Richmond Tribunal Answer Form.pdf

Benjamin Evans, Petitioner V Township Of Richmond, Respondent · 24-003565-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.

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON |. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

PROPERTY TAX APPEAL ANSWER FORM 

VALUATION / EXEMPTION / CLASSIFICATION APPEAL 

MTT DOCKET NO, 24-003565 

Section 1: Respondent’s Contact Information 

First Name 

[XN 

Last Name 

Cameron 

R 

Fuess 

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

PO Box 35 

City or Town 

State 

ZIP Code 

Palmer 

Mi 

49871 

Telephone Number 224-388-3003 

Email Address (do not enter unless you want MTT to send all correspondence vie email} 

richmondtownshipassessor@gmail.com 

Section 2: Respondent’s Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Contact Information 

) 

First Name 

M.). 

Last Name 

Firm Name (if any) 

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

City or Town 

State 

ZIP Code 

Telephone Number 

Email Address (do not enter unless you want MTT to send all correspondence via email} 

Section 3: Subject Property Information 

Does the subject property have a Principal Residence Exemption of 50% or more? 

ves 

[1 No 

Are the parcels listed by Petitioner contiguous or adjoining? 

If not, list which parcels adjoin one another. 

Oves 

Ono 

Not Applicable

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON |. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Section 4: Explain Your Answer to this Appeal 

This assessment was created, and the March Board of Review was held previous to my employment with 

the township, as 

| was just hired in July 2024. The previous assessor calculated the estimated true cash 

value of the property at $709,600. The property was purchased in August of 2023 for $510,000, and in 

2024 it uncapped at a value of $354,800 assessed and taxable both. The landowner petitioned the March 

Board of Review and the MBOR chose to lower the assessed and taxable both from $354,800 to 

$291,100. The landowner stated on the MBOR petition form that he thought the true cash value was 

$500,000. 

Section 5: Jurisdictional Issues 

IF PETITIONER IS APPEALING THE TRUE CASH AND/OR TAXABLE VALUES 

Did Petitioner protest the assessment at a Board of Review (BOR)? 

Yes 

[i] No 

Ifyes, check which BOR Petitioner attended: (4 March 

[J duty 

[J December 

If no, was the Notice of Assessment properly sent to Petitioner prior to the March BOR? 

Yes 

a No 

*Submit a copy 

of the Notice of Assessment with the Answer. 

If the July or D 

nber BOR revised the 

t(s) at issue, did it have authority? O Yes 

[(] No 

If yes, cite the Board's authority. 

Was the assassment(s) at issue established as the result 

of a clerical error 

or mutual mistake of fact? |] Yes 

No 

if yes, explain 

Is Petitionor appealing from a State Tax Commission Order? 

O Yes 

No 

If so, what 

is the issue dato? 

IF PETITIONER IS APPEALING THE UNCAPPING OF TAXABLE VALUE 

‘When was the Notice of Uncapping, if applicable, issued? 

Under what statutory section was the Taxable Value uncapped? 

IF PETITIONER IS APPEALING THE DENIAL OF A POVERTY EXEMPTION

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON |. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Did Petitioner request a Poverty Exemption at a BOR? a Yes 

No 

If Yes, check which BOR Petitioner attended: (ml March 

a July 

(m]} December 

List the date the BOR denied Petitioner's Poverty Exemption: 

IF PETITIONER IS APPEALING THE DENIAL OF AN EXEMPTION 

OTHER THAN POVERTY, PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE, OR QUALIFIED AGRICULTURAL EXEMPTIONS 

Did Petitioner request the exemption ata BOR? [J Yes 

[J No 

\f Yes, check which BOR Patitioner attended: [] March 

[J duty 

[J December 

Tax Year(s) denied: 

List the date the exemption was denied: 

What statutory section did Petitioner r 

t the subject 

property be 

pt? 

IF PETITIONER (S APPEALING THE CLASSIFICATION OF PROPERTY 

What do you believe the classification should be: 

Real 

Personal 

(check one) 

m] 

Agricultural 

Commercial 

Industrial 

Residential 

Timber-Cutover 

Developmental 

Utility 

(check one) 

Section 6: Valuation Information +use the muttiple parce! form for additional, contiguous parcels. 

Parcel Identification Number: 

52-13-004-006-10 

Classification of Property: 

Real 

Personal 

(chock one) 

Agricultural 

Commercial 

Industrial 

Rose! 

Timber-Cutover 

Developmental 

‘BH 

(check one) 

™ 

Current Assessed Value (also known as State Equalized Value) as established by the BOR: 

291,100 

Current Taxable Value as established by the BOR: 

291,100 

What do you believe is the fair market value (also known as True Cash Value)? 

582,200 

Multiply the True Cash Value by .5 and enter here. This is your contention of Assessed Value. 

291,100 

fyou believe the Taxable Value differs from your contention of Assessed Value, enter your contention of Taxable Value. 

291,100 

Signature ‘required 

Respondent or 

mey/Authorized Representative’s Signature: 

5 

CA 

1 

Cameron Fuess

← View full record