Tomezak.pdf

Jeremy J Tomezak, Petitioner V Township Of Lincoln, Respondent · 24-003749-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 

toms i 

JUL 312024 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS ~~ 

MARLON. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

PROPERTY TAX APPEAL PETITION FORM 

VALUATION / EXEMPTION / CLASSIFICATION APPEAL 

Do not use this form to appeal Principal Residence Exemption, Qualified Agricultural Exemption, Special Assessment, or 

Non-Property tax disputes. 

Pursuant to Michigan Tax Tribunal Rule (TTR) 277(3), you MUST submit a copy of the notice giving rise to the appeal 

(e.g. Board of Review Decision or Notice of Uncapping) with this Smalt Claims Petition, if applicable. If you do not 

submit this document, you may be held in default. 

Section 1: Petitioner’s Contact Information 

MI. 

Last OMe 14 K 

First Nam 

Jeremy 

3 

| Tomes 

Mailing Address (Nof, Street, P.O. Box or Rural Route} ~ 

AE 

(5058 

Kinde 

Ma 

98445 

re at 

Fax Number 

Blo 

A4T 

4375 

E-mail Address (do not enter unless you want MTT to send all correspondence via e-mail) 

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

First Name 

Last Name 

Firm Name (if any) 

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

City or Town 

State 

ZIP Code 

Telephone Number 

Fax Number 

E-mail Address (do not enter unless you want MTT to send all correspondence via e-mail) 

Section 3: Subject Property Information 

How many 

i you are appealing more than one parcel, are they contiguous or adjoining? 

parcels are you | [7] vest 

[7] No 

appealing? 

*H yes, use a multiple parcel form for information regarding any contiguous parcels.

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Section 4: Issues Being Appealed (check 

all that apply) 

+d True Cash and Taxable Value 

{0 poverty Exemption 

[3 Taxable Value Only (calculation) 

[J Disabled Veterans Exemption 

[1 Uncapping of Taxable Value 

[3 Etigible Manufacturing Personal Property (ESA) 

[1] Exemption from Taxation (other than the denial of a 

¥ Classification 

Principal Residence or Qualified Agricultural Exemption) 

Section 5: Explain the Reason for this Appeal 

q fF 

AHAHED 

Section 6: Jurisdictional Issues 

Year(s) you are EE 

20 

Did you protest the assessment at a Board of Review (BOR)? [Yi] Yes 

O No 

If Yes, check which BOR you attended AND attach the BOR decision: 

March 

[| July 

O December 

If No, check the applicable reason(s): 

|] Not required to attend 

Assessment Change Notice was not received by Petitioner 

[I] Appealing a purported Clerical Error or Mutual Mistake of Fact (If yes, include explanation in Section 5) 

[Il] Appealing within 35 days of State Tax Commission Order

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Section 7: Valuation Information *use the multiple parcel form for additional, contiguous parcels, 

Parcel Identification Number: 

Al 

~ ool -0l3-c6 

Classification of Property: 

% 

Personal 

(check one) 

Agricultural 

Commercial 

Industrial 

Fe 

Timber-Cutover 

Developmental 

Utility 

{check one) 

Current Resege Value {alsoknown as State Equalized Value) as established by the BOR: 

[|§, 700 

Current Taxable Value as established by the BOR: 

| 1 < yJo= 

What do you believe Is the fair market value 

(also known as True Cash Value)? 

iol, So 

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

| 

£3,750 

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

53,750 

Section 8: Classification Information *Only the MI Dep't of Treasury may appeal this Issue to the Tribunal* 

Parcel Identification Number: 

Current Classification of Property as established by Board of Review: 

Real 

Personal 

(check one) 

0 

Agricultural 

Commercial 

Industrial 

Residential 

Timber-Cutover 

Developmental 

Utility 

(check one) 

What do you believe is the property's classification? 

Real 

Personal 

(check one) 

a 

Agricultural 

Commercial 

Industrial 

Residential 

Timber-Cutover 

Developmental 

Utility 

(check one) 

If improved property, how Is the property currently being used? 

if improved property, for what use was the property designed?

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON 1. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Fee Information 

Does the subject property have a Principal Residence Exemption of at least 50% as of the date of the filing of this petition? 

[| Yes 

4 No 

Are you appealing ONLY the denial of a Poverty Exemption or Disabled Veterans Exemption? 

O Yes 

vo 

If you answered yes to either or both of the above questions, you are not required to pay any filing fees. 

The filing fee is based on the greater of the State Equalized Value or Taxable Value in contention. 

If you are appealing more than one 

parcel, the parcel with the highest State Equalized Value or Taxable Value in contention will be used to determine your filing fee, plus 

$25.00 will be added for each additional parcel being appealed, not to exceed a total filing fee of $1,000. 

if your property Is residential property (see MCL 205,762) and 

the State Equalized Value or Taxable Value In contentton is: 

Fillng Fee is: 

$100,000.00 and under 

$125.00 

$100,000.01 to $500,000.00 

$200.00 

$Over $500,000.00 

$300.00 

If your property is NOT residential property (see MCL 205.762) and 

the State Equalized Value or Taxable Value in contention is: 

Filing Fee is: 

$100,000.00 and under 

¥ 

$250.00 

* Plus $25,00 for each additional parcel, as indicated above, 

If your property Is NOT residential property and the State Equalized Value or Taxable Value in contention is $100,000.01 or greater the 

appeal does not qualify for Small Claims. Therefore, an Entire Tribunal petition must be filed. 

Signature sadpired 

Petitioner or Att 

yiAuthorized Representative’s Signature: 

Ist 

7

Michigan Tax Tribunal 

i 

0 

26763598-1 

07/26/24 

i 

TranInfos4é0h 

25763596 

5/2 

Hemmlup MLAERE 

Chit: 

1797 

Ants $250.00 

10: 

JEREMY 

TOMEZOK 

July 18,2024 

1D: 

JEREMY 

TOM 

Jeremy Tomezak 

3281 Cross Rd 

Kinde, MI 48445 

Dera Sir/Madam, 

I am writing regarding a property tax appeal matter for the assessed value of parcel # 3214-0001 

013-10 located in Huron County ML. I recently purchased my new home located at 3281 Cross 

Rd, Kinde, MI 48445 parcel number 3214-001-013-10 in April of 2023. In February 2024 I 

received a Notice of Assessment, Taxable Valuation, and Property Classification (notice of 

assessment) notifying me that my taxable value increased by 95,870.00 dollars. As listed in box 6 

on the notice of assessment the reason for the change was due to market adjustment. 

Upon receipt of this adjustment on the attached notice of assessment, I attended the 2024 Lincoln 

Township Board of Review meeting on March 15", 2024, as indicated by the sign-in sheet on 

record. At the meeting I was informed that the Board of Review (BOR) was going to review my 

petition for the new assessed value, but I was never informed of the results. After discovering 

that the previous Lincoln Township Assessor Lisa A. Shagena did not record, nor enter a petition 

or notify me of my right to appeal, I contacted the current Lincoln Township Assessor Julia 

Fletcher (Ms. Fletcher), and she provided me the information needed to file a petition (attached 

to this letter). 

In accordance with Michigan Tax Tribunal Rule (TTR) 277(3) I am submitting the 

communication I have received from Ms. Fletcher confirming that I attended the March 15%, 

2024, BOR meeting but did not receive notice of the BOR decision. I am asking that this 

property be valued at 107,500.00 dollars based on the true value of the residential property. 

Please see attached evidence for this value: 

e 

Proposed True Cash Value of the property prepared by Ms, Fletcher (current Lincoln

I am asking that you please take the review the attached documents and take into consideration 

my initial attempt to correct this at the March 2024 Lincoln Township BOR meeting. 

Sincerely, 

Jeremy Tomezak 

Enclosures: copy of documents listed as attachments above, Property Tax Appeal Petition Form 

Valuation/Exemption/Classification Appeal 

CC: Julie Fletcher, Lincoln Township of Huron County MI Assessor

Report To Township Board 

Parcel Number: 3214-001-013-10 

Subject address: 3281 Cross Rd., Filion, MI 48432 

Property Owner: Jeremy Tomezak 

Facts: 

o 

The Record card shows the subject parcel is 2.37 acres with a residential 

improvement, 3 outbuildings of pole construction, 2 silos, and a wooden shed. 

This parcel was split from an 80 acre agricultural parcel for the 2022 tax roll. 

o 

Zillow reports the subject was listed on 10/29/2022 at $145,000; changed status 

to Pending on 2/12/2023; changed status to Back on Market on 2/19/2023; 

changed status to Pending on 3/12/2023; changed status to Sold on 4/7/2023 at 

$107,500. Total market exposure: approximately 4.5 months. 

e 

The current property owner purchased the subject on 4/4/2023 for $107,500; the 

deed is recorded in L. 1811; P. 754 

+ 

The residence was valued as a modular home with class of construction of CD 

+10 for 2024. 

* 

The parcel was classified as Agricultural with an ECF of 1.130. 

o 

Jeremy Tomezak attended the MBOR, his signature is on the sign-in sheet for 

03/15/2024. 

o 

There is nothing referencing the subject in MBOR minutes. 

* 

There is not a 2024 MBOR action entered into the database. 

* 

The subject parcel has been receiving 

a QA exemption since 1994, per 

database. 

o 

The subject's Assessed Value was $82,300 in 2023; in 2024, the Assessed Value 

was $118,700. 

Interview: 

On June 8, 2024, the property owner, Jeremy Tomezak was interviewed by me in a 

telephone conversation. The valuation statement was reviewed for accuracy; Jeremy 

agreed that the parcel is 2.37 acres, that the residence was constructed in 1974, that 

the residence has a basement, that there is a 480 sf addition on a crawl, with ducted 

FWA heat. Jeremy agreed that the land improvements are 320 sf reinforced concrete; 

that the Ag buildings are correct. 

Jeremy had 4 points of contention: 

* 

Wanted to know why he was being taxed on the road ROW 

e 

Has 2 full baths (1.1 baths are calc’d in record card) 

* 

Residence valued as a modular home, Jeremy contends it is 

a mobile 

home that was in poor condition when purchased with rotted floors and a

some discussion about uncapping. The assessor then said she would notify him in 

writing of the BOR decision. Jeremy said he has not received anything to date. 

Opinions: 

« 

The classification of the parcel is Ag, but should be Res; current use is as Res, 

not Ag (pending field inspection); may then qualify for PRE. 

* 

The residence should be valued as a mobile home (manufacturer certificate 

provided by owner); class of construction should reflect this. 

» 

The condition of the residence at time of purchase was poor or fair with a failing 

basement foundation and rotted floorboards (pending home inspection report, 

building permits, photos and receipts showing cost of repairs to be provided by 

owner); depreciation should reflect this. 

* 

Agricultural ECF of 1.130 should have only been applied to the outbuildings; the 

residential mobile home should have had the Residential ECF of 0.903 applied to 

it. 

* 

The previous assessor should have conducted a field inspection; the wooden 

shed should have been removed for the 2024 roll. The silos may be obsolete; 

contributory value should have been considered/reviewed. The condition of the 

residence should have been reviewed. 

Question: 

Does the property owner have a right to appeal to the MTT? 

Addenda: 

GIS aerial view of subject. 

Valuation statement without corrections 

Valuation statement with proposed corrections

G6/08/2024 

01:17 

BM 

W/ Covi ecH 1 Svatuation seport 

7 

Parcel 

Number: 

3214-001-013-10 

TOF 

STDENT IAL) 

1.130 

=> TCV of Bldg: 

1 

= 

5,283 

Ag. 

Bld 

2 

0, 

4 Wall Utility Building 

Height: 

prion 

Cost 

Default Walls 

Phy/Ab. 

Phy/Func/E 

(RESIDENTIAL) 

+ Good=48/100/100/100/48 

Depr. 

Cost 

= 

Class:D,Pole 

 Quality:Average 

Rate 

Size 

Cost New 

11.58 

17eR 

26,473 

8.13 

1768 

1.130 

=> TCV 

of 

Bldg: 

2 

= 

Ag. 

Bld 

3 

0, 

4 Wall Equipment Shed 

Height: 

1G 

ft 

Class:D, Pole 

 Quality:Average 

Description 

Rate 

Cost 

Hew 

Base Cost 

11.7% 

20,2 

Phy /ab. Phy/func/Econ/Comb. 

% Good=40/100/100/100/40 

Depr. 

Cost 

= 

8,004 

{RESIDENTIAL} 

1.130 

=> 

TCV 

of Bldg: 

3 

= 

9,146 

Ag. 

Bld 

4 

0, 

4 

wall 

Cylindrical 

Silo 

Class:C 

Quality:Good 

Description 

Rate 

Size 

Cost 

New 

Silo, 

Concrete Stave, 

flo Roof, 

10 

- 

Dia. 

25,277.00 

1 

26,277 

y/Bb. Phiy/ func 

on/Comb. 

& Good=206/100/20/100/4 

Depr. 

Cost 

1,011 

{RESIDENTIAL 

1.130 

=> 

TCV 

of 

Bldg: 

4 

1,143 

Ag. 

Bld 

5 

0, 

4 Wall Cylindrical Silo 

Class:C 

Quality:Good 

pescription 

Rate 

size 

Cost lew 

Silo, Concrete Stave, 

No Roof, 

107 

Dia. 

25,277.00 

1 

5,277 

y/Bb. Phy/Func/Econ/Conb, 

% Good=20/100/20/100/4 

Depr. Cost 

= 

1,011 

{RESLDENTIAL) 

1.130 => ICY of Bldg: 

5 

= 

1,143 

Total Estimated True Cash Value of Agricultural Buildings 

= 

36,616 

2025 

14-001-013-10 

= 

105,384 

t. 

2024 Assessed 

MBOR 

5.E.Y. 

118,700 

118,700 

118,700 

2025 

New 

Eq. Adjustment 

Loss 

60 

0 

118,700 

2025 Assessed 

HBOR 

5.E.V. 

52,700 

52,700 

52,700 

1 

Floor Area 

= 70.82, 

Most 

recent 

sale 04/04/2023 

for 

107,500 

Base 

for Cap 

C.p.1. 

118,760 

0.00 

Additions 

‘Pax Adjustment 

Losses 

0 

-66,000 

[4 

Capped 

~~ ->Taxable<- 

PRE/MBT 

» 700 

52,700 

52,700

A 4 

W/ese od PS 

Valuation Report. 

5a) 

| 

37214-001-013-10 

2025 Bst. 

T.C.V. 

TOMEZAK JEREMY 

Property Class: 

401 

3281 CROSS ROAD 

» 

#: 

14 

01 

400 

001 

LINCOLN TOWNSHIP 

FILIQM, 

BI 

48432 

OM 

AT 

S§ 

1/4 

COR 

OF 

SEC 

1 

TH 

§ 

ALG 

S 

L OF SD SEC 

485' 

TO 

POB 

TH 

W 429 

TH 

& 

142.76" 

TH 

5 

05 

DRG 

220.10" 

TH 

§ 

85 

DEG 

E 

108.71' 

TH 

S 

190.63' 

TH 

5 

85 

DEG 

W 

ALG 

SD 

§ 

SEC 

L 301.76' 

TO POB. 

2.37 

A PER CASE 

SV §12413 2-18-21. 

SPLIT 

OM 

01/17/2622 

FROM 3214-001-013-00 

FOR 

202 

Split/Comb. 

on 01/17/2022 completed 01/17/2022 

BSA 

ESTATE 

i 

Parent 

Paxcel{(sy: 

14-001-013-00; 

Child parcels 

14-001-013-10, 

14-001-013- 

Land Value Estimates 

for Land Table 400. RESIDENTIAL 

+ 

Factors 

* 

Description 

Frontage 

Depth 

Front 

Depth 

Rate 5Adj. Reason 

value 

LOTS 

2.370 acres 

8,097 

100 

19,190 

37 

Total 

Acres 

Total 

Est. 

Land Value 

= 

19,190 

Land Improvement Cost Estimates 

Description 

Rate 

Size 

% Good 

Cash Value 

D/W/E: 

din 

Ren. 

Conc. 

7.76 

320 

45 

1,117 

Wood 

Frame 

27.74 

96 

17 

453 

Total Estimated 

Land Improvements True Cash Value 

= 

1,570 

Cost 

Est. 

for 

Res. 

Bldg: 

1 

Mobile 

Home 

MOBILE 

Cls 

Fair 

Bit 

1974 

(11; Heating 

Warm 

4 Cool Air 

Ground Area 

vloor Area 

= 1488 

§ 

Phy /ab. 

con/Comb. 

% Good=35/100/1007:06/35 

Building Areas 

Type 

Ext. Walls 

Size 

Cost New 

Depr. Cost 

Main Home 

Ribbed 

Comp. 

Shingle 

1008 

Basement 

1008 

Addition 

crawl 

480 

Total: 

129,377 

45,282 

Other Additions/Adjustments 

Plumbing 

2 Fixture Bath 

1 

1,920 

672 

Water/Sewer 

1060 Gal Septic 

1 

1,808 

1,683 

water Well, 

100 Feet 

1 

5,960 

2,086 

57 

751 

263 

Deck 

Treated Wood 

397 

6,701 

3,015 

*45% Good 

Totals: 

148,517 

53,001 

ECF 

(8 

AL) 

0,503 => TCV: 

47,860 

0, 

4 

Wall 

Feeder 

Barn 

Classi, Pale 

Quality:Good 

Pate 

Gize 

Cost 

Hew 

Base Cost 

4.05 

2516 

16,190 

Default Walls 

7.00 

2516 

Phy/Bb. Phy/Func/Econ/Cosb, 

% Good=10/100/50/100/20 

bepr. 

Cost 

= 

5,560

06/09/2024 

12:10 

PM 

Valuation Report 

Bofors 

Ce (Tech onS 

DB: 

Lincoln 

3214~001-013-10 

Property Class: 

101 

Map 

#: 

14 

01 

400 

001 

2025 

Est. 

T.C.V. 

LINCOLN TOWNSHIP 

TOMEZAK JEREMY 

3281 

CROSS 

ROAD 

FILION, 

MI 

48432 

COM 

AT 

S 

1/4 

COR OF SEC 

1 

TH 

E 

ALG 

S$ 

L 

OF 

SD 

SEC 

485' 

TO 

POB 

TH 

N 

429" TH E 

182.78' 

TH 

S 

05 

DEG 

E 220.10" 

TH 

Ss 

85 

DEG 

E 108.71 

TH 

S 

190.69' 

TH 

S 

85 

DEG 

W 

ALG 

SD 

§ 

SEC 

L 

301.76' 

TC 

POB. 

2.37 

A 

PER CASE 

SV #12413 

2-18-21, 

SPLIT 

ON 

01/17/2022 

FROM 3214-001-013-00 

FOR 

2022. 

Split/Comb. 

on 01/17/2022 completed 01/17/2022 

BSA 

ESTATE 

H 

Parent 

Parcel (s): 

14-001-013-00; 

Child Parcel 

(s 

14-001-013-10, 

14-001-013-20; 

Land Value Estimates 

for Land Table 

100.AGRICULTURAL 

* 

Factors 

* 

Description 

Frontage 

Depth 

Front 

Depth 

Rate 

%Adj. 

Reason 

Value 

LOTS 

2.370 Acres 

8,805 

100 

20,868 

2.37 

Total 

Acres 

Total 

Est. 

Land Value 

= 

20,868 

Land Improvement Cost Estimates 

Description 

Rate 

Size 

% 

Good 

Cash Value 

D/W/P: 

4in Ren, 

Conc. 

8.49 

320 

45 

1,223 

Wood Frame 

30.35 

96 

17 

495 

Total Estimated Land Improvements 

True 

Cash Value 

= 

1,718 

Cost 

Est. 

for 

Res. 

Bldg: 

1 

Single 

Family 

MODULAR 

Cls 

CD 

10 

Blt 

1974 

(11) 

Heating 

System: 

Forced Air 

w/ 

Ducts 

Ground Area 

= 

1504 

SF 

Floor Area 

= 

1504 

SF. 

Phy/Ab.Phy/Func/Econ/Comb. 

% Good=66/100/100/100/66 

Building Areas 

Stories 

Exterior 

Foundation 

Size 

Cost 

New 

Depr. 

Cost 

1 

Story 

Siding 

Basement 

1,024 

1 

Story 

Siding 

Crawl 

Space 

480 

Total: 

215,038 

141,906 

Other Additions/Adjustments 

Plumbing 

2 

Fixture 

Bath 

1 

2,743 

1,810 

Water/Sewer 

1000 

Gal 

Septic 

1 

4,808 

3,173 

Water 

Well, 

100 

Feet 

1 

5,960 

3,934 

Porches 

CPP 

57 

1,309 

864 

Deck 

Treated Wood 

397 

6,701 

3,015 

*45% 

Good 

Totals: 

236,559 

154,702

06/09/2024 

Valuation Report 

12:10 

PM 

Parcel 

Number: 

3214-001-013-10 

Page: 

2 

Ag. 

Bld 

2 

0, 

4 

Wall Utility Building 

Class: D, Pole 

Quality:Average 

Height: 

12 

ft 

Description 

Rate 

Size 

Cost New 

Base Cost 

11.58 

1768 

20,473 

Default Walls 

8.13 

1768 

14,374 

Phy/Ab.Phy/Func/Econ/Comb. 

% Good=48/100/100/100/48 

Depr. 

Cost 

= 

16,727 

ECF 

(AGRICULTURAL) 

1.130 

=> 

TCV of Bldg: 

2 

= 

18,901 

Ag, 

Bid 

3 

0, 

4 

Wall Equipment 

Shed 

Class:D, Pole 

Quality:Average 

Height: 

10 

ft 

Description 

Rate 

Size 

Cost 

New 

Base Cost 

11.71 

1728 

20,235 

Phy/Ab.Phy/Func/Econ/Comb. 

% Good=40/100/100/100/40 

Depr. 

Cost 

= 

8,094 

ECF 

(AGRICULTURAL) 

1.130 

=> 

TCV 

of 

Bldg: 

3 

= 

9,146 

Ag. 

Bld 

4 

0, 

4 

Wall Cylindrical 

Silo 

Class:C 

Quality:Good 

Description 

Rate 

Size 

Cost 

New 

Silo, 

Concrete 

Stave, 

No 

Roof, 

10’ 

- 

153’ 

Dia. 

25,277.00 

1 

25,277 

Phy/Ab.Phy/Func/Econ/Comb. 

% Good=20/100/20/100/4 

Depr. 

Cost 

= 

1,011 

ECF 

(AGRICULTURAL) 

1.130 

=> 

TCV 

of Bldg: 

4 

= 

1,143 

Ag. 

Bld 

5S 

0, 

4 

Wall Cylindrical 

Silo 

Class:C 

Quality:Good 

Description 

Rate 

Size 

Cost 

New 

Silo, 

Concrete 

Stave, 

No 

Roof, 

10’ 

~ 

15’ 

Dia. 

25,277.00 

1 

25,277 

Phy/Ab.Phy/Func/Econ/Comb. 

% Good=20/100/20/100/4 

Depr. 

Cost 

= 

1,011 

ECF 

(AGRICULTURAL) 

1.130 

=> 

TCV 

of Bldg: 

5 

= 

1,143 

Total Estimated True Cash Value 

of Agricultural Buildings 

= 

36,616 

2025 

Est, 

T.C.V. 

14-001-013-10 

= 

234,015 

Est. 

TCV/Total 

Floor Area 

= 

155,60, 

Most 

recent 

sale 04/04/2023 

for 

107,500 

2024 Assessed 

MBOR 

S.E.V. 

Base 

for 

Cap 

C.P.I. 

118,700 

118,700 

118,700 

118,700 

0.00 

2025 

New 

Eg. 

Adjustment 

Loss 

Additions 

Tax Adjustment 

Losses 

[4] 

-1,700 

[4 

[4 

-1,700 

0 

2025 Assessed 

MBOR 

S.E.V. 

Capped 

—>Taxable<- 

PRE/MBT 

117,000 

117,000 

117,000 

118,700 

117,000 

117,000

Lincoln Township Assessor 

PO Box 539, Port Austin, Ml 48467 

Julia Fletcher assessorjulia@gmail.com Cell: (586) 944-8907 

Home: (989) 874-3084 

Hope Bedford Deputy Assessor assessorhope@gmail.com Cell: (989) 930-8434 

Office Hours: By appointment only 

Jeremy Tomezak 

3281 Cross Rd. 

Filion, MI 48432 

June 21, 2024 

Re.: Petition to the 2024 MBOR for the Assessed Value of parcel # 3214-001-013-10; 

commonly known as 3281 Cross Rd. 

Mr. Tomezak, 

| have discussed your case with William Gast at the Michigan Department of Treasury. 

Mr. Gast has advised that 

| should notify you of your right to appeal to the Michigan Tax 

Tribunal (MTT). 

Your signature appears on the sign-in sheet for 03/15/2024; however, the previous 

assessor of record did not enter a petition for you or notify you of your right to appeal; 

therefore, no changes were made to the 2024 Assessed Value, Capped Value or 

Taxable Value of the above referenced property by the March Board of Review (MBOR). 

The action of the MBOR may be appealed to the MTT within 35 days of this notice. To 

appeal, file a petition with the MTT, which can be obtained on their website SC-Petition- 

Valuation-fillable.pdf (michigan.gov) 

. 

Please contact me with any further questions. 

Respectfully, 

Julia Fletcher 

Assessor of Record

iris Re 

ARE

Ba 

tor 

0 

ei 

Eo. 

0 

0 

N 

[EES 

a 

Sl 

SE 

pa 

EE 

cha 

wy 

| 

| aisamu3 eyo) 

Co] Fini ABS NTIOLE 5 TRONS YELL te A 

5 

AEE wn 

mr 

2558 

TA NOT 

£3 

TH NLS 

L404 U0 753 040 

WO 

—_— 

Sg Th Lanai 

PRY SEOLifv0 Woy 38s 

Wn 

EN 

I 

Qu SSOUD T6ZE, 0 OVX HOT 5293, Uo PY 33205 RU) 

YS 

N— 

LO NER ATI 

TANIA, UO 

7 3] uy BuO 

vo 

of IL 

oo 

PRR 

wn 

———f 

I0 

El 

0% 

0 07 oye “0098 01 00E'98 0 

$702 sy 05355 

VST 

— 

ly 

318) SPRL 135 WoL PRYPOU (T-ET-100+1 Fog 

VSI 

| 

wR 

uoRdinsaq 

| 

R

[ 

seeaswnxgyene 

os] andlesg 

iA 

BS

01:17 

PH 

Ld Bd ddted 

Vo TT 

vb: 

Lincoln 

1 

- 

yarce) Humber: 3234-001-013-10 

Page: 

2 

ECF (RESIDENTIAL) 

1.130 => TCV of Bldg: 

1 

= 

6,283 

hy. 

Bld 

2 

0, 

4 Wall Utility Building 

Class:D,Pole 

 Quality:Average 

Height: 

12 

ft 

bescription 

Rate 

Size 

Cost 

New 

Base Cost 

11.58 

1768 

20,473 

befault Walls 

8.13 

1768 

14,31 

Phy/Ab, Phy/Func/Econ/Comb. 

% Good=48/100/100/100/48 

Depy. 

Cost 

= 

16,727 

ECF 

(RESIDENTIAL) 

1.130 

=> TCV 

of 

Bldy: 

2 

= 

18,901 

Ag. 

Bld 

3 

0, 

4 

Wall 

Equipment 

Shed 

Class:D, Pole 

Quality:Average 

Height: 

10 ft 

Description 

Rate 

size 

Cost New 

Base Cost 

11.71 

1728 

20,235 

Phy/Ab. Phy/Func/Econ/Comb. 

% Good=40/100/100/100/40 

 Depr. Cost 

8,094 

ECF (RESIDENTIAL) 

1.130 => TCV of Bldg: 

3 

= 

9,146 

Ag. 

Bld 

4 

0, 

4 Wall Cylindrical Silo 

Class:C 

 Quality:Good 

Description 

Rate 

size 

Cost New 

silo, Concrete Stave, 

No Roof, 

10° 

- 

15’ 

Dia. 

25,277.00 

1 

25,277 

Phy/Ab. Phy/Func/Econ/Comb, 

$ Good=20/100/20/100/4 

Depr. Cost 

1,011 

ECF {RESTDENTIAL) 

1.130 => TCV of Bldg: 

4 

1,143 

Ag. 

Bld 

5 

0, 

4 Wall Cylindrical Silo 

class:C 

 Quality:Good 

vescription 

Rate 

size 

Cost Mew 

Silo, Concrete Stave, 

No Roof, 

10° 

- 

15' 

Dia. 

25,277.00 

1 

25,277 

Phy/Ab. Phy/Func/Econ/Comb, 

3 Good=20/100/20/100/4 

Depr. Cost 

= 

1,011 

ECF {RES1DENTTAL) 

1.130 => "TCV of Bldg: 

5 

= 

1,143 

Total Estimated True Cash Value 

of Agricultural Buildings 

= 

36,616 

2025 Bst. 

T.C.V. 14-001-013-10 

= 

105,384 

Est. TCV/Total Floor Area 

= 70.82, 

Most recent sale 04/04/2023 for 107,500 

2024 Assessed 

MBOR 

S.E.V. 

Base for Cap 

 C.P.I. 

118,700 

118,700 

118,700 

118,700 

0.00 

2025 

Wew 

Eq. Adjustment 

Loss 

additions 

Tax Adjustment 

Losses 

52,700 

0 

118,700 

0 

~66, 000 

0 

2025 Assessed 

MBOR 

S.E.V. 

Capped 

 ~>Taxable<- 

PRE/MBT 

52,700 

52,700 

52,700 

118,700 

52,7700 

52,700

01:17 

PH 

a 

cad 

LU 

Rr) 

. 

vat 

Lincoln 

3214-001-013-10 

2025 

Est. 

T.C.V. 

TOMEZAK JEREMY 

Property Class: 

401 

3281 

CROSS 

ROAD 

Map 

#: 

14 

01 

400 

001 

LINCOLN TOWNSHIP 

FILION, 

MI 

48432 

COM 

AT 

8 

1/4 

COR OF SEC 

1 

TH 

E ALG 

§ 

L OF 

SD 

SEC 

485' 

TCO 

POB TH 

NM 

423' 

TH 

BE 

182.78' 

TH 

Ss 

05 

DEG 

E 220.10' 

TH 

8 

85 

DEG 

E 

108.71' 

TH 

$ 

190.69" 

TH 

$§ 

85 

DEG 

W 

ALG 

SD 

S§ 

SEC 

L 

301.76¢' 

TO 

POB. 

2.37 

A 

PER CASE 

SV 

#12413 2-18-21. 

SPLIT 

ON 

01/17/2022 

FROM 3214-001-013-00 

FOR 2022. 

Split/Comb. 

on 01/17/2022 completed 0L/17/2022 BSA 

ESTATE 

i 

Parent 

Parcel(s): 

14-001-013-00; 

Child 

Parcel(s}: 

14-001-013-10, 

14-001-013-20; 

Land Value Estimates 

for 

Land Table 

400.RESTIDENTIAL 

* 

Factors 

* 

Description 

Frontage 

Depth 

Front 

Depth 

Rate 3Adj. Reason 

value 

LOTS 

2.370 Acres 

8,097 

100 

19,190 

2.37 Total Acres 

Total Est. Land Value 

= 

19,190 

Land 

Improvement 

Cost 

Estimates 

Description 

Rate 

Size 

% 

Good 

Cash Value 

b/%/P: 

din 

Ren. 

Conc. 

7.76 

320 

45 

1,117 

Wood Frame 

21.74 

96 

17 

453 

Total 

Estimated 

Land Improvements True 

Cash Value 

= 

1,570 

Cost 

Est. 

for Res. 

Bldg: 

1 

Mobile 

Home 

MOBILE 

Cls 

Faix 

Blt 

1874 

(11) 

Heating 

System: 

Warm 

& 

Cool Air 

Ground Area 

= 

1488 

SF 

Floor Area 

= 

1488 

SF. 

Phy/Rb. Phy/Func/Econ/Comb, 

% Good=35/100/100/100/35 

Building 

Areas 

Type 

Ext. Walls 

Roof/fnd. 

7 

Hize 

Cost New 

Depr. 

Cost 

Main Home 

Ribbed 

Comp. Shingle 

1008 

Basement 

Block, 

6" 

1008 

Addition 

siding 

crawl 

480 

Total: 

129,377 

45,282 

Other Additions/Adjustments 

plumbing 

2 

Fixture 

Bath 

1 

1,920 

672 

Water/Sewer 

1000 

Gal 

Septic 

1 

4,808 

1,683 

Water Well, 

100 

Feet 

1 

5,960 

2,086 

Porches 

CPE 

57 

151 

263 

beck 

Freated Wood 

397 

6,701 

3,015 

*45% 

Good 

Totals: 

149,517 

53,001 

totes: 

ECF 

{RESIDENTIAL} 

0.803 

=> 

TCV: 

47,860 

Ag. 

Bild 

1 

0, 

4 

Wall 

Feeder 

Barn 

Class:D, Pole 

Quality:Good 

Height: 

8 

ft 

Description 

Rate 

Size 

Cost 

lew 

Base Cost 

4.05 

2516 

10,190 

Default 

Walls 

7.00 

2516 

17,612 

Phy/Ab. Phy/Func/Econ/Comb. 

% Good=40/100/50/100/20 

pepr. 

Cost 

= 

5,560

AL 

Td 

0 

VAN 

NL 

¥ 

RT 

MLA DN A DA 

meron 

{gion 

of. 

Tre 

ark 

Homes divLgLoN, A. 

Log. Mark HOTEL. 

iho of Manufacturer 

1320 

5. araham Rds, SAEENEH) 

ARERR 

FRE 

By ant AdresE 

i 

AEE 

: 

dn, rai 

SC 

Model 

LOB 

wadlc 

TT 

aA 

8 

eal NOG 

BE 

Model 0B. 

) 

{1 

au 

dled 

Le 

Label Serial No. D21759..& D2 idl {RE 

Dated 

Labelled hol ES 

AT 

(isted 

te, Inc. Label with the words 

means that Nationwide Consumer 

d, representative mobile homes of the 

structural, plumbing, 

pment and conditions 

: 

Mobile homes bearing a Nationwide Consumer Tasting Institu 

in accordance with ANSI Mobile Homes Standard A119.1 

Testing 

Institute, 

Ine, 

has evaluated, tested, and inspecte 

i 

manufacturer 

and established follow-up inspection consisting 

of making 

heating, or electrical inspections on each unit labeled, with the following equi 

for acceptance of ANSI Mobile Home Standard A119.1 

: 

(a) 

Plans, specifications and design including structural calculations required by the Standard have 

been confirmed by Nationwide Consumer Testing Institute, Inc. 

(b) 

Alternate test procedures authorized by the Standard have been witnesse 

Nationwide Consumer Testing Institute, Inc. 

(¢) 

The test for flexural rigidity has not been confirmed because of 

procedures. 

(d) 

In-transit conditions have not been confirmed because of lack of test standards for all these 

features. 

(e) 

The heat loss certification is furnished by ‘the manufacturer as required. 

(f) 

Listed LP Gas flexible connectors required by. the Standard are not available. 

d and verified by 

apparent error in A119.1 test 

Faron Sorvioemas 

bi. . 

& a 

Volts... ... 100 dT 

aD 

AMPS. 

J SERA 

8 

Wire 

ype of Gas 

Designed for Zone, 

= 

i.aieeeseins Nox th Tr 

Mf 

i 

nl 

: [] 

: 

Model 

Gas 

Elec 

Qil 

‘Furnace 

Lear Siegler 

MGC 

80 

Lt 

Te 

AE 

A 

0 

O 

Water Heater 

tate Stove 

-30 

= 

Air Cond. 

PREG Chi i Clr 30M... 

9 

= 

Refrig. 

SLA 

Se 

ie 

EY 

? 

Washer 

i) Af a ing Pg A 

ad oF 

O 

g 

IPA ee 

mad 

oe gt 

| 

ids 

mei diy i 

- 

0 

Stove/Range 

"Magic Chef 

313Y-A 

a 

D. Wash./Disp. 

A 

ALAVEATIN 

= 

Ee eh TE 

cl 

5 

’ 

Hy aE 

A 

(| 

0 

(m)] 

ATTENTION! 

1. User should check type of gas connected to coach for suitabilit 

2. The following items should be checked at site! 

, 

¥ with each gas appliance, 

Od re REO 

ECHO 

EE 

rs

BINDER 

BUILDING 

INSPECTIONS 

fo —LLC— 

on 

989-598-0707 

Certification by the American Society of Home Inspectors 

- 

EL 

Hdinginspections@ 

HOME INSPECTION REPORT 

Street Address 

273 ! 

Cross 

Romp 

City, State, Zip 

Kings 

MI 

484 4% 

Building Style 

Sere 

Soy 

MANUEL TURED 

Sq f2. 

= [200 

Client 

Kanon 

Task 

Real Estate Agent 

Toe 

Meeks 

Inspector 

Pau 

Date of Inspection 

Fes 

[14 2023 

Time of Inspection 

G00 fH 

House Faces 

Sout 

Estimated Age 

50 

Weather 

LRRTLY 

Clou Ji] ¥

If you need the property surveyed 

TANK SURVEYING 

Benjamin D. Tank P.S. 

Professional Surveyor 

255 E. lturon Ave. 

Office: 989-269-2201 

Bad Axc, MI 48413 

Cell: 810-304-1994 

Limail: bengitanksurveying com

Photo 1 

The house is located at 3281 Cross Road, Kinde, MI, 48445. 

As 

| inspected the outside of the house my focus was on the roof, fascia, soffits, siding, 

windows, doors, steps, porches and any other structural components. 

When inside the building 

| opened, closed, and latched all of the windows that are designed to 

be opened as well as all of the walk through doors. 

| tested all of the cupboard and storage 

doors. 

| tested all of the faucets, toilets, along with the shower and tub valves. 

| looked at all of 

the ceilings, walls, and floors. 

| tested all of the ceiling and vent fans, lights, and all accessible 

electrical outlets. 

| found that each was in good condition and functioning as it should with the 

exceptions mentioned in this report. 

In this report 

| will state " 

... contractor issue". 

| would be able to provide contact information for

Photo 2 

The red line (with a curve) indicates that the roof sheathing has a dip between the vertical line of 

the outside wall of the house and the fascia. The red oval indicates an example of where the 

fascia is loose and out of place. The blue double arrow indicates that it appears the wood 

behind the fascia is not level ( looks like it has a droop). Building contractor issue. 

The roof material is a single layer of asphalt shingles. 

| would estimate that this roof material is 

likely between 5 and 8 years old.

Photo 3 

The blue ovals indicate that the roof sealant has developed cracks where rain water can get in 

behind the roof material. The red ovals indicate cracks in the chimney cap material and the red 

arrows indicate examples of cracked bricks. Chimney sweep issues.

Photo 4 

The blue ovals again indicate that the roof sealant around this chimney has developed cracks 

and potentially will allow rainwater to get under the shingles. The red oval indicates the cracks in 

the chimney top cement and the red double arrow indicates that the chimney flue is cracked and 

is deteriorating. The yellow ovals indicate examples of where the flue and chimney brick show 

evidence of spalling. Chimney sweep issues.

Photo 5 

The red ovals indicate that the electrical connections are exposed to the weather and are not 

covered with any type of protective coating / insulating material. Electrical contractor issue.

Photo 6 

The red oval indicates where a section of fascia is missing. This area provides easy access for 

rodents to get into the attic. Building contractor issue.

Photo 7 

The red ovals indicate examples of where the soffit material is not contained by the fascia. 

Building contractor issue.

Photo 8 

Another example of fascia that is not properly installed. Building contractor issue.

Photo 9 

The back storm door is missing as well as the trim for the door frame. Building contractor issue.

HT 

i 

I 

iis 

; 

} 

is 

[| 

ie 

4 

JE 

0 

st 

hd 

& 

- 

fi 

Photo 10 

The red oval indicates an example of where the wood of the window frame appears to be 

cracked and the paint is peeling. Building contractor issue.

Photo 11 

The red oval indicates an example of where the vinyl siding shows evidence of a hole ( there 

are other such holes, likely caused by a lawn mower). Building contractor issue.

Photo 12 

These front steps / stoop should have handrails installed to prevent someone from falling off the 

edge of the steps. Building contractor issue.

Photo 13 

The wood of the back deck is significantly weathered. Some of the wood of the deck and 

handrails will likely need to be replaced, all of the remaining sections of wood will need a 

thorough cleaning followed by the application of a protective product ( stain or paint) to protect 

the wood from the elements of the weather. This maintenance will likely need to be completed 

once every two years. Deck maintenance contractor. 

See additional photos.

Photo 14 

See comments under photo 13.

Photo 15 

See comments under photo 13.

Photo 16 

See comments under photo 13. 

The steps are not level. Building contractor issue.

Photo 17 

See comments under photo 13. 

The red oval here indicates that there are two levels, the rise presents a potential tripping 

hazard. Building contractor issue.

Photo 18 

The shrubbery at the front of the house has become overgrown and will require significant 

trimming and / or replacement. Landscaping contractor issue.

Photo 19 

A large portion of the floor in this storage building is dirt, the portion that is cemented has 

significant cracks. Building contractor issue. 

The structure of the pole building itself appeared to have been properly built and in good 

condition at the time of the inspection. 

There is a room added to the north side of this building that is not in good condition. Building 

contractor issues.

Photo 20 

The structure of this second pole bldg also appeared to have been properly constructed and in 

good condition at the time of the inspection. There is no cement floor anywhere in this second 

building. Building contractor issues.

Photo 21 

The blue ovals indicate examples of where the formica countertop is chipped and the blue 

curved line indicates that the countertop surface is bowed. Building contractor issue. 

The four burners of the stovetop were tested and each did light (propane). The oven was set at 

350 degrees and tested with a thermometer at about 320 degrees. There is no garbage 

disposal, dishwasher, or refrigerator to test. 

The red arrows indicate electrical outlets that are properly grounded but are not GFCI protected. 

Electrical contractor issue. 

The red ovals indicate chips in the porcelain sink. Plumbing contractor issue.

Photo 22 

The wallboard / wallpaper ( above the kitchen sink) shows evidence of water damage, likely a 

result of a roof leak ( it does not appear to be a current leak). Building contractor issue.

VIER 

oh 

“5 

Photo 23 

Most of the rooms in the house have evidence of a previous roof leak, likely from before the 

current roof material was installed.

Photo 24 

The yellow oval indicates that there is a leak in the drain pipe under the kitchen sink. The red 

arrow indicates what appears to be a galvanized water pipe but 

| am not certain that it is still 

being used, 

it would seem that the copper pipe next to the iron pipe is likely what is being used 

for the water supply today. 

The red oval indicates a significant issue for this house - - evidence of mice. Although 

| did not 

see any live ( or dead) mice, the aroma of rodent urine was extreme. This would present a 

potential health risk. Building restoration contractor issue.

Photo 25 

The range hood vent fan did not appear to function, it appeared to just humm. Building 

contractor issue.

Photo 26 

This dining room and living room area has evidence of roof leak / water stains on the ceiling. 

See photos 27 and 28.

= 

+ RET 

A 

ME 

Photo 27

STA 

at 

XY 

Sa BN 

re 

Nl 

=, 

3) 

yg 

i 

5 

a 

3 

es 

WS 

SE ca 

= 

5 

3 

= 

= 

RY RE 

RE 

es 

No 

Prd 

SE 

= 

= 

5 

E32 

=< 

— 

Photo 28

Photo 29 

The window on the left did open, close, and latch as it should. The other three windows did not 

open as easily as they should, 

| suspect this is a result of photo 6. It appears that the framework 

is compromised. The window ledge is significantly weather damaged 

( sun). Building contractor 

issue.

Photo 30 

The front door did open and close, but it did not easily latch - - 

| had to apply significant lifting on 

the door knob to get the door to latch. Building contractor issue. 

The yellow arrow indicates a light switch that 

| was not able to determine what the switch 

controls - - but there is also no switch controlled light or outlet in this living room. 

| suspect this 

switch originally controlled the flow of electricity to an outlet and has since been by-passed. 

Electrical contractor issue.

Photo 31 

The red ovals indicate examples of where there are cracks in the walls. Building contractor 

issue. 

The blue arrow indicates an example of where the wood of the window frame shows evidence of 

mold and wood deterioration. Building contractor issue. 

The propane fueled heater in this room was tested and did begin to heat. Before any extended 

use of this heater 

| would recommend cleaning and inspection of the vent flue by a licensed 

chimney sweep ( see photo 3).

Photo 32 

The blue oval indicates a large section of the ceiling that has been patched / repaired ( sort of). 

This will need the work of an experienced drywall professional to properly finish this ceiling.

Photo 33 

The red oval indicates a hole in the linoleum, the red arrow indicates that the subfloor inside the 

exterior door is significantly compromised 

( actually rotted). The door leads to the back deck. 

The door has a combination lever lockset / deadbolt locking mechanism. The deadbolt does 

latch securely, but the backset for the lever lockset mechanism does not latch. Building 

contractor issues.

Photo 34 

The red arrow indicates that the floor next to the toilet appeared to be soft. There is no vent fan 

installed in this bathroom. The door leading into this bathroom does open and close but it does 

not latch and 

it rubs on the floor. Building contractor issue. 

The blue arrow indicates that there is no drain stopper installed at the sink. Plumbing contractor 

issue. 

The shower valve did appear to function but there is significant rust on the pipe fitting connected 

to the shower arm. Plumbing contractor issue. 

The toilet in this bathroom is securely fastened to the floor ( this is a good thing, not an issue).

Photo 35 

Although it is not very visible in this photo, the red oval indicates a “puddle” of water on the floor 

in the bathroom. 

Plumbing contractor issue.

Photo 36 

The red oval indicates the GFCI style outlet that does have electrical power, it is properly 

grounded but it does not provide GFCI protection. Electrical contractor issue. 

There is a crack above the window in this bathroom. Building contractor issue.

Photo 37 

The toilet in this bathroom is not tightly fastened to the floor ( actually very loose). There is no 

drain stopper installed in the sink. Plumbing contractor issue. 

The window did open, close, and latch as it should but there is a water stain on the ceiling 

above the window and bathtub area. 

The electrical outlet in this bathroom is properly grounded and GFCI protected. 

There is no vent fan installed in this bathroom. Building contractor issue. 

The bathtub valve was not tested due to the cold handle being severely bent ( see photo 38).

Photo 38 See comments under photo 37.

Photo 39 

The flooring material has a few scuffs. The door leading into this bedroom does open and close 

but it does not latch. Building contractor issue. 

The light fixture did not function ( 

may just be a burned out light bulb).

Photo 40 

The red oval indicates where there is mold and deterioration of the wood for this window frame. 

Building contractor issue.

Photo 41 

The water stains in the ceiling of this bedroom.

Photo 42 

The door leading into this bedroom does open and close but it did not latch. The red oval 

indicates another example of mold and deteriorating wood on this window 

( actually both 

windows in this room). Building contractor issue.

Photo 43 

The ceiling shows evidence of water damage. Building contractor issue.

Photo 43 

The ceiling in this bedroom also has evidence of water stains from a roof leak. See photo 44

1s _ 

747 

AF 

=) 

Fe 

74 Bra 

(Far 

- 

17 

oe. 

nd =i 

a 

2g 

Z 

7 

Jo 

id 

7 

= 

#% 

FE 

A 

ot 

Cr 

Ser 

et 

EE 

7 

Zs 

Gi 

77 7 

72% 

i 

z 

iad Ze 

FES 

2. 24) 

Pe Zz 

i 

Seas 

Tp 

7 

=r 

= 

5 

Sos 

T= 

o 

EEE 

7 

7 

2 

7, 

hE 

Photo 44

Photo 45 

The basement stairway is very steep ( not the “normal” angle, not installed to code 

specifications). There are no handrails with spindles installed on either side of these steps. 

Building contractor issue.

Photo 46 

This wood burning unit was not tested. Before using this heater 

| would recommend cleaning of 

the firebox and the vent / chimney and inspection by a licensed chimney sweep ( see photo 4).

Photo 47 

The yellow ovals indicate areas of moisture where the basement floor meets the wall. Building 

contractor issue. 

It was reported to me that the power vent for the exhaust of the water heater did not function. As 

a result 

| did not test the temperature of the water from the water heater. Plumbing contractor 

issue. 

In this report 

| have stated “ Plumbing contractor issue”. For each of these issues 

| would 

recommend repair by a licensed plumbing contractor.

Photo 48 

The yellow ovals indicate where the mortar joint is cracked open for almost the entire length of 

the basement wall. See also photos 49, 50, and 51.

Photo 49 

See comments under photo 48.

Photo 50 

The red arrows indicate that this cement block has slid inward an estimated % to %z inch. (likey 

this wallwill be an expensive repair). Building contractor issue.

Photo 51 

The red oval indicates a broken block and the area as described in the comments under photo 

50. 

The blue oval indicates moisture along the base of the basement wall. 

The yellow oval indicates evidence of moisture ( mold) on the basement wall, likely a result of 

the cracked wall. Building contractor issue.

Photo 52 

This photo shows some deterioration of the subfloor in the area of the toilet as seen in photo 37. 

Building contractor issue.

Photo 53 

This photo shows the rotted subfloor as mentioned in the comments under photo 33. 

Building contractor issue.

Photo 54 

The “floor” of the crawl space is dirt. There was an attempt to insulate between the floor joists, 

but much of that insulation is hanging and not functioning. Building contractor issue. 

The floor joists and support structure did appear to be properly installed. Much of the wall was 

not visible due to the sheet insulation installed. The portions of the wall that were visible did 

appear to be in good condition at the time of the inspection. 

In this report 

| have stated “ Building contractor issue”. For each of these issues 

| would 

recommend repair by a licensed building contractor.

Photo 55 

The heating system is a Payne brand propane fueled forced air system that did appear to be 

functioning as it should at the time of the inspection. The blue oval indicates that there is no air 

filter installed. 

This (or any ) heating system should be cleaned and the heat exchanger inspected every year 

by a licensed heating contractor.

Photo 56 

The electrical circuit breaker panel is a G E brand unit that is rated at 100 amps capacity. 

The red arrows each indicate the circuit breakers that are “double tapped” which means that 

each of these breakers control the flow of electricity to two electrical circuits. Electrical 

contractor issue. 

In this report 

| have stated “Electrical contractor issue”. For each of these issues 

| would 

recommend repair by a licensed electrical contractor. 

| did not see any functioning smoke alarms, carbon monoxide alarms, or fire extinguishers in the

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Jeremy Aone 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

I" 

Petitioner(s) 

v 

MTT Docket No. 

Township 

of 

Lincoln 

Respondent(s) 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

Je fern] 

Tomezqk 

states that on 7/2 2 /a Y 

he/she 

[Name of person serving/mailing petition) 

[date of service] 

served a copy of the Petition / evidence 

relative to the above-captioned matter upon: 

[Provide name and address of the party/people being served] 

Julia flacher 

/ Assessor 

Po. Box 539 

Pox 

Avstin 

mT 

4BU6T 

og 

of person who is serving/mailing copy] 

remy Jomezak 

[Print/type name of person serving/mailing copy}

TomezeK 

EEE 

SAE EE 

bE ed 

icsican

To COE

7 

BH

← View full record