or whenever events or changes in circumstances
indicate that the carrying value of the assets may not be recoverable from
related future undiscounted cash flows. Indicators which could trigger an
impairment review include legal and regulatory factors, market conditions and
operational performance. Any resulting impairment loss, measured as the
difference between the carrying amount and the fair value of the assets, could
have a material adverse impact on the Partnership's financial condition and
results of operations. Per Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
("SFAS")  No. 144, "Accounting for the Impairment and Disposal of Long-Lived
Assets," a long-lived asset shall be tested for recoverability whenever, among
other events, there is a current expectation that, more likely than not, it
will be sold or otherwise disposed of significantly before the end of its
previously estimated useful life.

Allowance for Doubtful Accounts

     The Partnership monitors its accounts receivable balances on a monthly
basis to ensure they are collectible. On a quarterly basis, the Partnership
uses its historical experience to determine its accounts receivable reserve.
The Partnership?s allowance for doubtful accounts is an estimate based on
specifically identified accounts as well as general reserves. The Partnership
evaluates specific accounts where it has information that the customer may



                                    -18-



have an inability to meet its financial obligations. In these cases,
management uses judgment, based upon the best available facts and
circumstances, and records a specific reserve for that customer against
amounts due to reduce the receivable to the amount that is expected to be
collected. These specific reserves are reevaluated and adjusted as additional
information is received that impacts the amount reserved. The Partnership also
establishes a general reserve based upon a range of percentages applied to
aging categories. These percentages are based on historical collection and
write-off experience. If circumstances change, the Partnership?s estimate of
the recoverability of amounts due the Partnership could be reduced or
increased by a material amount. Such a change in estimated recoverability
would be accounted for in the period in which the facts that give rise to the
change become known. The Partnership currently does not have an allowance for
bad debt.

Cash and Cash Equivalents

     For the purpose of the statements of cash flows, the Partnership
considers all short-term investments, which have original maturities of three
months or less to be cash equivalents. Substantially all of the Partnership's
cash and cash equivalents are held at one financial institution.

Concentration of Credit Risk

     The Partnership maintains cash balances at institutions insured up to
$100,000 by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Balances in excess of
$100,000 are usually invested in savings and money market accounts. Cash
balances exceeded these insured levels during the year.

Revenue Recognition

     Rental revenues are based on lease terms and recorded as income when
earned and when they can be reasonably estimated. Rent increases are generally
based on the Consumer Price Index. Leases generally require tenants to
reimburse the Partnership for certain operating expenses applicable to their
leased premises. These costs and reimbursements have been included in
operating expenses and rental income, respectively.

Fair Value of Financial Instruments

     The carrying amounts of cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable,
accounts payable and accrued expenses approximate their fair values due to the
short-term maturity of these instruments.

Net Income Per Unit of Limited Partnership Interest

     Net income per Unit is computed based upon the weighted average number of
Units outstanding (180,937 Units at December 31, 2006 and 2005) during the
year.

Income Taxes

     No provisions have been made for federal, state and local income taxes,
since they are the personal responsibility of the partners.

     The income tax returns of the Partnership are subject to examination by
federal, state and local taxing authorities. Such examinations could result in
adjustments to Partnership income, which changes could affect the tax
liability of the individual partners.

Estimates

     The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires
management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amount
of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses and related disclosure of
contingent assets and liabilities.



                                    -19-



     On an ongoing basis, the Partnership evaluates its estimates, including
those related to bad debts, contingencies, litigation and valuation of the
real estate. The Partnership bases its estimates on historical experience and
on various other assumptions that are believed to be reasonable under the
circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about
the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent
from other sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates under
different assumptions or conditions.

Recently Issued Accounting Standards

     In 2005, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (the ?FASB?) issued
SFAS No. 154, ?Accounting Changes and Error Correction,? which requires that
all voluntary changes in accounting principle should be accounted for by
retrospective application, unless impracticable to do so. Retrospective
application is defined as the application of a different accounting principle
to prior accounting periods as if that principle had always been used. SFAS
No. 154 is effective for all accounting changes and corrections of errors made
in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2005. The adoption of SFAS No.
154 did not have an impact on the Partnership?s financial statements during
the years ended Decmber 31, 2005 and 2006.

     In June 2005, the FASB ratified the consensus reached by the Emerging
Issues Task Force (?EITF?) on Issue No. 04-05, ?Determining Whether a General
Partner, or General Partners as a Group, Controls a Limited Partnership or
Similar Entity When the Limited Partners Have Certain Rights? (?EITF 04-05?).
EITF 04-05 provides a framework for determining whether a general partner
controls, and should consolidate, a limited partnership or a similar entity.
EITF 04-05 became effective on June 29, 2005, for all newly formed or modified
limited partnership arrangements and January 1, 2006, for all existing limited
partnership arrangements. The Partnership?s adoption of this standard did not
have any effect on its financial statements.

     In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157, ?Fair Value
Measurements? (?SFAS 157?). This statement defines fair value, establishes a
framework for measuring fair value for both assets and liabilities through a
fair value hierarchy and expands disclosure requirements. SFAS 157 is
effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning after
November 15, 2007 and interim periods within those fiscal years. The
Partnership is evaluating SFAS 157 and has not yet determined the impact the
adoption will have on the consolidated financial statements.

     In September 2006, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the ?SEC?)
issued Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 108 (?SAB 108?), which documents the SEC
staff?s views regarding the process of quantifying financial statement
misstatements. Under SAB 108, the Partnership must evaluate the materiality of
an identified unadjusted error by considering the impact of both the current
year error and the cumulative error, if applicable. This also means that both
the impact on the current period income statement and the period-end balance
sheet must be considered. SAB 108 is effective for fiscal years ending after
November 15, 2006. Any past adjustments required to be recorded as a result of
adopting SAB 108 are recorded as a cumulative effect adjustment to the opening
balance of retained earnings. The Partnership does not believe the adoption of
SAB 108 will have a material impact on its financial position or results of
operations.


NOTE 3. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND TRANSACTIONS WITH RELATED PARTIES

     Effective January 1, 2002, Maxum LLC (the ?General Partner?) acquired the
associate and general partnership interests of the Partnership previously held
by Presidio and RAM Funding, respectively, pursuant to the Assignment
Agreement, dated as of October 10, 2001, between the General Partner, Western
Real Estate Investments, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company and an
affiliate of the General Partner ("Western"), RAM Funding and Presidio as well
as Presidio Capital Investment Company LLC, Presidio Partnership II Corp. and
Bighorn Associates LLC, each of which is affiliated with RAM Funding and
Presidio AGP Corp. and was a limited partner of the Partnership prior to
January 1, 2002 (the "Former LPs"). Also pursuant to the Assignment Agreement,

                                     -20-



as of January 1, 2002, Western purchased all 57,695 Units of limited
partnership interest in the Partnership owned by the Former LPs ("Former LP
Units"). However, the Former LPs reserved their rights to the proceeds from
the settlement of a class action litigation, which was subsequently settled.
Also, prior to 2002, Western had acquired 2,799 Units on the open market, 749
Units through intermediaries and 6,841 Units via a tender offer, and Mr. Ben
Farahi, in his individual capacity, acquired 44 Units in an open market
transaction. During 2002, another affiliate of the General Partner, Virginia
Springs LLC (?Virginia Springs?), acquired 9,703 Units via a tender offer. In
2003, Virginia Springs LLC acquired 12,339 Units via another tender offer, and
Western acquired 407 Units from several limited partners in a series of
private transactions. In 2004, Western acquired 1,359 Units from several
limited partners in a series of private transactions. During 2005, Mr. Ben
Farahi, the Manager of the General Partner but acting in his individual
capacity, acquired 568 Units from several limited partners in a series of
private transactions, and 9,646 Units via a tender offer. Also during 2005,
Western acquired 10 Units in an open market transaction. During 2006, Virginia
Springs transferred all 22,042 of its Units to Western. Also during 2006, Mr.
Ben Farahi, acting in his individual capacity, acquired 84 Units in a series
of open market transactions, and an additional 8,821 Units via a tender offer
that termonated on August 29, 2006 (see below). Accordingly, as of December
31, 2006, affiliates of the General Partner owned 111,065 Units, which
represented 61.4% of the issued and outstanding Units at such date.

     On May 23, 2006, Ben Farahi resigned as an executive officer and director
of Monarch Casino & Resort, Inc. (?Monarch?), which controls a hotel casino
property located next to the Sierra Property (the "Adjacent Property"). Mr.
Farahi resigned, in part, to eliminate any potential conflict of interest with
respect to his position with the General Partner and his ownership of Units
and with the intent of focusing on the best interests of the Partnership.
Currently, Ben Farahi beneficially owns approximately 10.5% of Monarch?s
outstanding common stock.

     On July 20, 2006, Monarch filed a Form 8-K stating that Monarch's Board
of Directors had been ?accumulating information relative to a potential
purchase offer? for the Sierra Property. On July 26, 2006, the Partnership
received a letter from counsel to Monarch setting forth the terms of a
proposal by Monarch to purchase the Sierra Property at a cash price of $27
million (the ?Offer?).

     The Partnership has received expressions of interest in the Sierra
Property from Monarch and other third parties in the past but no prior offers
were ever made, nor were any significant negotiations ever commenced. In
October 2005, a representative of a publicly held casino operator met with Ben
Farahi, in his capacity as the sole manager of the General Partner, and stated
that his company was interested in purchasing the Adjacent Property and,
contingent upon such purchase, also desired to purchase the Sierra Property.
However, negotiations between the casino operator and Monarch, the owner of
the Adjacent Property, were unsuccessful and, accordingly, no offer was ever
made to purchase the Sierra Property. In addition, on May 3, 2006, the
Partnership received a letter from counsel to Monarch confirming a prior
telephone conversation in which such counsel had advised Ben Farahi that the
Monarch Board of Directors wished immediately to commence negotiations for the
Sierra Property. During the referenced telephone conversation, a member of the
Board of Directors of Monarch informed Ben Farahi that Monarch was interested
in negotiating to purchase the Sierra Property. Ben Farahi, on behalf of the
General Partner, responded to the representative of Monarch that the
Partnership was not interested in selling the Sierra Property but would,
instead, consider entering into a long-term lease arrangement.

     On August 4, 2006, the Partnership entered into a letter agreement (the
"Agreement") with Marshall & Stevens Incorporated ("Marshall & Stevens")
pursuant to which the Partnership retained Marshall & Stevens to assist the
Partnership in analyzing Monarch?s offer to purchase the Sierra Property and
the Partnership's strategic alternatives compared to the Offer.

     The Agreement stated that Marshall & Stevens was to provide the
Partnership with financial advisory services for a fee of $20,000, and an
objective, supportable fairness opinion from a financial point of view for a

                                     -21-



fee of $50,000, to the partners of the Partnership as to the Offer. The
Agreement required payment of a $20,000 retainer and, if the opinion was not
delivered, the Partnership would be required to pay Marshall & Stevens on an
hourly basis for its time spent on the engagement. The Agreement also provided
for the Partnership to indemnify Marshall & Stevens against claims involving
its services furnished to the Partnership and included a mandatory arbitration
provision.

     On October 16, 2006, the General Partner decided, after completing a
thorough review of the Offer, that such Offer was not in the best interest of
the Partnership's limited partners and, therefore, would not be entering into
negotiations with Monarch.

     On June 22, 2006, Ben Farahi, as the sole managing member of Western,
filed Articles of Dissolution with the Secretary of State of the State of
Nevada with respect to Western, which beneficially owns 91,902 Units. On June
30, 2006, the Articles of Dissolution were challenged by Ben Farahi?s
brothers, each of whom owns a one-third interest in Western. In the event that
Western has been properly dissolved, Ben Farahi beneficially owns one-third of
the Units formerly owned by Western, constituting 30,634 Units, based on his
ownership of a one-third interest in Western. If, alternatively, the
dissolution issue is considered to be unresolved, Ben Farahi disclaims
beneficial ownership of two-thirds of the Units owned by Western pursuant to
Rule 13d-4 promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
In either of these events, Ben Farahi owns an aggregate of 49,797 Units,
representing 27.5% of the outstanding Units. In the event that it is
eventually determined under Nevada law that Ben Farahi?s brothers control
Western's actions, on the other hand, it is possible, although unlikely, they
would control 91,902 Units on behalf of Western, constituting a 50.8% majority
interest in the Partnership's outstanding Units. In such event, they could
remove and replace the General Partner and control whether, and on what terms,
the Sierra Property is sold. Ben Farahi is no longer acting in concert with,
or considered for securities law purposes to be part of a ?group? with, either
of his brothers with respect to his ownership of Units. The sole managing
member of Western made a request to the Partnership to transfer 90% of
Western's Units to each of the three members proportionately. After
considering this request, the Partnership decided that, based on the situation
described above, it would be inappropriate to allow such transfer.

     On June 6, 2006, Ben Farahi, acting in his individual capacity, commenced
a tender offer to purchase up to 65,000 Units for $140 per Unit in cash. The
tender offer was set to expire on July 6, 2006. However, the tender offer was
extended and subsequently expired on August 29, 2006. Mr. Farahi acquired
8,821 Units as a result of this tender offer.

     On April 14, 2006, a distribution of $2.50 per Unit was paid to limited
partners of record as of the close of business on March 31, 2006, and
affiliates of the Partnership, including the General Partner, received an
aggregate of $267,209 from this distribution. No distributions were made for
the fiscal year ended December 31, 2005.

     During 2006, the Partnership paid $50,000 in consulting fees to the
General Partner for work related to the Sierra Property?s zoning change
application that was approved by the City of Reno in January 2006.

     The Partnership demolished and rebuilt some parts of the Sierra Property
and may remodel, demolish and renovate other parts, of the Sierra Property
(the "Renovation") in an attempt to improve the financial viability of the
Sierra Property. As part of the Renovation, the portion of the shopping center
previously occupied by Good Guys, a former anchor tenant of the Sierra
Property whose lease expired on November 30, 2003, was demolished for the
purpose of creating in its place a new driveway (and traffic signal) directly
between the Sierra Property and the Adjacent Property. The Partnership took an
impairment charge in 2003 on the portion of the building of the Sierra
Property that was demolished. The driveway was constructed and put into use on
September 30, 2004, and is being shared by, and provides a connection between,
both properties. In January 2004, the Adjacent Property entered into a lease
with the Partnership for a section of the Sierra Property (including the new


                                     -22-



driveway). The Adjacent Property began paying rent on September 30, 2004, and
has a minimum lease term of 15 years at a monthly rent of $25,000, subject to
increases every 60 months based on the Consumer Price Index. The Adjacent
Property also uses part of the common area of the Sierra Property and pays its
proportionate share of the common area expense of the Sierra Property. The
Adjacent Property has the option to renew the lease for three five-year terms,
and at the end of the extension period, has the option to purchase the leased
section of the Sierra Property at a price to be determined based on an MAI
Appraisal. The space being leased by the Adjacent Property provides pedestrian
and vehicle access to the Adjacent Property, and the Adjacent Property has use
of a portion of the parking spaces at the Sierra Property. The total cost of
the project was $2.0 million and the Adjacent Property was responsible for
two-thirds of the total cost, or $1.35 million.

     In addition to the driveway lease, the Adjacent Property is currently
leasing approximately 16,300 square feet of office and storage space at the
Sierra Property and is paying approximately $11,200 per month in rent plus
common area expenses for such spaces. The Adjacent Property is also leasing
sign space at the Sierra Property for $1,000 per month.

     The Partnership received $473,980 and $446,371 (including $23,000 which
had not been recorded in prior years) in rental revenue and common area
charges during 2006 and 2005, respectively, for the driveway and the leased
spaces.

     Accounting rules define transactions with related parties as
transactions, which are not arms-length in nature and, therefore, may not
represent fair market value.

     See Note 1.

Compensation of the General Partner

     The General Partner is the manager of the Sierra Property. The General
Partner received $111,797 and $177,390 for the years ended December 31, 2006,
and 2005, respectively for such management services. Also, pursuant to the
Amended LP Agreement, the General Partner is entitled to receive 2.5%
of the Partnership's income, loss, capital and distributions, including
without limitation the Partnership's cash flow from operations, disposition
proceeds and net sale or refinancing proceeds. Accordingly, for the year ended
December 31, 2006, the General Partner was allocated $15,744 of income.

     Also pursuant to the Amended LP Agreement, the General Partner shall
receive mortgage placement fees for services rendered in connection with the
Partnership?s mortgage loans. These fees may not exceed such compensation
customarily charged in arm?s-length transactions by others rendering similar
services as an ongoing public activity in the same geographical location for
comparable mortgage loans. The General Partner is entitled to certain fees for
compensation of services rendered; these include acquisition fees in an amount
equal to 2% of the price of such acquired fixed assets, refinancing fees equal
to the lesser of 1% of the refinancing proceeds of the related fixed asset or
fees which are competitive for similar services in the geographical area where
the fixed asset is located, development fees equal to 10% of the total
development cost, construction fees equal to 10% of the total cost of
development of a fixed asset of the Partnership, and guarantee fees for any
guarantees the General Partner may provide in order for the Partnership to
secure indebtedness for a fee that is competitive with guarantee fees of
similar nature. The General Partner may also be compensated for property
management services in amounts to be equal to the lesser of (a) fees which are
competitive for similar services in the same geographical area or (b)(i) 5% of
the gross revenues with respect to residential properties or (ii) 6% of
revenues with respect to industrial and commercial properties or (iii) 1% of
gross revenues with respect to industrial and commercial properties which are
leased on a long-term net basis (except for a one-time initial leasing fee of
3% of gross revenues). The General Partner may also receive real estate
commissions from the Partnership for real estate brokerage services for
properties acquired upon foreclosure of mortgage loans or fixed assets of the
Partnership, the fees for which shall not exceed the lesser of (i) a


                                     -23-



percentage of the gross sales price of a fixed asset of the Partnership equal
to one-half of brokerage fees which are customary, competitive and
reasonable or (ii) 3% of the gross sales price of such fixed asset. Insurance
commissions may also be paid to insurance agencies affiliated with the General
Partner so long as conditions to the General Partner?s purchase of insurance
brokerage services from an affiliate are met.

     For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004, the General Partner earned
approximately $65,732 in development fees, which has been capitalized as a
cost of the building and improvements. The General Partner did not earn any
development fees during 2005 or 2006.

     On April 14, 2006, a distribution of $2.50 per Unit was paid to limited
partners of record as of the close of business on March 31, 2006, and
affiliates of the Partnership, including the General Partner, received an
aggregate of $267,209 from this distribution.

     During 2006, the Partnership paid $50,000 in consulting fees to the
General Partner for work related to the Sierra Property?s zoning change
application that was approved by the City of Reno in January 2006.


NOTE 4. REAL ESTATE

     The Partnership's real estate is summarized as follows:

                                December 31,        December 31,
                                    2006                2005
                                ------------        ------------
Land........................... $  3,198,574        $  3,198,574
Building and improvements......   12,387,906          12,387,905
                                ------------        ------------
                                  15,586,480          15,586,479
Accumulated depreciation.......   (1,799,036)         (1,276,784)
                                ------------        ------------
                                  13,787,444          14,309,695
Construction in progress.......           -               10,000
                                ------------        ------------
                                $ 13,787,444        $ 14,319,695
                                ============        ============

     The land, buildings and improvements that constitute the Partnership's
fixed assets were acquired from High Cash in lieu of foreclosure on a mortgage
note receivable to the Partnership from High Cash, which was collateralized by
such fixed assets.


NOTE 5. MINIMUM FUTURE RENTAL REVENUES

     The Partnership leases office space to various tenants under a variety of
terms, including escalation provisions, renewal options and obligations of the
tenants to reimburse operating expenses.

     The aggregate future minimum fixed lease payments receivable under
noncancellable leases at December 31, 2006, are as follows:

          2007 ..........  $  938,895
          2008 ..........     707,126
          2009 ..........     391,637
          2010 ..........     359,598
          2011 ..........     359,598
          Thereafter ....   2,327,483
                          -----------
                          $ 5,084,337
                          ===========





                                    -24-



NOTE 6. OTHER INCOME

     In 2005, the Partnership received $1,200,000 in settlement of its lawsuit
with Smith?s Food King for default on its lease. Of the amount received,
$318,220 was in settlement of all charges owed, the balance of $881,780 was
for future rent and early termination of its lease.


NOTE 7. RECONCILIATION OF NET INCOME AND NET ASSETS PER FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
        TO TAX BASIS

     A reconciliation of net income per financial statements to the tax basis
of accounting is as follows:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                         Year ended December 31,
                                       --------------------------
                                            2006         2005
                                       ------------- ------------
<S>                                    <C>           <C>
Net income per financial statements    $    629,763  $ 1,562,285
Reconciliation of net income per books
  to tax basis accounting:
     Depreciation                           166,220      162,640
     Prepaid rent                            (6,323)       9,354
     Other tax adjustments                       -         9,472
                                       ------------- ------------
Net income per tax basis               $    789,660  $ 1,743,751
                                       ============= ============
</TABLE>


     The differences between the Partnership's net assets per financial
statements and tax basis of accounting are as follows:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                         Year ended December 31,
                                       --------------------------
                                            2006         2005
                                       ------------- ------------
<S>                                    <C>           <C>
Net assets per financial statements    $ 20,937,479  $ 20,771,658
Reconciliation of net income per books
  to tax basis accounting:
     Tax basis in Property                  624,975       986,040
     Accumulated depreciation               488,745       (38,540)
     Prepaid rent                            12,882        19,205
Syndication costs                         2,230,944     2,230,944
Other tax adjustments                        10,085        10,085
                                       ------------- ------------
Net assets per tax basis               $ 24,305,110  $ 23,979,392
                                       ============= ============
</TABLE>


NOTE 8. LITIGATION

     On April 12, 2004, the Partnership took legal action against Smith?s Food
King (?Smith?s?), a supermarket retail chain, as it was in default of its
obligation to pay common area charges and other covenants of its lease. The
courts ruled in favor of the Partnership. On October 1, 2004, the Partnership
was notified by Smith?s that Smith?s would vacate its leased space on October
12, 2004. Smith?s had been leasing a 68,972 square-foot space at the Sierra
Property, representing approximately 32.4% of the Sierra Property?s rentable
square footage. Smith?s was contractually obligated to continue paying rent
and common area maintenance charges, as well as to fulfill its other

                                     -25-



obligations under its lease agreement through expiration in August 2008. On
April 25, 2005, the Partnership settled its lawsuit with Smith?s. Per the
terms of the settlement, Smith?s paid the Partnership the sum of $1.2 million
in settlement of all charges owed, future rent and early termination of its
lease at the Sierra Property. As a result of the settlement in favor of the
Partnership, the Partnership regained control of the premises previously
occupied by Smith?s. In March 2006, the space previously occupied by Smith?s
was broken into and vandalized resulting in damage in excess of $200,000. The
Partnership filed an insurance claim on the loss and, in 2007, received
approximately $161,000 in settlement proceeds from the insurance company. The
Partnership has increased its security measures at the Sierra Property and is
in the process of evaluating repair and lease options for the damaged space.


NOTE 9. COSTS OF DEVELOPMENT NOT CONSUMMATED

     Costs of development not consummated consist of design and engineering
expenses for potential renovation plans that were subsequently cancelled due
to changes in market conditions that caused the maximum potential of the
Sierra Property to change.


ITEM 8. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND
        FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE

     As reported on Form 8-K dated June 20, 2006, the Partnership disengaged
Imowitz, Koenig & Co. (?Imowitz?) as its independent public accountants. The
Manager of the General Partner participated in and approved the decision to
disengage Imowitz. The Partnership engaged Mark Bailey & Company Ltd. as its
new independent accountants as of June 19, 2006.

ITEM 8A. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

     As of the end of the period covered by this annual report on Form 10-KSB,
an evaluation was carried out under the supervision and with the participation
of the manager of the General Partner of the effectiveness of the
Partnership's disclosure controls and procedures (as such term is defined in
Rule 13a-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934). Based on that
evaluation, the General Partner's manager has concluded that, as of the end of
such period, the Partnership's disclosure controls and procedures were
effective as of the end of the period covered by this report. In addition, no
change in the Partnership's internal control over financial reporting (as
defined in Rule 13a- 15(f) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) occurred
during the fourth quarter of the Partnership's fiscal year ended December 31,
2006 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the Partnership's internal control over financial reporting.


                                   PART III

ITEM 9. DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS, PROMOTERS AND CONTROL PERSONS;
        COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 16(a) OF THE EXCHANGE ACT.

     The Partnership has no officers or directors. The General Partner, Maxum
LLC, a Nevada limited liability company, has managed and controlled
substantially all of Partnership's affairs and has general responsibility and
ultimate authority in all matters affecting its business. Mr. Ben Farahi has
been the sole manager of the General Partner since its formation in 2001 and,
as such, exercises the powers associated with the board of directors and
executive officers of a corporation.

     Mr. Farahi, age 54, was, until May 26, 2006, Co-Chairman of the Board,
Chief Financial Officer, Secretary, and Treasurer of Monarch Casino & Resort,
Inc. which, through its wholly-owned subsidiary Golden Road Motor Inn, Inc., a
Nevada company, owns and operates the tropically themed Atlantis Casino Resort
in Reno, Nevada. Since September 1, 1978, Mr. Farahi has been a partner in
Farahi Investment Company, which is involved in real estate investment and
development. Mr. Farahi is also the Manager of the General Partner. Mr. Farahi
holds a mechanical engineering degree from the University of California at

                                     -26-



Berkeley and a MBA degree in accounting from the California State University,
Hayward.

     Although the Partnership does not have a board of directors or,
accordingly, an audit committee, Mr. Farahi, as the managing member of the
General Partner, qualifies as a "financial expert" as defined by the
Securities and Exchange Commission in accordance with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002.


ITEM 10. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

     Under the Partnership's partnership agreement, the General Partner is
entitled to receive 2.5% of the Partnership's income, loss, capital and
distributions, including without limitation the Partnership's cash flow from
operations and disposition proceeds. For the fiscal year ended December 31,
2006, the General Partner was allocated an aggregate of $15,744 of taxable
income from the Partnership. See "Item 12. Certain Relationships and Related
Transactions" for information regarding amounts paid to affiliates of the
General Partner by the Partnership for services provided by them in fiscal
year 2006. The General Partner is the manager of the Sierra Property and
received $111,797 in 2006 for such management services. Also, pursuant to the
Amended LP Agreement, the General Partner may receive development fees from
the Partnership but did not earn any such development fees in 2006 or 2005.


ITEM 11. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT
         AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS

     (a)  Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners.

     Except as set forth below, no person or group is known by the Partnership
to be the beneficial owner of more than 5% of the outstanding Units at March
15, 2007:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                           Number of         % of
Name of Beneficial owners                  Units Owned       Class
---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                        <C>               <C>
Western Real Estate Investments, LLC(1)(3) 91,902            0%-50.8%
Ben Farahi(2)(3)                           49,797(3)         27.5%
John Farahi(4)(3)                          61,268(5)         33.9%
Bob Farahi(4)(3)                           61,268(5)         33.9%
</TABLE>

       (1) The principal business address of Western, an affiliate of the
           General Partner, is 1175 West Moana Lane, Suite 200, Reno, Nevada
           89509.
       (2) Mr. Ben Farahi's principal business address is 1175 West Moana
           Lane, Suite 200, Reno, Nevada 89509.
       (3) Includes 19,163 Units held directly by Mr. Ben Farahi and 30,634
           Units, or one third of the Units owned by Western. On June 22,
           2006, Ben Farahi, as the sole managing member of Western, filed
           Articles of Dissolution with the Secretary of State of the State of
           Nevada with respect to Western, which beneficially owns 91,902
           Units. On June 30, 2006, the Articles of Dissolution were
           challenged by Ben Farahi?s brothers, each of whom owns a one-third
           interest in Western. In the event that Western has been properly
           dissolved, Ben Farahi beneficially owns one-third of the Units
           formerly owned by Western, constituting 30,634 Units, based on his
           ownership of a one-third interest in Western. If, alternatively,
           the dissolution issue is considered to be unresolved, Ben Farahi
           disclaims beneficial ownership of two-thirds of the Units owned by
           Western pursuant to Rule 13d-4 promulgated under the Securities
           Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. In either of these events, Ben
           Farahi owns an aggregate of 49,797 Units, representing 27.5% of the
           outstanding Units. In the event that it is eventually determined

                                    -27-



           under Nevada law that Ben Farahi?s brothers control Western's
           actions, on the other hand, it is possible, although unlikely, they
           would control 91,902 Units on behalf of Western, constituting a
           50.8% majority interest in the Partnership's outstanding Units. In
           such event, they could remove and replace the General Partner and
           control whether, and on what terms, the Sierra Property is sold.
           Ben Farahi is no longer acting in concert with, or considered for
           securities law purposes to be part of a ?group? with, either of his
           brothers with respect to his ownership of Units. The sole managing
           member of Western made a request to the Partnership to transfer 90%
           of Western's Units to each of the three members proportionately.
           After considering this request, the Partnership decided that, based
           on the situation described above, it would be inappropriate to
           allow such transfer.
       (4) Messrs. John Farahi's and Bob Farahi?s principal business address
           is 1175 West Moana Lane, Suite 200, Reno, Nevada 89509.
       (5) Represents two thirds of 91,902 Units owned by Western with respect
           to which Messrs. Farahi share beneficial ownership.

     (b)  Security Ownership of Management.

     At March 15, 2007, neither the General Partner nor its members, manager
or affiliates owned any Units except as indicated in (a) above.

     (c)  Changes in Control.

     There exists no arrangement known to the Partnership the operation of
which may at a subsequent date result in a change in control of the
Partnership.


ITEM 12. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS

     Effective January 1, 2002, the General Partner acquired the associate and
general partnership interests of the Partnership previously held by Presidio
and RAM Funding, respectively, pursuant to the Assignment Agreement, dated as
of October 10, 2001, between the General Partner, Western Real Estate
Investments, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company and an affiliate of the
General Partner ("Western"), RAM Funding and Presidio as well as Presidio
Capital Investment Company LLC, Presidio Partnership II Corp. and Bighorn
Associates LLC, each of which is affiliated with RAM Funding and Presidio AGP
Corp. and was a limited partner of the Partnership prior to January 1, 2002
(the "Former LPs"). Also pursuant to the Assignment Agreement, as of January
1, 2002, Western purchased all 57,695 Units of limited partnership interest in
the Partnership owned by the Former LPs ("Former LP Units"). However, the
Former LPs reserved their rights to the proceeds from the settlement of a
class action litigation, which was subsequently settled. Also, prior to 2002,
Western had acquired 2,799 Units on the open market, 749 Units through
intermediaries and 6,841 Units via a tender offer, and Mr. Ben Farahi, in his
individual capacity, acquired 44 Units in an open market transaction. During
2002, another affiliate of the General Partner, Virginia Springs LLC
(?Virginia Springs?), acquired 9,703 Units via a tender offer. In 2003,
Virginia Springs LLC acquired 12,339 Units via another tender offer, and
Western acquired 407 Units from several limited partners in a series of
private transactions. In 2004, Western acquired 1,359 Units from several
limited partners in a series of private transactions. During 2005, Mr. Ben
Farahi, the Manager of the General Partner but acting in his individual
capacity, acquired 568 Units from several limited partners in a series of
private transactions, and 9,646 Units via a tender offer. Also during 2005,
Western acquired 10 Units in an open market transaction. During 2006, Virginia
Springs transferred all 22,042 of its Units to Western. Also during 2006, Mr.
Ben Farahi, acting in his individual capacity, acquired 84 Units in a series
of open market transactions, and an additional 8,821 Units via a tender offer
that termonated on August 29, 2006 (see below). Accordingly, as of December
31, 2006, affiliates of Maxum owned 111,065 Units, which represented 61.4% of
the issued and outstanding Units at such date.




                                     -28-



     During the Partnership's fiscal years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005,
the Partnership's general partners were not entitled to any payment for
services from or with respect to the Partnership. However, pursuant to the
Partnership's partnership agreement, the general partner(s) are entitled to
receive 2.5% of Partnership's income, loss, capital and distributions (2.45%
to the managing general partner and .05% to the associate general partner)
including without limitation the Partnership's cash flow from operations and
disposition proceeds. Under the Assignment Agreement (as defined in "CHANGE IN
CONTROL" under Item 1.), the General Partner purchased the interests of
both previous general partners. Pursuant to the Amended LP Agreement, there is
no longer an associate general partner, and, therefore, the General Partner is
entitled to receive the entire 2.5%. Based on the settlement agreement,
however, the former general partners were not entitled to any of the Class
Action settlement proceeds and were, accordingly, not allocated any taxable
income associated with the settlement proceeds. For the year ended December
31, 2006, the General Partner was allocated $15,744 of income from operations.

     The General Partner is the manager of the Sierra Property. The General
Partner received $111,797 and $177,390 for the years ended December 31, 2006,
and 2005, respectively for such management services.

     An affiliate of the General Partner controls the Adjacent Property. In
order to increase traffic flow to the Sierra Property, the Partnership has
constructed a new driveway and traffic signal to make it easier for customers
from the Adjacent Property to visit the Sierra Property. As part of the
development, the portion of the Sierra Property previously occupied by Good
Guys was demolished for the purpose of creating in its place the new driveway
(and traffic signal) directly between the Sierra Property and the Adjacent
Property. The Partnership took an impairment charge in 2003 on the portion of
the building of the Sierra Property that was demolished for this purpose. The
driveway is being shared by, and provides a connection between, both
properties. The portion of the Sierra Property that was demolished is being
leased to the owner of the Adjacent Property for $25,000 per month, which
enables the Partnership to make up much of the lost rental revenue previously
generated by Good Guys. The Adjacent Property has the option to renew the
lease for three five-year terms, and at the end of the extension periods, has
the option to purchase the leased section of the Sierra Property at a price to
be determined based on an MAI appraisal. The space being leased by the
Adjacent Property provides pedestrian and vehicle access to the Adjacent
Property, and the Adjacent Property has use of a portion of the parking spaces
at the Sierra Property. The total cost of the project was $2.0 million and the
Adjacent Property was responsible for two-thirds of the total cost, or $1.35
million.

     In addition to the driveway lease, the Adjacent Property is currently
leasing approximately 16,300 square feet of office and storage space at the
Sierra Property and is paying approximately $11,200 per month in rent and
common area expenses for such spaces. The Adjacent Property is also leasing
sign space at the Sierra Property for $1,000 per month.

     The Partnership received $473,980 and $446,371 (including $23,000 which
had not been recorded in prior years) in rental revenue and common area
charges during 2006 and 2005, respectively, for the driveway and the leased
spaces.

     Also pursuant to the Amended LP Agreement, the General Partner shall
receive mortgage placement fees for services rendered in connection with the
Partnership?s mortgage loans. These fees may not exceed such compensation
customarily charged in arm?s-length transactions by others rendering similar
services as an ongoing public activity in the same geographical location for
comparable mortgage loans. The General Partner is entitled to certain fees for
compensation of services rendered; these include acquisition fees in an amount
equal to 2% of the price of such acquired fixed assets, refinancing fees equal
to the lesser of 1% of the refinancing proceeds of the related fixed asset or
fees which are competitive for similar services in the geographical area where
the fixed asset is located, development fees equal to 10% of the total
development cost, construction fees equal to 10% of the total cost of
development of a fixed asset of the Partnership, and guarantee fees for any
guarantees the General Partner may provide in order for the Partnership to

                                     -29-



secure indebtedness for a fee that is competitive with guarantee fees of
similar nature. The General Partner may also be compensated for property
management services in amounts to be equal to the lesser of (a) fees which are
competitive for similar services in the same geographical area or (b)(i) 5% of
the gross revenues with respect to residential properties or (ii) 6% of
revenues with respect to industrial and commercial properties or (iii) 1% of
gross revenues with respect to industrial and commercial properties which are
leased on a long-term net basis (except for a one-time initial leasing fee of
3% of gross revenues). The General Partner may also receive real estate
commissions from the Partnership for real estate brokerage services for
properties acquired upon foreclosure of mortgage loans or fixed assets of the
Partnership, the fees for which shall not exceed the lesser of (i) a
percentage of the gross sales price of a fixed asset of the Partnership equal
to one-half of brokerage fees which are customary, competitive and
reasonable or (ii) 3% of the gross sales price of such fixed asset. Insurance
commissions may also be paid to insurance agencies affiliated with the General
Partner so long as conditions to the General Partner?s purchase of insurance
brokerage services from an affiliate are met.

     For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004, the General Partner earned
approximately $65,732 in development fees, which has been capitalized as a
cost of the building and improvements. The General Partner did not earn any
development fees during 2005 or 2006.

     Accounting rules define transactions with related parties as
transactions, which are not arms-length in nature and, therefore, may not
represent fair market value.

     During the course of negotiations with related parties, the General
Partner has conducted research in an attempt to obtain current and comparable
market data for the purpose of being informed on current trends so that its
transactions with related parties approximate fair market value.


ITEM 13. EXHIBITS

     The Exhibits listed on the accompanying Index to Exhibits are filed as
part of this Annual Report and incorporated in this Annual Report as set forth
in said Index.


ITEM 14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES

     The General Partner has appointed Mark Bailey & Co., Ltd. as independent
auditors to audit the consolidated financial statements of the Partnership for
2006.

Audit Fees. The Partnership paid Imowitz, Koenig & Co., LLP audit fees of
approximately $25,500 for the year ended December 31, 2005, and has agreed to
pay Mark Bailey & Co., Ltd. audit fees of approximately $20,000 for the year
ended December 31, 2006.

Audit Related Fees. The Partnership paid audit related fees in the amount of
$8,000 to Mark Bailey & Co., Ltd. for the year ended December 31, 2006. The
Partnership did not pay any audit related fees to Imowitz, Koenig & Co., LLP
for the year ended December 31, 2005.

Tax Fees. The Partnership has agreed to pay Mark Bailey & Co., Ltd. fees for
tax services of approximately $5,500 for the year ended December 31, 2006.
The Partnership paid Imowitz, Koenig & Co., LLP fees for tax services of
approximately $16,500 for the year ended December 31, 2005.

Other Fees. The Partnership did not pay any other fees to Mark Bailey & Co.,
Ltd. or Imowitz, Koenig & Co., LLP for the years ended December 31, 2006 and
2005, respectively.




                                     -30-



                                  SIGNATURES

     In accordance with Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act, the
Registrant caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned,
thereunto duly authorized.


BIGGEST LITTLE INVESTMENTS L.P.

By:  MAXUM LLC
     General Partner


By:  /s/ Ben Farahi                                       Date
     --------------
         Ben Farahi, Manager                              March 26, 2007

     In accordance with the requirements of the Exchange Act, this report has
been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the Registrant and in
the capacities and on the dates indicated.

     Signature                    Title                   Date

     /s/ Ben Farahi             Manager of                March 26, 2007
     --------------         the General Partner
         Ben Farahi












































                                    -31-



                                EXHIBIT INDEX

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                  Page
Exhibit   Description                                             Number
-------   -----------                                             ------
<S>       <C>                                                     <C>

2.        General and Limited Partner Interest Assignment
          Agreement, dated as of October 10, 2001, between
          Maxum LLC, Western Real Estate Investments, LLC,
          RAM Funding, Inc., Presidio AGP Corp., Presidio
          Capital Investment Company LLC, Presidio
          Partnership II Corp. and Bighorn Associates LLC
          (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.1 of the
          Partnership's Current Report on Form 8-K dated
          January 25, 2002).

3.

  (A)     Certificate of Limited Partnership filed on August
          14, 1986 with the State of Delaware (incorporated
          by reference to Exhibit 3B to Pre-Effective
          Amendment No. 1 to Registration Statement filed by
          the Partnership with the Securities and Exchange
          Commission on May 14, 1987 (the "Pre-Effective
          Amendment")).

  (B)     Amendment to Certificate of Limited Partnership
          filed on March 12, 1987 with the State of Delaware
          (incorporated by reference to the Pre-Effective
          Amendment).

  (C)     Amendment to Certificate of Limited Partnership
          filed on May 7, 1987 with the State of Delaware
          (incorporated by reference to the Pre-Effective
          Amendment).

  (D)     Amendment to Certificate of Limited Partnership
          filed on February 5, 1988 with the State of
          Delaware (incorporated by reference to Post-
          Effective Amendment No. 2 to Registration Statement
          filed by the Partnership with the Securities and
          Exchange Commission in 1988 ("Post-Effective
          Amendment No. 2")).

  (E)     Certificate of Amendment to Certificate of Limited
          Partnership dated as of January 1, 2002, filed on
          January 29, 2002 with the State of Delaware
          (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3(e) to the
          Partnership's Form 10-KSB filed with the Securities
          and Exchange Commission on March 29, 2002 (the
          "2001 Form 10-KSB").

  (F)     Certificate of Amendment to Certificate of Limited
          Partnership filed on November 9, 2003 with the State
          of Delaware (incorporated by reference to Exhibit
          3(F) to the Partnership's Form 10-KSB filed with the
          Securities and Exchange Commission on March 26, 2004
          (the "2003 Form 10-KSB").

4.

  (A)     Amendment No. 1 to Second Amended and Restated
          Limited Partnership Agreement of Biggest Little
          Investments, L.P. is filed herewith as Exhibit
          4(A).


                                     -32-



  (B)     Second Amended and Restated Limited Partnership
          Agreement of the Partnership (incorporated by
          reference to Exhibit 4A to the Partnership's
          Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the
          Securities and Exchange Commission on October 10,
          2003.

  (C)     Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited
          Partnership of the Partnership (incorporated by
          reference to Exhibit 3A to  Post-Effective
          Amendment No. 2).

  (D)     Amendment No. 1 to Amended and Restated Partnership
          Agreement dated as of June 1, 1988 (incorporated by
          reference to Exhibit 4(B) of the Partnership's
          Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year 1988
          (the "1988 10-K")).

  (E)     Amendment No. 2 to Amended and Restated Partnership
          Agreement (incorporated by reference to Supplement
          No. 1 dated August 12, 1988 to the Prospectus filed
          by the Partnership with the Securities and Exchange
          Commission pursuant to Rules 424(b)(3) and 424(c)
          of the Securities Act of 1933).

  (F)     Amendment to Amended and Restated Agreement of
          Limited Partnership dated as of January 1, 2002.
          (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4(D) of the
          2001 Form 10-KSB).

  (G)     Amendment to Amended and Restated Agreement of
          Limited Partnership dated as of January 1, 2002
          (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4(E) of the
          2001 Form 10-KSB).

10.

  (A)     Deed of Trust, Assignment of Rents, Fixture Filing
          and Security Agreement among High Cash Partners,
          L.P., Trustee; First Commercial Title, Inc.,
          Trustee; and Resources Accrued Mortgage Investors
          2, L.P., Beneficiary, dated February 10, 1989
          (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10(a) to the
          Partnership's Current Report on Form 8-K filed
          with the Securities and Exchange Commission dated
          February 13, 1989 (the "1989 Form 8-K").

  (B)     Registered Note among High Cash Partners, L.P. and
          Resources Accrued Mortgage Investors 2, L.P., dated
          February 10, 1989 (incorporated by reference to
          Exhibit 10(b) to the 1989 Form 8-K).

  (C)     Assignment of Leases and Rents among High Cash
          Partners, L.P. and Resources Accrued Mortgage
          Investors 2, L.P., dated February 10, 1989
          (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10(c) to the
          1989 Form 8-K).

  (D)     Modification Agreement, dated as of December 21,
          2000, between High Cash Partners, L.P. and
          Resources Accrued Mortgage Investors 2, L.P.
          (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10 to the
          Partnership's Current Report on Form 8-K filed
          with the Securities and Exchange Commission dated
          February 9, 2001).

31.       Certification pursuant to Section 302 of the
          Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


                                     -33-



32.       Certification pursuant to Section 906 of the
          Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
</TABLE>



































































                                     -34-



                                                                    EXHIBIT 31

   CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Ben Farahi, certify that:

     1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Biggest Little
Investments L.P.;

     2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any
untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary
to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such
statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by
this annual report;

     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual
report;

     4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls
and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for
the small business issuer and I have:

         a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures or caused such
            disclosure controls and procedures to be designed, under my
            supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the
            small business issuer is made known to me, particularly during the
            period in which this annual report is being prepared:

         b) evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's
            disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report my
            conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and
            procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this annual
            report based on such evaluation; and

         c) disclosed in this annual report any change in the small business
            issuer's internal control over financial reporting that occurred
            during the small business issuer's most recent fiscal year that
            has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
            affect, the small business issuer's internal control over
            financial reporting; and

     5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal
control over financial reporting to the small business issuer's auditors:

         a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design
            or operation of internal control over financial reporting which
            are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business
            issuer's ability to record, process, summarize and report
            financial information; and

         b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
            other employees who have a significant role in the small business
            issuer's internal control over financial reporting.



                                          /s/ Ben Farahi
                                          --------------
                                              Ben Farahi
                                              Manager of the General Partner

                                              Date: 3/26/07





                                     -35-



                                                                    Exhibit 32

   CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     In connection with the Annual Report of Biggest Little Investments L.P.
(the "Partnership"), on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended December 31,
2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), the undersigned, in the capacities and on the date indicated
below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: (1) the
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (2) the information contained in the
Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Partnership.



Date:  March 26, 2007          /s/ Ben Farahi
                               --------------
                                   Ben Farahi,
                                   Manager of the General Partner

















































                                     -36-

(..continued)