Supporting_Documentation_Packet_082526.pdf
Thomas Mark Evans Petitioner Vs. Township Of Golden Respondent · 26-001549-TT
Text extracted from the reviewed PDF, organized by page. OCR and reading order may contain errors; confirm details in the PDF below.
Page 1
STATE OF MICHIGAN MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL Thomas Mark Evans, Petitioner, v. MTT Docket No. 26-001549 Township Of Golden, Respondent. COVER LETTER INDEX OF ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION This cover letter transmits the documents attached below as potential supporting evidence and documentation in connection with Petitioner's Amended Petition in the above-captioned matter. These materials were previously submitted to, or issued by, Respondent's March 2026 Board of Review, and are referenced in Item 20 of the Petition and in the accompanying Statement of Facts Supporting Relief Requested. 1. Assessor Support Statements (pages 2–10) Pages 2–5 — Parcel 64-006-650-038-50 (8448 W Hazel Rd, Mears, MI) Pages 6–8 — Parcel 64-006-650-038-00 (8446 W Hazel Rd, Mears, MI — main hotel building) Pages 9–10 — Parcel 64-006-630-001-00 (8446 W Hazel Rd, Mears, MI — no separately assigned address) 2. Board of Review Decision Notices (pages 11–13) Page 11 — Parcel 64-006-650-038-00 (partial reduction: $545,300 to $487,500) Page 12 — Parcel 64-006-630-001-00 (reduction denied: $633,500 / $582,514 unchanged) Page 13 — Parcel 64-006-650-038-50 (reduction denied: $250,100 unchanged) All of the foregoing documents are incorporated herein by reference and are attached in full following this cover letter. Page 1 of 13
Page 2
Assessor Support Statement Parcel: 006-650-038-50 Property Address: 8448 W Hazel Rd, Mears MI Owner: Silver Sands Hotel & Resort LLC Township: Golden Township, Oceana County Purpose This statement is submitted in support of a property tax assessment appeal for the above parcel and is intended to assist the Golden Township Board of Review, with supporting information for the township assessor, in determining the true cash value of the real estate associated with the property following the May 1, 2025 transfer of ownership. In accordance with MCL 211.27, which recognizes that purchase price alone does not necessarily represent the true cash value of real property, this statement provides clarification regarding the components of the transaction and identifies the portion of the purchase attributable to real property as distinct from other assets included in the transaction. Property Description The subject parcel contains approximately 0.482 acres of commercially zoned land located within the Silver Lake commercial corridor and includes a commercial building originally constructed in 1950. The township assessment record currently lists the building size as 3,736 square feet. However, based on physical measurements of the building footprint, the actual building area is approximately 3,150 square feet. The owner respectfully requests that the township review and verify the building measurements used in the assessment record, as building square footage is a primary component of the cost-based valuation model used in property assessments. Transaction Summary The property transferred on May 1, 2025 for $575,000. The transaction reflected the acquisition of multiple components associated with the property and its redevelopment potential, including: • the real estate (land and building) • architectural and design plans prepared for redevelopment of the site • engineering documentation associated with site planning and infrastructure considerations • environmental reports and related due diligence materials • restaurant furniture and movable furnishings remaining within the building • redevelopment opportunity associated with the location It is the current owners understanding that items such as architectural plans, engineering documentation, environmental reports, and restaurant furnishings represent development assets or personal property rather than taxable real estate improvements. Building Condition at Time of Transfer At the time of purchase, the building had been substantially gutted by the previous owner. Key conditions included: • removal of restaurant related equipment • removal of interior restaurant build-out and operational infrastructure • absence of functional restaurant facilities • the need for substantial renovation before restaurant operations could resume Page 2 of 13
Page 3
Use and Zoning Uncertainty at Time of Transfer Prior to the sale, the previous owner had intended to convert the building to an off-road vehicle rental operation, and the property was no longer functioning as a restaurant. Because of these circumstances, the continued use of the property as a restaurant was uncertain at the time of transfer and required confirmation through the local zoning and regulatory process. This uncertainty created additional risk and redevelopment cost for a potential buyer and represents a form of functional and legal obsolescence affecting the value of the real estate at the time of purchase. Building Depreciation and Physical Condition According to the township assessment record, the building reflects a Physical Percent Good of approximately 47%, indicating significant depreciation due to age and condition. In addition to this physical depreciation, the property experienced functional obsolescence due to the removal of restaurant interior improvements and the lack of operational infrastructure at the time of purchase. The owner also notes that the improvement value reflected in the assessment record may not fully reflect the condition of the structure at the time of transfer. Because the building had been substantially gutted and lacked the infrastructure necessary to function as a restaurant, the building represented a commercial shell requiring significant renovation. As a result, the contributory value of the building improvements at the time of purchase would reasonably be lower than that of a comparable operational restaurant property. Comparable Property Evidence A nearby comparable commercial property is located at: 8407 W Silver Lake Rd (Parcel 006-180-024-00). Assessment comparison (2025 values): Property Acres Frontage SEV Sq Ft 8448 W Hazel Rd (subject) 0.482 130 ft $185,200 3,736 (adj. 3,150) 8407 W Silver Lake Rd 0.413 120 ft $128,500 2,490 The comparable property retains restaurant infrastructure and has historically functioned as an operational restaurant facility. Despite this, the comparable parcel reflects a substantially lower assessed value than the subject property. Given the subject property's condition at the time of purchase and the uncertainty surrounding restaurant use, the subject parcel would reasonably be expected to reflect a similar or lower real estate value relative to the comparable property. Assessment Trend Comparison Township assessment records show a significant difference in the change in State Equalized Value between the subject property and the nearby comparable restaurant property located at 8407 W Silver Lake Rd. Property 2025 SEV 2026 SEV Increase 8448 W Hazel Rd (Subject) $185,200 $250,100 +$64,900 8407 W Silver Lake Rd $128,500 $142,200 +$13,700 While both properties are similar in age and general commercial use, the subject property experienced an increase of approximately 35%, whereas the comparable property increased by approximately 10.7%. Page 3 of 13
Page 4
Given the similar characteristics of the properties, the substantially larger increase applied to the subject parcel appears inconsistent with the principle of uniform assessment required under Michigan property tax law. Cost Model Comparison Township assessment records also include the assessor’s estimated True Cash Value (TCV) generated through the state cost valuation model. Property Estimated TCV Building Size TCV per Sq Ft 8448 W Hazel Rd (Subject) $384,163 3,736 sq ft (adj. 3,150 sf) ~$102 / sq ft (adj. $122/sf) 8407 W Silver Lake Rd $158,750 2,490 sq ft ~$63 / sq ft This indicates that the township cost model is valuing the subject property at approximately 60% higher value per square foot than the nearby comparable restaurant property. Given that both structures are similar in age and commercial use, and that the subject property required substantial renovation at the time of purchase, this difference suggests that the valuation applied to the subject property may not accurately reflect its condition or functional utility. Building Condition Factors Comparison Property Year Built Effective Age Physical % Good Functional % Good 8448 W Hazel Rd (subject) 1950 25 yrs 47% 100% 8407 W Silver Lake Rd 1952 38 yrs 35% 100% Building Condition Factors Township assessment records indicate that the subject property at 8448 W Hazel Rd is assigned an effective age of 25 years, a physical percent good of 47%, and a functional percent good of 100%. By comparison, the nearby restaurant property at 8407 W Silver Lake Rd is assigned an effective age of 38 years, a physical percent good of 35%, and a functional percent good of 100%. It is the owner’s understanding that effective age and physical percent good are both indicators used in the assessment model to reflect the relative age, condition, and remaining useful life of a structure. In general, a lower effective age and higher physical percent good suggest that a building is in better overall condition and has greater remaining utility than an older or more deteriorated comparable structure. Here, however, the subject property had been substantially gutted prior to the 2025 transfer of ownership, lacked restaurant equipment and interior operational infrastructure, and was not functioning as a restaurant at the time of purchase. The comparable property, while older in effective age and lower in physical percent good, retained restaurant infrastructure and operational utility. Given these circumstances, it is the owner’s understanding that the subject property would not reasonably be expected to reflect a younger effective age, a stronger physical condition profile, and a 100% functional rating when compared with a nearby operational restaurant property of similar vintage. Accordingly, the assessment record may not fully reflect the actual condition, utility, and renovation burden associated with the subject property at the time of transfer. Page 4 of 13
Page 5
Requested Adjustment Based on: • corrected building square footage • the gutted condition of the building at the time of transfer • uncertainty regarding permitted restaurant use • functional and physical depreciation of the structure • the nearby comparable restaurant property It is our understanding that in commercial valuation practice, a loss of functional utility of this nature is often addressed through a functional obsolescence adjustment, commonly in the range of approximately a minimum of 20% or greater depending on the extent of the deficiency. It is in the owner’s opinion when applying a square footage adjustment, as well as a, 20% functional adjustment to the comparable property’s 2025 SEV of $128,500 results in an estimated SEV of approximately $103,000 for the subject property. Based on the condition of the building at the time of transfer, the uncertainty regarding restaurant use, and the renovation required to restore the property to operational restaurant use, the owner respectfully requests that the Golden Township Board of Review consider an adjusted State Equalized Value in the range of approximately $103,000. Submitted by Silver Sands Hotel & Resort LLC C/O Tom Evans 8446 W Hazel Rd Mears, MI 49436 Page 5 of 13
Page 6
Assessor Support Statement Parcel: 006-650-038-00 Property Address: 8446 W Hazel Rd, Mears MI Owner: Silver Sands Hotel & Resort LLC Township: Golden Township, Oceana County Purpose This statement is submitted in support of a property tax assessment appeal for the above parcel and is intended to assist the Golden Township Board of Review, with supporting information for the township assessor, in determining the true cash value of the real estate associated with the property following the 2024 transfer of ownership. In accordance with MCL 211.27, which recognizes that purchase price alone does not necessarily represent the true cash value of real property, this statement provides clarification regarding the components of the transaction and identifies the portion of the purchase attributable to real property as distinct from business assets and other non-real estate components included in the acquisition. Property Description The subject parcel contains approximately 0.852 acres of commercially zoned land located within the Silver Lake tourism corridor and includes multiple motel-style lodging buildings and accessory structures associated with the Silver Sands Hotel & Resort. Township assessment records indicate a total building area of approximately 13,908 square feet across three structures. However, during acquisition it was identified the total building area is approximately 13,018 square feet. The owner respectfully requests that the township review and verify the building measurements used in the assessment record, as building square footage is a primary component of the cost-based valuation model used in property assessments. Transaction Summary The property transferred in 2024 as part of the acquisition of the Silver Sands Hotel & Resort. The transaction included not only the real estate itself but also the acquisition of an operating hospitality business. The purchase included elements such as furniture, fixtures and equipment (FF&E), established reservation systems, operational infrastructure, customer goodwill, and other components associated with an operating hotel business. It is the owner's understanding that these items represent business value rather than taxable real estate value under Michigan property tax law. Building Characteristics The improvements on the parcel consist primarily of older motel-style lodging buildings typical of earlier development within the Silver Lake tourism market. Township assessment records indicate effective ages of approximately 35–40 years and physical percent good ratings between roughly 35% and 40%, indicating substantial depreciation associated with the age and condition of the structures. Page 6 of 13
Page 7
Comparable Property Evidence A nearby comparable lodging property is the Dunes Waterfront Hotel located at 1180 N Shore Dr (Parcel 006-140-022-00). Property Sq Ft Rooms Building Value (SEV) SEV per Sq Ft Silver Sands Hotel (Subject) 13,908 (13,018) 34 $492,100 ~$35/sf ($38/sf) Dunes Waterfront Hotel 46,440 74 $1,318,700 ~$28/sf For purposes of this comparison, the building value was derived by subtracting the township- assigned land value from the total State Equalized Value of each parcel, allocating the remaining value to the building improvements. This method allows the improvement values to be compared without the influence of waterfront land premiums. Despite the Dunes Waterfront Hotel being significantly larger, newer, and located directly on the Silver Lake waterfront, the Silver Sands property reflects a higher building value per square foot. The subject parcel is assessed at approximately $35–$38 per square foot, compared with approximately $28 per square foot for the Dunes Waterfront Hotel. Because the subject property consists of older motel-style lodging structures with smaller room sizes and greater physical depreciation, it would generally be expected to reflect a lower building value profile than a newer, larger hotel property. The current assessment therefore suggests that the improvement value assigned to the subject parcel may be disproportionately high relative to comparable lodging properties within the township. Room Size Comparison Property Sq Ft Rooms Sq Ft per Room Silver Sands Hotel (Subject) 13,908 (13,018) 34 ~409 (~382) Dunes Waterfront Hotel 46,440 74 ~628 The comparable hotel provides significantly more building area per room than the subject property. This typically reflects a higher construction cost and overall improvement value profile. Despite this, the township assessments reflect nearly identical SEV per square foot. Land Value Comparison Property Acres Land Value Land Value per Acre Silver Sands Hotel (Subject) 0.852 $106,400 ~$124,800 Dunes Waterfront Hotel 2.137 $1,050,000 ~$491,000 The township assessment records reflect a significant land value premium associated with the direct Silver Lake waterfront location of the Dunes Waterfront Hotel. The comparable property carries a land value of $1,050,000 (approximately $491,000 per acre) compared with $106,400 (approximately $124,800 per acre) for the subject parcel. Because the waterfront premium is already reflected in the land component of the comparable property’s assessment, the improvement values of the two properties should reasonably reflect the structural differences between a larger waterfront hotel property and the smaller inland motel-style lodging structures located on the subject parcel. Cost Model Review Township assessment records include calculations generated through the state commercial cost valuation model. Because the model relies heavily on building square footage, depreciation curves, and structural classifications, even modest discrepancies in building size or effective age assumptions may materially affect the resulting valuation. Verification of building area and Page 7 of 13
Page 8
depreciation factors may therefore be appropriate in determining the true cash value of the subject property. Requested Adjustment Based on: • the corrected building square footage identified in the acquisition appraisal • the age and condition of the motel-style lodging structures on the parcel • the physical depreciation reflected in the township assessment record • the structural differences between the subject motel property and larger hotel-style comparable property • comparison with the nearby Dunes Waterfront Hotel property • the inclusion of operating hospitality business value within the acquisition transaction It is the owner’s understanding that in commercial assessment practice, differences in building scale, building utility, and physical depreciation characteristics are reflected through adjustments to the contributory value of building improvements. The nearby comparable lodging property, the Dunes Waterfront Hotel, contains significantly larger building area, larger room sizes, and direct waterfront frontage, yet township assessment records indicate that the Silver Sands building value is assessed at a higher rate than the Dunes Waterfront. The subject property consists of older motel-style lodging structures with smaller room sizes and a materially different building configuration relative to the larger waterfront hotel comparable. In addition, the square footage at acquisition identified a total building area of approximately 13,018 square feet, compared with approximately 13,908 square feet reflected in the township assessment record. Because building square footage is a primary input in the state cost valuation model used to determine improvement value, the discrepancy between these measurements may materially influence the calculated improvement value assigned to the parcel. Based on the corrected building square footage, the age and depreciation characteristics of the improvements, the structural differences between the subject motel property and the larger waterfront hotel comparable, and the inclusion of operating business value within the purchase transaction, the owner respectfully requests that the Golden Township Board of Review consider an adjusted State Equalized Value in the range of approximately $252,089, which the owner believes more accurately reflects the true cash value of the real estate component of the property. Submitted by Silver Sands Hotel & Resort LLC C/O Tom Evans 8446 W Hazel Rd Mears, MI 49436 Page 8 of 13
Page 9
Assessor Support Statement Parcel: 006-630-001-00 Property Address: No Address (8446 W. Hazel Rd. Mears, MI 49436) Owner: Silver Sands Hotel & Resort LLC Township: Golden Township, Oceana County Purpose This statement is submitted in support of a property tax assessment review for the above referenced parcel and is intended to assist the Golden Township Board of Review, together with the township assessor, in determining the true cash value of the real estate associated with this property. The parcel represents a waterfront lodging property consisting of multiple small cabin- style structures typical of earlier tourism development within the Silver Lake area. This statement provides context regarding the age and characteristics of the improvements and compares the subject parcel with the only other large waterfront lodging property located within the immediate downtown Silver Lake area. Property Description The subject parcel contains approximately 1.127 acres of land located along the Silver Lake shoreline and includes approximately 310 feet of combined frontage, including a portion of direct Silver Lake frontage and additional back lot frontage within the Shore Acres subdivision area. Township assessment records indicate the parcel includes multiple small lodging structures totaling approximately 4,668 square feet of building area across several cabin-style improvements. These structures represent older tourism lodging improvements typical of early Silver Lake development patterns and are characterized by small building footprints and modest construction types. Township records indicate effective ages of approximately 50–55 years with significant physical depreciation reflected in the cost model used by the township assessor. Comparable Property Evidence Within the downtown Silver Lake area, the only large waterfront lodging property providing meaningful comparison to the subject parcel is the Dunes Waterfront Hotel located at 1180 N Shore Dr. Property Sq Ft Property Type Building Value (SEV) SEV per SF Silver Sands Waterfront Cabins (Subject) ~4,668 sq ft Waterfront cabins $250,000 $53.56 / SF Dunes Waterfront Hotel 46,440 sq ft Multi‑story hotel $1,318,700 $28.40 / SF Despite the Dunes Waterfront Hotel being significantly larger and newer, the subject parcel is assessed at nearly double the State Equalized Value per square foot. This indicates that the improvement value assigned to the subject parcel may be disproportionately high relative to comparable waterfront lodging properties within the township. Land Value Comparison Township assessment records reflect the following land values: Property Acres Land Value Land Value per Acre Silver Sands Waterfront Parcel (Subject) 1.127 $767,000 $680,567 / acre Dunes Waterfront Hotel 2.137 $1,050,000 $491,343 / acre Page 9 of 13
Page 10
The subject parcel therefore reflects a significantly higher land value per acre compared with the larger waterfront hotel property. Because the Dunes Waterfront Hotel represents a larger commercial development with newer construction and greater building utility, it would be reasonable to expect the subject parcel to reflect a lower improvement value profile. Cost Model Review Township assessment records include calculations generated through the State of Michigan commercial cost valuation model. Because the model relies heavily on building square footage, building classification, and depreciation factors, the resulting calculated improvement value may not always fully reflect the characteristics of older tourism cabin properties that have experienced substantial physical depreciation over time. Requested Adjustment Based on the following factors observed in the township assessment records and comparable property review: • the age and condition of the cabin‑style lodging structures located on the parcel • the significant physical depreciation associated with these older tourism improvements • the structural differences between the subject parcel and the larger Dunes Waterfront Hotel property • the relatively small building area and limited scale of improvements located on the subject parcel • the disparity between the subject parcel’s SEV per square foot and the lower SEV per square foot applied to the Dunes Waterfront Hotel It is the owner's understanding that in commercial assessment practice, differences in building scale, building utility, and physical depreciation characteristics are reflected through adjustments to the contributory value of building improvements. When the State Equalized Value per square foot applied to the Dunes Waterfront Hotel is applied to the building area of the subject parcel, the resulting calculated SEV would be approximately $409,422. This comparison demonstrates that the subject parcel is currently assessed at a substantially higher value per square foot despite consisting of significantly older and smaller cabin‑style structures. Because the subject parcel consists primarily of older, small‑scale cabin structures rather than a modern hotel building, it would be reasonable to expect the subject parcel to reflect an even lower improvement value profile relative to the larger hotel property. Based on these factors, the owner respectfully requests that the Golden Township Board of Review consider an adjusted State Equalized Value of approximately $367,243, which the owner believes more accurately reflects the true cash value of the real estate associated with the property. Submitted by Silver Sands Hotel & Resort LLC C/O Tom Evans 8446 W Hazel Rd Mears, MI 49436 Page 10 of 13
Page 11
Page 11 of 13 1 2026 BOARD OF REVIEW DECISION FROM GOLDEN TWP ASSESSOR BARBIE EATON, MAAO PO BOX 26 MEARS MI 49436 NAME AND ADDRESS OF OWNER OR PERSON NAMED ON ASSESSMENT ROLL. PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION: (Paree) Code required, Property addrey and legal description optional at 64-006-650-038-00 8446 W HAZEL RD 8446 W HAZEL RD ESMT-1.2016P 17527 MLC862339 QCY3¢ SILVER SANDS HOTEL AND RESORT QC940097 QC40100 WIS 6877 SPI, IN 99/PW PCL, QC- PO BOX 783 1.2003P42673 PLAT OF SILVER LAKE VILLAGE TH PT Of LINDEN MI 48451 LOT 38 & TH PT OF GOVT LOT 2, SEC 29 LYG ELY OF ¥ cD LN: COM AT NW COR LOT 38, TH § 05 DEG 1: 8¢ 3 S$ 03 DEG E 140.21 FT, TH N 89 DEG E 56,58 ¥*T, 01 DEG E 70.54 FT TO POE. THIS PROPERTY IS CLASSIFIED 20] (COMMERCIAL-IMPROVED) Thank you for attending this years March Board of Review. The Board has reviewed the information you supplied and the data nec to compute your assessment and taxable value. The Board has completed their review of parcel number 64-006-650-038-00 i They have made the following determination based on the information you supplied. Board of Review Comments [2026 ORIGINAL ASSESSED VALUE 545,300 [2026 "BOARD OF REVIEW" ASSESSED VALUE 487,500 (If the above amounts are the same, no revisions have occured) [2026 ORIGINAL TAXABLE VALUE 545,300 [2026 "BOARD OF REVIEW" TAXABLE VALUE 487,500 [2026 PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE EXEMPTION/QUALIFIED AG 0.0000 Please feel free to contact the assessor at the address listed above or call (231-873-441 3) if you have any questions, Sr EVI a Ea Sy wR po bon BG de vi sa ¢ BR pr—— Ifyou disagree with the determination of the March Board of Review you may appeal their decision 10 the Mich Tax Tribunal. All petitions for Commercial or Industrial property must by received by the Tribunal no \ater than 3st. All petitions for Agricultural or Residential property must be received by the Tribunal no \ater than Iuly ? To appeal please visit www.michi gan.gov/taxtrib for a petition form and more information. YOU MUST INC A COPY OF THIS NOTICE WITH YOUR APPEAL PETITION, Page 11 of 13
Page 12
Page 12 of 13 FROM GOLDEN TWP ASSESSOR BARBIE EATON, MAAO PO BOX 26 MEARS MI 49436 2026 BOARD OF Ag DECISION NAME AND ADDRESS OF OWNER OR PERSON NAMED ON ASSESSMENT ROLL SILVER SANDS HOTEL AND RESORT PO BOX 783 LINDEN MI 48451 PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION: (Parcel Code required Property address and legal description optional | 64-006-630-001-00 MLC862339 QCI39692 QCIA0097& 100 PT TO 002 IN 86 & 001 10 IN 92 WD9816877 PT TO 001-20 IN 99/PW QC-1.2003P $2673 | SHORE ACRES TH PT OF LOTS 3.4 & 5 & TH PT OF GOVT \ LOT 2. SEC 29 COM AT SW COR LOT 1. TH N 88 DEG E 195 | FT. THN 04 DEG W 103.94 FT TO POB. TH N 04 DEG W 35.02 FT. TH N 86 DEG E 69.66 FT. TH N 07 DEG W 25.05 FT. THN 15 DEG W 41.26 FT. TH N 85 DEG E 74.46 FT TOW LN LOT 38 [ THs PROPERTY IS CLASSIFIED 201 (COMMERCIAL-IMPROVED) \ Thank you for attending this years March Board of Review. The Board has reviewed the information you supplied and the data necessary to compute your assessment and taxable value. The Board has completed their review of parcel number 64-006-630-001-00 They have made the following determination based on the information you supplied. Board of Review Comments [2026 ORIGINAL ASSESSED VALUE 633,500 | [2026 "BOARD OF REVIEW" ASSESSED VALUE 633,500 | (If the above amounts are the same, no revisions have occured) [2026 ORIGINAL TAXABLE VALUE 582,514 il [2026 "BOARD OF REVIEW" TAXABLE VALUE 582,514 wa [2026 PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE EXEMPTION/QUALIFIED AG 0.0000 al Please feel free to contact the assessor at the address listed above or call (231 If you disagree with the determination of Tax Tribunal. All petitions for Commercia 31st. All petitions for Agricultural or Residential propert To appeal please visit www. michigan. gov/taxtrib for a pe A COPY OF THIS NOTICE WITH YOUR APPEAL PETITION. 1 or Industrial property must by received by the Tri y must be received by the Tribunal no later than July 31st. tition form and more information. YOU MUST Page 12 of 13 -873-4413) if you have any questions. he March Board of Review you may appeal their decision to the Michigan bunal no later than May WCLUDE
Page 13
Page 13 of 13 2026 BOARD OF REVIEW DECISION GOLDEN TWP ASSESSOR BARBIE EATON, MAAO PO BOX 26 MEARS MI 49436 NAME AND ADDRESS OF OWNER OR PERSON NAMED ON ASSESSMENT ROLL PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION: (Parcel Code required. Property address and legal description optional); 64-006-650-038-50 8448 W HAZEL RD a 8448 W HAZEL RD ESMT-L2016P17530 MLC992294 QC- SIVER SANDS HOTEL & RESORT L L2005P4889 SPL IN 99 PER PW PCL A RESTAURANT PT OF LINDEN MI 48451 LOT 38, PLAT OF SILVER LAKE VILL & PT OF LOTS 1 & 2, SHORE ACRES & PT OF GOVT LOT 2, SEC 29 COM AT SE COR OF PLAT OF SHORE ACRES, TH N 13 DEG W 33.73 FT TO POB, TH S 88 DEG W 22.77 FT. TH N 04 DEG E 100.72 FT, THN 07 DEG W 67.05 FT TH N 15 DEG W 41.26 FT. THN 85 D | THIS PROPERTY IS CLASSIFIED 201 (COMMERCIAL-IMPROVED) Thank you for attending this years March Board of Review. The Board has reviewed the information you supplied and the data necessary to compute your assessment and taxable value. The Board has completed their review of parcel number 64-006-650-038-50 They have made the following determination based on the information you supplied. Board of Review Comments THE ASSESSED VALUE DOES NOT EXCEED 50% OF THE TRUE CASH VALUE [2026 ORIGINAL ASSESSED VALUE 250,100 [2026 "BOARD OF REVIEW" ASSESSED VALUE 250,100 (If the above amounts are the same, no revisions have occured) [2026 ORIGINAL TAXABLE VALUE 250,100 [2026 "BOARD OF REVIEW" TAXABLE VALUE 250,100 2026 PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE EXEMPTION/QUALIFIED AG 0.0000 Please feel free to contact the assessor at the address listed above or call (231-873-4413) if you have any questions. If you disagree with the determination of the March Board of Review you may appeal their decision to the Michigan Tax Tribunal. All petitions for Commercial or Industrial property must by received by the Tribunal no later than May 31st. All petitions for Agricultural or Residential property must be received by the Tribunal no later than July 31st. To appeal please visit www.michigan.gov/taxtrib for a petition form and more information. YOU MUST INCLUDE A COPY OF THIS NOTICE WITH YOUR APPEAL PETITION. Page 13 of 13