Bittner.pdf

Ralph K Bittner Petitioner V Township Of Vassar Respondent · 26-003772-TT

← View full record

Text extracted from the reviewed PDF, organized by page. OCR and reading order may contain errors; confirm details in the PDF below.

RECEIVED

 AUG 2026
 |
 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

GRETCHENror WHITMERWHT DEPARTMENT OF LICENSINGSTATE OF MICHIGAN eo AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS ~~ MARLONDIRECTOR|. BROWN, DPA

 PROPERTY TAX APPEAL PETITION FORM
 VALUATION / UNCAPPING

 Do not use this form to appeal Classification, Principal Residence Exemption, Qualified Agricultural Exemption, Other
 Exemptions, Special Assessments, or Non-Properly tax disputes,

 Pursuant to Tax Tribunal Rule (TTR) 279, you MUST submit a copy of the notice giving rise to the appeal (i.e., Board of
 Review Decision or other notice) with this petition, if applicable. if you do not submit this document, you may be held in
 default.

 Section 1: Petitioner’s Contact Information
 First Name Ma. Last Name/Company Name
 Ralph K Bittner

 Mailing Address (No., Street, P.O. Box or Rural Route)
 6385 Stale Road
 City or Town State ZIP Code
 Vassar Mi 48768
 Telephone Number 989-710-6238

 Email Address (do not enter unless you want MTT lo send all correspondence via email)
 mrsmsu@sbcglobal.net

 Section 2: Petitioner’s Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Contact Information
 First Name [“XN Last Name

 Firm Name {if any)

 Mailing Address (No., Street, P.O. Box or Rural Route)

 City or Town B State ZIP Code
 ‘ i { Telephone Number N

 Emal Address {do not enter unfess you want MTT to send all correspondence via email)

 Section 3: Subject Property Information use the multiple parcel form for additionat, contiguous parcels.
 How many parcels are you If you are appealing more than one parcel, are they contiguous or adjoining?
 appealing? ves* [J Now

 **If No, you must file separate appeals for each parce!

 Property Address (No., Street)
 6365 State Road (parcel years ago carried an address of 6351 State Road)
 CityVassaror Town County Tuscola StateMi ZIP48768Code

(2)

# STATE OF MICHIGAN
 GRETCHEN WHITMER DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS MARLON I. BROWN, DPA
 GOVERNOR LANSING DIRECTOR

 Section 4: Check which of the following you are appealing (check all that apply)

 [J True Cash and Taxable Value ND A PRAREAN T ROX for —

 DO Taxable Value Only (calculation) AssEssED VALVE APPEAL
 a = — ———
 [J Uncapping of Taxable Value See 3 ~AcE EX Oran ATION

 Section 5: Explain the Reason for this Appeal

 Explanation exceeds space allowed. See accompanying 3-page explanation.

 Section 6: Jurisdictional Issues

 Did you protest the assessment at a Board of Review (BOR)? Yes O No

 If Yes, check which BOR you attended: March O July [I] December

 If No, please check the applicable reason(s):

 [| Not required to attend
 0 Appealing a purported Clerical Error or Mutual Mistake of Fact (if yes, include explanation in Section 5)

 O Appealing within 35 days of State Tax Commission Order
 O Appealing within 35 days of receipt of Notice of Uncapping
 [1 other

 If you checked “other” above, explain:

2)

 STATE OF MICHIGAN
GRETCHEN WHITMER DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS MARLON |, BROWN, DPA
 GOVERNOR LANSING DIRECTOR

 Section 7: Valuation Information *use the multiple parcel form for additional, contiguous parcels.
 Parcel Number: 020-019-000-3500-00
 Classification of Properly: Real.) Personal} (check one)

 Agricultural[J Commercial{3 industriail] Residentialid Yimber-Cutover[J Developmentat{] Utility[J (check one)
 Assessed Value (also known as State Equalized Value) established | Taxable Value established by the Board of Review:
 by the Board of Review: 29,400 6,946

 What do you believe is the fair market vatue (also known as true cash value)?
 36,608

 What do you believe is the assessed value? (multiply true cash What do you believe Is the taxable value? {cannot exceed
 value by .5) 18,304 assessed value) 6482

 Fee Information
 Does the property have a Principal Residence Exemption of at least 50% as of the date of the filing of this petition for all tax years at
 issue?

 Yes [J No

 If you answered yes to the above question, you are not required to pay any filing fees.

 if the property does not have a Principal Residence Exemption of at least 56% as of the date of the filing of this petition for all tax years at
 issue, the filing fee Is based on the greater of the State Equalized Value or Taxable Value in dispute. Ifyou are appealing more than one
 parcel, the parcel with the highest State Equatized Value or Taxable Value in dispute will be used to determine your filing fes, plus $25.00
 will be added for each additional parcel being appealed, not to exceed a tota! filing fee of $1,000.00

 If your property Is residential property (see MCL 206.762) and
 the State Equalized Value or Taxable Value In contention is: Filing Fee Is:

 $100,000.00 and under $125.00
 $100,000.01 to $500,000.00 $200.00
 $Over $500,000.00 $300.00

 1f the property Is NOT residential property (see MCL 205.762) and
 the State Equalized Value or Taxable Value in contention is: Filing Fee is:

 $100,000.00 and under $250.00

 * Plus $26.00 for each additional parcel, as indicated above.

 if the properly is NOT residential property and the State Equatized Value or Taxable Value in dispute is $100,000.01 or greater the
 appeal does not qualify for Small Claims. Therefore, an Entire Tribunal petition must be filed.

 Signature *requires
 ne rized Reprasantative’s Signature:

Section 5, Reason(s) for this Appeal

 We are appealing the Assesssed Value of said property for
2026 as stated on Treasury Form L-4400, Notice of Assessment,
Taxable Valuation, and Property Classification.

 The property in question covers approximately 7.4 acres,
total. Eighty percent is reforestation in progress; scrub
growth yielding to coniferous trees, yielding to hardwoods.
The remaining western portion, about 1.5 acres, borders a state
highway and is mowed periodically at a 4” height.

 From the time of possession, over 50 years, absolutely
nothing has changed. Nothing.

 What has changed, though, is the Assessed Value for 2026
vis-a-vis the Assessed Value for 2025. The 2025 figure was
$19,100, and the new Assessed Value for 2026 is $29,400. In
the short span of 52 weeks, the property increased in value by
$10,300, or 53.9%, per the Township of Vassar assessor. No new
mineral rights, no new pole buildings, no changes whatsoever.
Yet the value increased an eye-popping 53.9%.

 Within Box 6, 'Assessor Change Reason', of the Notice of
Assessment (form L-4400) sent in late February, the assessor
merely stated, “Market Adjustment”. Note that, in my appeal to
the Board of Review, I said no reason had been given. That was
incorrect. I missed spotting those two words, 'market
adjustment’, because frankly the very small font, the brevity
of the comment, and the corner location in the relatively large
comment box made them easy to miss.

 Two words, 'market adjustment’, are sufficient
justification for elevating our property's assessment by almost
54% over the short span of twelve months?

(2)

 The enclosed photos---views of the adjoining property
" bordering the north side of ours---show what has indeed changed
 during 2025 and continuing into 2026. The neighbor is now
 allowing a tree service to deposit organic material in piles
 reaching about 8' in height within 15 to 25 feet parallel to
 the property line. The mountain range of wood chips is
 sufficiently long so as to obscure any view northward for a
 good portion of the shared property line.

 Other photos show the condition of out buildings and
 equipment, all visible from our property. (All photos were
 taken from the north edge of our property, with the fiberglass
 sticks on the property line visible in the foreground in some
 photos. No trespassing was involved.)

 We mention the condition of the neighboring property NOT as
 an indictment, since we believe the property might actually be
 zoned commercial. This is America, and if the neighbor pays
 his/her taxes, and if the township either has no ordinances
 being violated, or if the township elects to not enforce
 existing ordinances, fine. That's their choice. But consider
 this; real estate values are hugely impacted by location.
 That's axiomatic. Any real estate agent will confess that the
 first consideration in determining value is what neighboring
 and adjoining properties look like.

 The photos tell the story. While the neighbor is
 absolutely free to do as he/she wants, their choices have
 collateral value consequences, primarily for adjoining property
 owners and also for other property owners nearby.

 Either the condition of the adjoining property escaped the
 attention of the assessor during an in-person visit, or there
 was no in-person visit. Our guess is that it was the latter,
 because had she viewed the situation---had she actually seen
 the mountain of organic material within sniffing distance of
 the property line~-~there is no way in good conscience she

z)

 petitioned the Board of Review. When the assessor failed to
 provide the data base information which informed her decision
" to impose a 53.9% increase, how were we, the petitioners,
 expected to present a cogent presentation before the BoR other
 than to say, which we did, that absolutely nothing altered the
 property during 2025 to warrant the whopping reassessment
 figure? To reiterate, though, a whole lot did happen during
 2025, and continuing even now, just beyond the north property
 line which clearly pushes real-world value of our property
 substantially downward, not upward.

 If assessors in general, and ours in particular, are
 permitted to do value alterations remotely off-site of the
 magnitude we're experiencing---presumably using some sort of
 actuarial tables of comparable sales within x-miles of our
 location...5 miles, 50 miles, statewide, who knows?...the
 assessors' job is a gnat's whisker away from being done via a
 clerk using artificial intelligence (AI). At that point the
 assessor will have rendered herself/himself superfluous.

 Consider this, if you will: What we've witnessed is an
 assessor's explanation which, in fact, is no explanation at
 all. Ironically, it is the assessor's reason which has no
 supporting documentation given to the petitioner(s). It lacks
 foundational information which would allow any petitioner to
 present a compelling refutation. That, in turn, sets the stage
 for Board of Review rejection by an equally vague assertion
 that insufficient documentation has been presented. Five
 words, “Market Adjustment” and “No Supporting Documentation”,
 are all that are needed to stop any appeal from virtually any
 petitioner: Simply use a reason that is cryptically vague
 (assessor), then summarily dismiss the appeal attempt (Board of
 Review). It's a slam-dunk, every time.

 We are asking that reason prevails, that we be granted a
 relatively modest reduction request in Assessed Value amounting
 to about $800 [to $18,304], as suggested to, and rejected by,
 the Board of Review. (In retrospect, considering the current

rosihe rian THIS IS NOT A TAX BILL L-4400
 Notice of Assessment, Taxable Valuation, and Property Classification rim
 Tis forms issued indor tho authority of Public Act 208 of 1693, Sec. 211.24and Sec.211.34c, as anonded. This is a model nt notice {0 be used by the local assessor.
 FROM YASSAR TOWNSHIP PARCEL IDENTIFICATION
 . 4470 W SAGINAW RD PARCEL NUMBER: 020-019-000-3500-00

 - PROPERTY ADDRESS:
 VASSAR MI 48768 STATE RD
 VASSAR, MI 48768
 SCHOOL DISTRICT CODE: ~~ 79150

 OWNER'S NAME & ADDRESS/PERSON NAMED ON ASSESSMENT ROLL:
 EXEMPTIONS
 7 % Exempt As “Homeowners Principal Residence”: 100.00%
 4rtxraRaRpAUTOS*5-DIGIT 48768 T12 P1144 % ExemptAs "Qualified Agricultural Property”: .00%
 aCe ER RALEH, K % ExemptAs "MBT Industrial Personal™ 00%
 VASSAR, MI 48768-9215 % ExemptAs "MBT Commercia! Personal”; 00%
 Ite figs fifo t yg fe ge pgs ExemptAs “Disabled Veteran or Surviving N
 Spouse”: 0 es 3] °
 ExemptAs "Qualified Forest Property”: [Hl] Yes No

 ExemptAs "Development Property”: [m} Yes x No

 LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
 VAS-18-402A SEC 19 T11N R8E 10 A OFF SW COR OF NW 1/4 OF SE 1/4 ALSO NE 1/4 OF SW M4 E OF( STATE RDEXCOMATA
 PT ON CL OF M-15 THAT IS S 34 DEG 15' E 1321.5 FT FROM INTERS OF M-15 & E-W 1/4 LN, TH N 70 DEG E 355 FT, TH S 34 DEG
 15'E 382 FT. TH S 88 DEG 15"W 408 FT TO CEN OF M-15. TH N 34 DEG 15' W 250 FT TQ POB.

 ACCORDING TO MCL 211.34c THIS PROPERTY IS CLASSIFIED AS: 401 Residential

 PRIOR YEAR'S CLASSIFICATION IF DIFFERENT: 401 Residential

 The change in taxable value will increase/decrease your tax bill PRIOR AMOUNT CURRENT CHANGE FROM
 for the 2026 year by, .approximately: $4 YEAR: 2025 TENTATIVE AMO a ER

 1. TAXABLE VALUE: : 6,764 6,946 182
 2. ASSESSED VALUE: 19,100 29,400 10,300
 3. TENTATIVE EQUALIZATION FACTOR: 1.000
 4, STATE EQUALIZED VALUE (SEV): 19,100 29,400 10,300
 5. WAS THERE A TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP i025 THAT RESULTED iN A TAXABLE VALUE UNCAPPING? [yes No
 6. Assessor Change Reason(s):
 Market Adjustment

 The 2026 Inflation rate o Multiplier iis: 1021
 Questions regarding the Notice of Assessment, Taxable Valuation, and Property Classification may be directed to the Following:
Name: Telephone Number: Email Address:
 SHERRY HICKMOTT 989-823-3541 ASSESSOR@VASSARTOWNSHIP.ORG

March Board of Review Appeal Information. The Board of Review will meet at the following dates and times:

Michigan Department of Treasury
 818 (Rev. 12-25)
 Petition to Board of Review L-4035
. This form is issued under the authority of P.A. 206 of 1893, as amended. Filing is voluntary; however, you may not appeal to the Michigan Tax Tribunal unless you first protest
 to tha Board of Review, except when the property is classified as commercialreal, Industrial real, or developmental real. You may not appeal property classification to the State
 Tax Commission unless you first protest to the Board of Review.

 TO BE COMPLETED BY OWNER OR OWNER’S AGENT
 Owner's Name (Please Print or Type) Petitioner's Name (If Other than Owner. Please Print or Type)
 Ralph K. Bittner and Nancy J. Bittner Trust Ralph Bittner
 Township or City County Year of Appeal
 Vassar Township Tuscola 2026
 The undersigned protests the assessed value and/or the tentative taxable value and/or the property classification and/or the qualified
 agricultural property exemption of the following described property:

 Property Identified (Parcel code required. Properly address end legal description optional.)

 Parcel # 020-019-000-3500-00
 6365 State Road
 Vassar Township, Michigan

 Protested tem: [| Assessed Value | Tentative | Taxable Status (H] Classification a Qualified Agricultural
 Taxable Value (exemption) Property Exemption
 1, PROTEST OF ASSESSMENT SEER Sptanas
 Complete this section for a protest of assessed value, including assessed value changes associated with exempt status and denied or late filed
 personal property forms.
 Assessed Value Owner's Estimate of True Cash Value (Market Value)
 $29,400 . $18,304
 2. PROTESTOF TAXABLE VALUE aaa REE ee
 Complete this section for a protest of Taxable Value.

 Reason: [| Value of Losses O Value of Additions [| Poverty Exemption | Uncapping %
 3. PROTESTOF CLASSIFICATION ~~~ Saal ow
 Complete this section for a request to change the classification. The Board of Review must make their decision regarding classification in accordance
 with Section 211.34c of the Michigan Compiled Laws. The Board of Review shall not be influenced by the effect that a particular classification has on
 that property's status as a homeowner's principal residence or qualified agricultural property.)
 Classification of property on this year's assessment roll

 Classification should be (check one of the following):
 [] Agricuttural [J industrial [] Timber Cutover [] utiiity (Personal Property Only)
 (| Commercial O Residential Od Developmental
 4. PROTEST OF EXEMPTION FOR QUALIFIED AGRICULTURAL PROPERTY. _
 If the assessor has denied or changed the percentage of the exemption from the 18 mills of local school operating tax for qualified agricultural proper-
 ty, the owner may appeal this action to the March Board of Review. THE BOARD OF REVIEW HAS NO AUTHORITY TO CONSIDER OR ACT UPON
 THE EXEMPTION FROM THE 18 SCHOOL OPERATING MILLS FOR HOMEOWNER'S PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE PROPERTIES.)
 Percent qualified agricultural exemption granted by assessor (Enter 0 if exemption Percent qualified agricultural exemption requested by owner (Enter 100 if full
 denied) exemption requested)
 ‘REASON FOR PROTEST ea Seg es : > Fo
 State reason(s) for protest of assessed value and/or the tentative taxable value and/or taxable status and/or classification and/or qualified agricultural property exemption

2026 BOARD OF REVIEW DECISIO 03/12/2026 10:44 AM

 FROM

 VASSAR TOWNSHIP

 4505 W SAGINAW RD

 VASSAR MI 48768

 NAME AND ADDRESS OF OWNER OR PERSON NAMED ON ASSESSMENT ROLL: PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION: (Parcel Code required. Property address
 and legal description optional):

 020-019-000-3500-00 STATE V/L

 BITTNER RALPH K & NANCY J VAS-19-402A SEC 19 T11N R8E 10 A OFF SW COR OF NW 1/4
 6365 S STATE RD OF SE 1/4 ALSO NE 1/4 OF SW 1/4 E OF STATE RD EX COM
 VASSAR MI 48768 AT APT ON CL OF M-15 THAT IS S 34 DEG 15'E 1321.5 FT
 FROM INTERS OF M-15 & E-W 1/4 LN, TH N 70 DEG E 355
 FT, TH S 34 DEG 15' E 382 FT, TH S 88 DEG 15' W 408 FT TO
 CEN OF M-15, THN 34 DEG 15' W 250 FT TO POB.

 THIS PROPERTY IS CLASSIFIED 401 (RESIDENTIAL-IMPROVED)

 Thank you for attending this years March Board of Review. The Boardhas 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 020-019-000-3500-00
 They have made the following determination based on the information you supplied.

 Board of Review Comments

 LAND VAULE DEEMED ACCURATE - NO SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION PROVIDED
 De ed

 2026 ORIGINAL ASSESSED VALUE 29,400 j

 2026 "BOARD OF REVIEW" ASSESSED VALUE 29,400

 (If the above amounts are the same, no revisions have occured)

 2026 ORIGINAL TAXABLE VALUE 6,946

 2026 "BOARD OF REVIEW" TAXABLE VALUE 6,946

 2026 PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE EXEMPTION/QUALIFIED AG 100.0000

Please feel free to contact the assessor at the address listed above or call if you have any questions.

 “Effective March 1, 2013, the Tribunal is no longer able to accept Small Claims letter appeals. Rather, you are required to file a petition to
 initiate a new Small Claims appeal. Petition forms are available on this website.”

http://www.michigan.gov/taxtrib/0,4677,7-187-38254---,00.html

STATE OF MICHIGAN
GRETCHEN WHITMER DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS MARLON 1. BROWN, DPA
 GOVERNOR LANSING DIRECTOR

 Ralph Bitiner and Nancy Bittner i MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL
 Petitioner(s)

 v MTT Docket No,

 Township of Vassar, Tuscola County ,
 Respondent(s)

 PROOF OF SERVICE

 Ralph Bittner states that on 8/5/2026 or before (helshe
 [Name of person setving/mailing petition] [date of service]

 served a copy of the Property Tax Appeal Pelion relative to the above-captioned matter upon:

 [Provide name and address of the party/people being served]

 Assessor, Township of Vassar

 4470 Saginaw Road

 Vassar, Michigan 48768

 PA
 [Signafure of person who is serving/mailing copy]

 Ralph Bittner
 [Print/type name of person serving/mailing copy]

Ad.

 ad

 oe
 ad

 I
 fi

 Sheps
 3

 =

 =
 24
 /)

 x) A cil
 5 3)
 Shes & 1% 1
 yy
 ji
 fi] Wi A 5“i J 5% G3 1 yl
 ht Gage
 id ee]$4 NY bE a f
 yA | 43 47 = iA NES i
 “8 b
 Mf Rw is i] %) =
 #5) 0 Ul i
 19 E>
 TH; SRY oh eq amass: re ha a ih My. BAY ol
 iN) a)
 i} & i" 7. ve A i 3 ee iE ia he A \F% we . {4% LATA Ag Vi NL7 dice $15 14h (2) ® Nd. 45
 Ro al) x NH
 EE 4 13 a) x : il: ZR
 Se EE fx! HEfi i ex {i 4 343, i ; I EAST
 1 £198) #4 BY i Lilie3 Hy i w os \ % a \ 4 71 id
 } di 2 LER hs
 5) Wes » i 4% la {0 elk Sih Ades) i {hy Ii Sy
 Ab 1] wir {/]
 Lg
 ve i 3
 yor SE Ss fio ©
 — A =a i: * ~cs
 Jods Sifa) fit
 i | 15) SIE piss =0) RRs ie —t FP Dal Ww £2 Rope, Sep elf 235 =D ) LS » ~~ ——— rl = les oh it Wit ot wd Eh \ Vii ES Dib A SS 1% Ei Fb bi fii i 7 Se ld Rs 4
 Es iB ke 4 Wad (1
 (8 SRS get!tal wee ry] i 1% a, end id
 oy i, Tl | 4h /
 sl

 SAT Pale YE ih TRI eid ~ wa pd

 0 Tod 23Lg A keefi
 (a o] vt
 fat) Figs.
 2 Ny A PERN i & iE
 if

 if Ea:

 > 4 go)
 ao

AE RD craTEL3¢= Uh A I CHIR RH ER
VA<

 Mick [GAN Lr

 IN. OZAW

 ANS ING !

← View full record