Farmington Hills Holdings.pdf

Farmington Hills Holdings, Petitioner Vs. City Of Farmington Hills, Respondent · 25-002752-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 

Lom 

JUN 02 2025 

pi 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Srvare 

’ 

a 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Farmington Hills Holdings 

, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Petitioner(s) 

MTT Docket No. 

City of Farmington Hills 

Respondent(s) 

ENTIRE TRIBUNAL PROPERTY TAX PETITION 

1. 

Property Parcel No: 22-23-02-108-031 

(If more than one parcel is at issue, attach a completed Multiple Parcel Petition 

Form addressing all other parcels at issue.) 

2. 

The property identified above is 

X real ___ personal. 

3. 

If more than one parcel of real property is under appeal, are the properties 

contiguous? ___ Yes ___ No. 

(If no, separate Petitions are required for each non- 

contiguous parcel.) 

4. 

Are all of the parcels of personal property located on a parcel of real property 

under appeal? ___ Yes ___ No. 

(If no, separate Petitions are required for each 

parcel of personal property not located on a parcel of real property under 

appeal.) 

5. 

If parcels of personal property are under appeal, when were the personal 

property statements filed by parcel number (attach additional page if necessary): 

6. 

The property identified above is classified as 201 Comm

MTT Docket No. 

Page 2 of 4 

10. 

11. 

12. 

13. 

If a protest was required and no protest was made, list the separate and specific 

facts upon which Petitioner relies to invoke the Tribunal's authority over the 

assessment or assessments at issue (attach additional page if necessary): 

If the appeal was not submitted by the deadline for the filing of an appeal for the 

classification or classifications of the properties at issue (i.e., May 31 or July 31 

of the tax year involved), list the separate and specific facts upon which 

Petitioner relies to invoke the Tribunal's authority over the assessment or 

assessments at issue (attach additional page if necessary): 

The property or properties at issue are located in Oakland 

County. The 

property or properties’ address is: 

32825 NW Hwy. 

FH, MI 48334 

The assessment or assessments at issue were established by the (applicable 

local governmental unit): City of FH 

Petitioner's legal residence or principal office address is: 

32825 NW Hwy. 

FH, MI 48334 

This appeal involves issues relating to the (check all that are applicable): 

X 

the property or properties’ true cash and taxable values 

the property or properties’ taxable value only 

If the property or properties’ taxable value is at issue, is there a 

dispute as to the value of an addition or loss? ___ Yes ___No 

uniformity of the property or properties’ assessment

MTT Docket No. 

Page 3 of 4 

15. 

If more than the current tax year is being appealed, list the separate and specific 

facts upon which Petitioner relies to invoke the Tribunal’s authority over the prior 

tax year or years (attach additional page if necessary): 

16. 

The values for the property identified above as established by Respondent’s 

Board of Review are: 

Tax Year 

True Cash Value 

Assessed Value 

Taxable Value 

2025 

643,860 

321,930 

293,900 

17. 

Petitioner contends that the values for the property identified above are: 

Tax Year 

True Cash Value 

State Equalized Value 

Taxable Value 

2025 

450,000 

225,000 

225,000 

18. 

The values in dispute for the property identified above are: 

Tax Year 

True Cash Value 

State Equalized Value 

Taxable Value 

2025 

193,860 

96,930 

68,900 

19. 

Petitioner requests the following relief (attach additional page if necessary): 

Reduction of Assessed and Taxable to fall more in line with comps, market, income, 

condition.

MTT Docket No. 

Page 4 of 4 

sal 

i 

ized Representative or, if none, Petitioner: 

RT 

ep 

WAL Vik 

Printed Name of Petitioner's Authorized Representative or, if none, Petitioner: 

Stephen Polter 

Email Address: spolter@polterlaw.com 

Mailing Address: 

2600 W Big Beaver, Ste L100, Troy, MI 48084 

Telephone Number: 248-213-6800 

Date: May 25, 2025

May 27, 2025 

RECEIVED 

: 

MAY: 

0 205 

f= [= 

i FAN 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

EXPRESS PROPERTY TAX APPEALS LLC 

A division of Polter Law Group 

2nd Floor Michigan Tax Tribunal 

2407 N. Grand River Avenue 

Lansing, Michigan 48906 

Re: 

Multiple 2025 PTA 

To whom it may concern, 

This mailing contains sixty-three (“63”) commercial property tax appeals/petitions and one 

(“1”) multi (2) contiguous residential appeal/ petition, along with the requisite filing fees, as follows: 

SXM LLC v Hadley Twp. (multi — 2) Res., along with 2 checks (#1345-46) for 

$125 ea. 

CCCU v Muskegon/Fruitpott, along with 2 checks; one (#1320) for $250, one 

(#1393) for $150 (totaling $400). 

CCCU v Commetce Twp., along with 2 checks; one (#1321) for $250, one (#1391) 

for $150 (totaling $400). 

CCCU v Notton Shores, along with 1 check (#1319) in the amount of $250. 

TOCU v Sandusky, along with 1 check (#1317) in the amount of $250. 

TOCU v Owosso, along with 1 check (#1318) in the amount of $250. 

W Investors v FH, along with 1 check (#1378) in the amount of $400. 

Rite Aid Cotp (Lewis) v Pinckney, along with 1 check (#1336) in the amount of 

$400. 

Warten Manot v Watten, along with 2 checks; one (#1311) for $600, one (#1390) 

for $25 (totaling $625 — contiguous multi (2)). 

2Changs v N*Ville, along with 2 checks; one (#1350) for $250, one (#1389) for 

$150 (totaling $400). 

’ 

5016 Gteenfield v Richfield, along with 1 check (#1330) in the amount of $250. 

Springfield v. Hampton, along with 1 check (#1331) in the amount of $400. 

Westbelt v Clawson, along with 1 check (#1337) in the amount of $400. 

CVS (Encote) v Detroit, along with 1 check (#1316) in the amount of $250. 

10 Middlebelt v FH, along with 1 check (#1375) in the amount of $250.

X Holdings v Warren, along with 1 check (#1329) in the amount of $400. 

Prism v Mt Pleasant, along with 1 check (#1326) in the amount of $250. 

Mishpat v Sfld., along with 2 checks; one (#1348) for $250, one (#1388) for $150 

(totaling $400). 

Greenfield Manor v Detroit, along with 1 check (#1369) in the amount of $400. 

Prep v Grand Haven, along with 1 check (#1349) in the amount of $400. 

Impulso v OP, along with 1 check (1338) in the amount of $400. 

Impulso v Clatkston/Independence Twp., along with 

1 check (#1340) in the 

amount of $400. 

Impulso v Pennfield, along with 2 checks; one (#1339) for $250, one (#1387) for 

$150 (totaling $400). 

Farmington 9 v Farmington, along with 1 check (#1333) in the amount of $400. 

HWEFDS v LP, along with 1 check (#1334) in the amount of $400. 

Main 5" v RO, along with 1 check (#1332) in the amount of $400. 

Messersmith v Okemos, along with 1 check (#1335) in the amount of $400. 

RAD v VBT, along with 1 check (#1314) in the amount of $400. 

St Helen v. Chatlevoix, along with 2 checks; one (#1315) for $250, one (#1386) 

for $150 (totaling $400). 

Durand RAD v Durand, along with 1 check (#1313) in the amount of $400. 

360 N MLK v Pontiac, along with 2 checks; one (#1312) for $400, one (#1396) 

for $100 (contiguous — multi (5)). 

Schaefer v Sfld., along with 1 check (#1365) in the amount of $400. 

26382 v Inkster, along with 1 check (#1310) in the amount of $400. 

29200 v Livonia, along with 1 check (#1308) in the amount of $400. 

20030 Taylor v Taylor, along with 1 check (#1309) in the amount of $400. 

222 Reed v Reed City, along with 1 check (#1307) in the amount of $250. 

WMG v Flint, along with 2 checks; one (#1347) for $250, one (#1385) for $150 

(totaling $400). 

13 York v Novi, along with 1 check (#1364) in the amount of $400. 

Kenwood v RO, along with 2 checks; one (#1341) for $250, one (#1384) for $150 

(totaling $400). 

Farmer v Detroit, along with 1 check (#1342) in the amount of $400. 

Rivershell v Lansing, along with 2 checks; one (#1363) for $600, one (#1383) for 

$25 (totaling $625) (contiguous — multi (2)). 

ID Pallister v Detroit, along with 1 check (#1366) in the amount of $600. 

ID Cap v Detroit, along with 2 checks; one (#1367) for $600, one (#1394) for $25

JRV v Livonia., along with 1 check (#1325) in the amount of $400. 

Dhal RE v Sfld., along with 2 checks; one (#1324) for $400, one (#1381) for $200 

(totaling $600). 

NWH v Lansing, along with 2 checks; one (#1351) for $250, one (#1380) for $150 

(totaling $400). 

Berkley Venture v Berkley, along with 1 check (#1361) in the amount of $400. 

FHH v FH, along with 1 check (#1357) in the amount of $250. 

Northstar v Chestetfield, along with 1 check (#1353) in the amount of $250. 

Fenton v BC, along with 1 check (#1356) in the amount of $400. 

NWH v FH, along with 1 check (#1352) in the amount of $400. 

Global v Roseville, along with 1 check (#1358) in the amount of $400. 

Gatfield Venture v CT, along with 1 check (#1360) in the amount of $600. 

Global v Shelby, along with 1 check (#1355) in the amount of $400. 

Intl Prop v Macomb, along with 1 check (#1379) in the amount of $250. 

KB3 v Big Rapids, along with 1 check (#1397) in the amount of $400. 

Please file and issue/email docket numbers accordingly. 

CC (Letter only): 

w Holy” 

Stephen Polter, JD, MBA 

President, EPTA 

SOM MTT

- 

POLTER LAW GROUP 

2600 W. BIG BEAVER, SUITE L100 

| TROY, MI 48084 

METROPLEX MI 480 

” 

27 MAY 2025PM OL 

" 

US

Fl 

0

[OM 

- MTT 

ToR Zz

← View full record