Severed Petition (Docket No. 25-003930).pdf
Onesky 8 & Lahser Properties, LLC, Petitioner Vs. City Of Detroit, Respondent · 25-003930-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
1 STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL ONESKY 8 & LAHSER PROPERTIES, LLC, Docket No. 25-003930 Parcel No. Petitioner, v. CITY OF DETROIT, Respondent. Jerome P. Pesick (P29039) Jason C. Long (P59244) WILLIAMS, WILLIAMS, RATTNER & PLUNKETT, PC Attorneys for Petitioner 380 N. Old Woodward Ave., Ste. 300 Birmingham, MI 48009 (248) 642-0333 jpesick@wwrplaw.com Mary Beth Cobbs (P40080) City of Detroit Law Department Attorney for Respondent 2 Woodward Ave., Ste. 500 Detroit, MI 48226 313.237.3075 cobbm@detroitmi.gov Severed Entire Tribunal Property Tax Petition Petitioner Onesky 8 & Lahser Properties, LLC, by and through its attorneys, Williams Williams Rattner & Plunkett, PC, states as follows for its Severed Entire Tribunal Property Tax Petition. The Parties 1. Petitioner Onesky 8 & Lahser Properties, LLC, is a Michigan limited liability company with its registered offices located at 400 Hamilton Row, Ste. 300, Birmingham, MI 48009. 2. Respondent City of Detroit is a Michigan municipal corporation with its principal offices located at 2 Woodward Ave., Detroit, Michigan 48226. 22019029.016L
Page 2
2 The Subject Property 3. Petitioner owns property identified as Parcel No. 22019029.016L, commonly known as 21651 W 8 Mile Road, Detroit, Michigan 48219 (the “Subject Property”). 4. To the best of Petitioner’s knowledge, the Subject Property was designed for, and is presently used for, retail purposes. 5. The Subject Property is located in Wayne County and is within the Detroit Community Schools Public School District. The 2025 Property Tax Assessment 6. Respondent possesses jurisdiction to assess and collect property taxes for the Subject Property. 7. For the 2025 tax year, Respondent classified the Subject Property as commercial real property. 8. For the 2025 tax year, Respondent established the Subject Property’s assessment for property taxes in the following amounts: True Cash Value Assessed Value Taxable Value $1,516,800 $758,400 $738,407 9. Petitioner contends that a lawful assessment of the Subject Property for the 2025 tax year cannot exceed the following amounts: True Cash Value Assessed Value Taxable Value $940,000 $470,000 $470,000 10. The amounts in dispute therefore are as follows: True Cash Value Assessed Value Taxable Value $576,800 $288,400 $268,407 11. This Petition presents issues involving the Subject Property’s valuation for property tax assessment purposes. Petitioner does not believe that this Petition presents any
Page 3
3 issues arising out of “additions” or “losses” as the General Property Tax Act, MCL 211.1 et seq. (the “GPTA”), defines those terms, but reserves its right to assert issues involving losses should information supporting such issues become available. 12. The Subject Property’s 2025 assessment (a) violates the Michigan Constitution, the GPTA, and other Michigan law, (b) is based on erroneous principles and information, (c) is based on the misapplication of valuation principles, and (d) otherwise violates Petitioner’s rights. 13. Petitioner does not assert that the Subject Property’s 2025 assessment is not uniform aside from the lack of uniformity resulting from Respondent overestimating the Subject Property’s values. Conclusion and Request for Relief WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests that this honorable Tribunal enter judgment revising the Subject Property’s 2025 assessment to amounts that do not exceed the values set forth in Paragraph 9 and granting Petitioner all other relief to which it is entitled under Michigan law. Respectfully Submitted, WILLIAMS WILLIAMS RATTNER & PLUNKETT, PC By: /s/ Jerome P. Pesick Jerome P. Pesick (P29039) Jason C. Long (P59244) Dated: February 11, 2026 Attorneys for Petitioner