Kentwood - Storage Five Kentwood LLC 25-001771 - Respondent's Appearance Answer & ADs with POS 9-10-25.pdf
Storage Five Kentwood LLC, Petitioner Vs. City Of Kentwood, Respondent · 25-001771-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 4932-0883-4897, v. 2 STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL STORAGE FIVE KENTWOOD LLC, Petitioner, v CITY OF KENTWOOD, Respondent. MTT Docket No. 25-001771-TT Parcel Nos. 41-18-28-125-010 41-18-28-125-011 41-18-28-125-012 / Paul M. Jones, Jr. (P82235) JONES PYATT LAW, LLC 435 E Main St, Ste 200 Greenwood, IN 46143 (317) 991-1865 paul@jonespyattlaw.com Toby Koenig (P72367) BLOOM SLUGGETT, PC Attorneys for Respondent 161 Ottawa Ave NW, Suite 400 Grand Rapids, MI 49503 (616) 965-9340 toby@bloomsluggett.com / APPEARANCE NOW COMES attorney Toby Koenig, of the law firm of Bloom Sluggett, PC, and hereby enters his appearance on behalf of Respondent City of Kentwood in this matter. Dated: September 10, 2025 Respectfully submitted, BLOOM SLUGGETT, PC /s/ Toby Koenig Toby Koenig (P72367) Attorney for Respondent 161 Ottawa Ave. NW, Suite 400 Grand Rapids, MI 49503 (616) 965-9340
Page 2
2 4932-0883-4897, v. 2 STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL STORAGE FIVE KENTWOOD LLC, Petitioner, v CITY OF KENTWOOD, Respondent. MTT Docket No. 25-001771-TT Parcel Nos. 41-18-28-125-010 41-18-28-125-011 41-18-28-125-012 / Paul M. Jones, Jr. (P82235) JONES PYATT LAW, LLC 435 E Main St, Ste 200 Greenwood, IN 46143 (317) 991-1865 paul@jonespyattlaw.com Toby Koenig (P72367) BLOOM SLUGGETT, PC Attorneys for Respondent 161 Ottawa Ave NW, Suite 400 Grand Rapids, MI 49503 (616) 965-9340 toby@bloomsluggett.com / RESPONDENT’S ANSWER TO PETITION AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES NOW COMES Respondent through its attorneys Bloom Sluggett, PC, and hereby submits its Answer to Petition and Affirmative Defenses as follows: 1. Petitioner’s allegation as to the property parcel numbers at issue is merely a statement of the claim that requires no response. 2. Admitted. 3. There are no allegations in Paragraph 3 of Petitioner’s petition, and Respondent otherwise leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 4. There are no allegations in Paragraph 4 of Petitioner’s petition, and Respondent otherwise leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 5. There are no allegations in Paragraph 5 of Petitioner’s petition, and Respondent otherwise leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 6. Admitted.
Page 3
3 4932-0883-4897, v. 2 7. There are no allegations in Paragraph 7 of Petitioner’s petition, and Respondent otherwise leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 8. There are no allegations in Paragraph 8 of Petitioner’s petition, and Respondent otherwise leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 9. There are no allegations in Paragraph 9 of Petitioner’s petition, and Respondent otherwise leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 10. Admitted that the street address 1900 44th Street SE corresponds to PPN 41-18-28-125- 010, that street address 1800 44th ST SE corresponds to PPN 41-18-28-125-011, and that 1820 44th ST SE corresponds to PPN 41-18-28-125-012. 11. Admitted. 12. Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truthfulness of the allegations in paragraph 12 of Petitioner’s petition and Respondent leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 13. Paragraph 13 of the Petition contains a restatement of Petitioner’s claim to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Respondent admits that Petitioner alleges issues relating to the properties’ true cash and taxable values, but Respondent denies that Petitioner is entitled to any relief. 14. Admitted. 15. There are no allegations in paragraph 15 of Petitioner’s petition, and Respondent leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 16. Respondent denies the value alleged in paragraph 16 as the value is not allocated to a specific parcel as required by the Tax Tribunal Rules. 17. Denied as untrue. 18. Respondent admits that Petitioner alleges the values in dispute in paragraph 18 of Petitioner’s petition, but Respondent denies that the subject properties are inaccurately assessed, or that Petitioner is entitled to any relief. Respondent further states that upon information and belief, Petitioner is not the owner, party-in-interest, or taxpayer of record for Parcel No. 41-18-28-125-012. 19. Paragraph 19 of Petitioner’s petition contains a request for relief to which no response is required; Respondent otherwise denies that Petitioner is entitled to any relief. 20. Denied as untrue. Respondent’s Responses to Petitioner’s Multiple Parcel Petition Form 1 of 1
Page 4
4 4932-0883-4897, v. 2 1. Respondent admits that Parcel Nos. 41-18-28-125-010, 41-18-28-125-011, and 41-18- 28-125-012 are real properties that are classified as 201 Commercial Improved. Respondent further states that upon information and belief, Petitioner is not the owner, party-in-interest, or taxpayer of record for Parcel No. 41-18-28-125-012. 2. Respondent admits that the values alleged in paragraph 2 of Petitioner’s Multiple Parcel Petition Form for Parcel Nos. 41-18-28-125-010, 41-18-28-125-011, and 41-18-28- 125-012 accurately reflect the values for the parcels on the ad valorem real property tax assessment roll for the 2025 tax year. Respondent further states that upon information and belief, Petitioner is not the owner, party-in-interest, or taxpayer of record for Parcel No. 41-18-28-125-012. 3. Respondent denies as untrue the values alleged in paragraph 3 of Petitioner’s Multiple Parcel Petition Form for Parcel Nos. 41-18-28-125-010, 41-18-28-125-011, and 41-18- 28-125-012. Respondent further states that upon information and belief, Petitioner is not the owner, party-in-interest, or taxpayer of record for Parcel No. 41-18-28-125-012. 4. Respondent admits that Petitioner contends the values in dispute in paragraph 4 of Petitioner’s Multiple Parcel Petition Form; however, Respondent denies that the subject parcels are inaccurately assessed or that Petitioner is entitled to any relief. Respondent further states that upon information and belief, Petitioner is not the owner, party-in-interest, or taxpayer of record for Parcel No. 41-18-28-125-012. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 1. Petitioner has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. 2. Petitioner’s claims against Respondent are barred because the valuation methods used by Respondent comply with the Constitution, state law, and prevailing State Tax Commission procedures. 3. Respondent’s assessments reflects 50% of the subject properties’ true cash values, and the values on the roll, including the taxable value, comply with the GPTA. 4. Petitioner has failed to allege facts to invoke the Tribunal’s jurisdiction or to support standing to bring this appeal or that it is a proper party-in-interest, including, without limitation, with respect to Parcel No. 41-18-28-125-012. 5. Petitioner has failed to allege facts to support its allegation that the taxable values of the subject properties are improper. 6. Petitioner’s petition does not comply with the Tax Tribunal Rules. 7. Respondent reserves the right to identify further affirmative defenses as may become known through discovery.
Page 5
5 4932-0883-4897, v. 2 WHEREFORE, Respondent requests that the Tribunal dismiss Petitioners’ appeal with prejudice and award Respondent its costs, attorney fees, and all such further and additional relief as this Tribunal may deem appropriate. Dated: September 10, 2025 Respectfully submitted, BLOOM SLUGGETT, PC /s/ Toby Koenig Toby Koenig (P72367) Attorney for Respondent PROOF OF SERVICE Tonya Voakes, being duly sworn, deposes and says that she is employed by Bloom Sluggett, PC, and that on September 10, 2025, she served a copy of Respondent’s Appearance and Respondent’s Answer to Petition with Affirmative Defenses by First Class Mail and electronic mail upon: Paul M. Jones, Jr. JONES PYATT LAW, LLC 435 E Main St, Ste 200 Greenwood, IN 46143 (317) 991-1865 paul@jonespyattlaw.com /s/ Tonya Voakes Tonya Voakes