R's Response to P's Motion to Amend 2026.pdf
Nda Auburn II LLC, Petitioner Vs. City Of Auburn Hills, Respondent · 25-001974-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 DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL NDA Auburn II LLC, Petitioner, v City of Auburn Hills, Respondent. MTT Docket No. 25-001974 _____________________________________________________________________________/ MICHELLE (MIKKI) M. SILVEY (P69494) ALEX MORSE DUCHARME, MCMILLEN, & ASSOCIATES, INC. Representatives for Petitioner 9229 Delegates Row, Suite 375 Indianapolis, IN 46240 (317) 689-6467 LAURA M. HALLAHAN (P42101) SETH A. O’LOUGHLIN (P80257) KELSEA M. MELCHER (P85821) HALLAHAN & ASSOCIATES, P.C. Attorneys for Respondent 1750 S. Telegraph Road, Suite 202 Bloomfield Hills, MI 48302 (248) 731-3089 _____________________________________________________________________________/ RESPONDENT’S RESPONSE TO PETITIONER’S MOTION TO AMEND PETITION TO CONTEST 2026 ASSESSED AND TAXABLE VALUES Respondent, City of Auburn Hills, by and through its attorneys, Hallahan & Associates, P.C., responds to the allegations made in Petitioner’s Motion to Amend as follows: 1. Respondent admits the allegations in Paragraph 1. 2. Respondent admits the allegations in Paragraph 2. 3. Respondent admits the allegations in Paragraph 3. 4. Respondent admits the allegations in Paragraph 4. 5. For the 2026 tax year, Respondent established the Subject Property’s assessment for property taxes as follows: Tax Year True Cash Value Assessed Value Taxable Value 2026 $16,425,180 $8,212,590 $7,276,160
Page 2
2 6. Respondent contends that the values for tax year 2026 are as follows: Tax Year True Cash Value Assessed Value Taxable Value 2026 $16,425,180 $8,212,590 $7,276,160 7. The values in dispute are as follows: Tax Year True Cash Value Assessed Value Taxable Value 2026 $0 $0 $0 8. Respondent denies the allegations in Paragraph 8, including subparagraphs (a)-(d), for the reason that the same are untrue. In further answer, the assessed, state equalized and/or taxable values do not exceed permitted amounts, do not exceed the percentage of true cash value permitted by law, were correctly determined and are based upon correct application of proper principles, and the values and Respondent’s mode of assessment are non-discriminatory and constitutional. WHEREFORE, Respondent, City of Auburn Hills, requests the Tribunal deny the Motion, dismiss the Petition, affirm Respondent’s assessed and taxable values, subject to county and state equalization, and award Respondent its costs and attorney fees. HALLAHAN & ASSOCIATES, P.C. /s/Laura M. Hallahan______________ LAURA M. HALLAHAN (P42101) SETH A. O’LOUGHLIN (P80257) KELSEA M. MELCHER (P85821) Attorneys for Respondent 1750 S. Telegraph Road, Suite 202 Bloomfield Hills, MI 48302 Dated: March 11, 2026 (248) 731-3089
Page 3
3 PROOF OF SERVICE On the date below I sent by electronic mail a copy of the foregoing Respondent’s Response to Petitioner’s Motion to Amend to: Michelle M. Silvey, Esq. msilvey@dmainc.com Alex Morse amorse@dmainc.com I declare that the statement above is true to the best of my information, knowledge and belief. /s/ Holly McIntyre_______________ Dated: March 11, 2026 Holly McIntyre