26-001549_EntireTribunalPropertyTaxPetition_082526_WithAttachment.pdf
Thomas Mark Evans Petitioner Vs. Township Of Golden Respondent · 26-001549-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
v STATE OF MICHIGAN GRETCHEN WHITMER DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS MARLON I. BROWN, DPA GOVERNOR DIRECTOR LANSING _____________________________, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL Petitioner(s) MTT Docket No. _____________________________, Respondent(s) ENTIRE TRIBUNAL PROPERTY TAX PETITION 1. Property Parcel No: _____________________________________________ (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 ___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 _________________________ 7. If the assessment or assessments at issue were protested, the protest was made to Respondent’s ___ March ___ July ___December Board of Review. MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL · 611 W. OTTAWA ST., LANSING, MI 48933 · 517-335-9760 PO BOX 30232, LANSING, MI 48909 · Other Carriers: 2407 N. GRAND RIVER AVE., LANSING, MI 48906 Thomas Mark Evans 26-001549 Township of Golden 006-650-038-00 x x NA NA Not applicable - real property appeal only. Resort-Commercial Real Property x
Page 2
MTT Docket No. _________________ Page 2 of 4 8. 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): 9. 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): 10. The property or properties at issue are located in _______________County. The property or properties’ address is: 11. The assessment or assessments at issue were established by the (applicable local governmental unit): ________________________________________ 12. Petitioner’s legal residence or principal office address is: 13. This appeal involves issues relating to the (check all that are applicable): ________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 ________the property or the properties’ exemption from ad valorem taxation under MCL ______ 14. The tax year(s) at issue are: _______________________________________ 26-001549 N/A — a timely protest was made to Respondent's Board of Review (see item 7). Not applicable — the appeal was filed May 27, 2026, before the May 31, 2026 deadline for this property classification. Oceana Address: 8446 W Hazel Rd and 8448 W Hazel Rd, Mears, MI 49436, plus one additional parcel with no separately assigned street address (Parcel 64-006-630-001-00). See attached Multiple Parcel Petition Form. Township of Golden Thomas Mark Evans, 14260 Wright Dr, Linden, MI 48451 x 2026
Page 3
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 17. Petitioner contends that the values for the property identified above are: Tax Year True Cash Value State Equalized Value Taxable Value 18. The values in dispute for the property identified above are: Tax Year True Cash Value State Equalized Value Taxable Value 19. Petitioner requests the following relief (attach additional page if necessary): 20. List the separate and specific facts upon which Petitioner relies to support the relief requested (attach additional page if necessary): 26-001549 N/A 2026 975,000 487,500 487,500 2026 504,179 252,089 252,089 2026 470,821 235,411 235,411 Petitioner requests an order reducing the 2026 true cash, state equalized, and taxable values of all parcels identified in this Petition and the attached Multiple Parcel Petition Form to the amounts set forth in Petitioner's contentions, plus any other relief See attached Statement of Facts.
Page 4
______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ MTT Docket No. _________________ Page 4 of 4 Signature of Petitioner’s Authorized Representative or, if none, Petitioner: Printed Name of Petitioner’s Authorized Representative or, if none, Petitioner: Email Address: _________________________________________________________ Mailing Address: Telephone Number: _____________________________________________________ Date: _________________________________________________________________ 26-001549 Thomas Mark Evans, Owner Silver Sands Hotel & Resort, LLC Tom@GLInfrastructure.com Thomas Mark Evans 14260 Wright Dr. Linden, MI 48451 248-880-1480 08/25/2026
Page 5
STATE OF MICHIGAN MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL Thomas Mark Evans, Petitioner, v. MTT Docket No. 26-001549 Township Of Golden, Respondent. ATTACHMENT TO ITEM 20 STATEMENT OF FACTS SUPPORTING RELIEF REQUESTED Petitioner submitted written correction requests to Golden Township's March 2026 Board of Review for each of the three parcels identified in this appeal, supported by the Assessor Support Statements previously submitted to the Board of Review and attached to this Petition. The Board of Review's decision on each parcel, and the specific facts supporting the relief requested for that parcel, are set forth below. Parcel 64-006-650-038-00 (8446 W Hazel Rd — Silver Sands Hotel main building) The Board of Review granted a partial reduction on this parcel, from an original assessed and taxable value of $545,300 to $487,500, but did not reduce the value to the $252,089 supported by Petitioner's evidence. Township assessment records list the building area as 13,908 square feet across three structures; documentation from the 2024 acquisition identifies the actual building area as approximately 13,018 square feet. The 2024 purchase price for the Silver Sands Hotel & Resort included substantial non-real- estate business value — furniture, fixtures and equipment, established reservation systems, operational infrastructure, and customer goodwill — that does not represent taxable real estate value under MCL 211.27. The comparable Dunes Waterfront Hotel (1180 N Shore Dr, Parcel 006-140-022-00), though significantly larger, newer, and located directly on the Silver Lake waterfront, reflects a lower building value per square foot (approximately $28/sf) than the subject parcel (approximately $35–$38/sf), indicating the subject's improvement value is disproportionately high relative to comparable lodging properties in the township. Parcel 64-006-630-001-00 (8446 W Hazel Rd — waterfront cabins) The Board of Review denied the requested reduction on this parcel, leaving the original assessed value of $633,500 and taxable value of $582,514 unchanged. This parcel consists of older waterfront cabin-style lodging structures totaling approximately 4,668 square feet, with an effective age of approximately 50–55 years and significant physical depreciation. The parcel is assessed at approximately $53.56 per square foot, compared to approximately $28.40 per square foot for the comparable Dunes Waterfront Hotel, despite that property being substantially larger and newer.
Page 6
Applying the comparable property's assessed value per square foot to the subject's building area yields an estimated State Equalized Value of approximately $409,422 — still well above Petitioner's requested value of $367,243 — underscoring that the current assessment materially overstates the parcel's true cash value. Parcel 64-006-650-038-50 (8448 W Hazel Rd — restaurant parcel) The Board of Review denied the requested reduction on this parcel, leaving the original assessed and taxable value of $250,100 unchanged. The township assessment record lists the building at 3,736 square feet; physical measurement identifies the actual building area as approximately 3,150 square feet. At the time of the May 2025 transfer, the building had been substantially gutted, lacked restaurant equipment and operational infrastructure, and its continued permitted use as a restaurant was uncertain, as the prior owner had contemplated converting the building to an off-road-vehicle rental use. The comparable restaurant property at 8407 W Silver Lake Rd (Parcel 006-180-024-00), which retains full restaurant infrastructure, carries a materially lower assessed value than the subject parcel, and the subject parcel's 2025–2026 State Equalized Value increased by approximately 35%, compared to approximately 10.7% for the comparable property over the same period. Full underlying data, comparable-sales analysis, and the specific value adjustment requested for each parcel are set forth in the Assessor Support Statements previously submitted to the Golden Township Board of Review and attached to this Petition, which are incorporated herein by reference.