petitioner's mbor evidence.pdf
Quest Trust Co Petitioner V Township Of Peninsula Respondent · 26-002429-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
UH -Gmss ted tvonsr requeshiy ad dt leo in advance 334-0600 Theodore Kohler 9600 Eastridge Dr Traverse City, Ml 49686 Email: kophler@chartermi.net » Phone: 231-409-4971 Date: 2 - 2.0- AOA [= To: March Board of Review Peninsula Township 13235 Center Road Traverse City, MI 49686 Ss Seg pa) Qo ~ Co 3 Re: Property Tax Appeal — 6323 Center Rd, Traverse City, MI 49686 (Parcel #11-336-098-00) Dear Members of the Board of Review, I'am writing to formally request a review and adjustment of the assessed value of my property located at 6323 Center Rd, Traverse City, MI 49686 (Parcel #1 1-336-098-00). | purchased this property on October 22, 2021, after it had been on the market for over one year. The two highest offers considered during the sale were $240,000 and a second offer with contingencies that were not acceptable to the sellers. | purchased the property using my retirement funds through an IRA. Several factors indicate that the current assessed value does not reflect the true market value: 1. Property Age and Condition ~ The home was built in 1947, making it 79 years old, and is a small 2-bedroom, 1.5-bath property with limited modern amenities.
Page 2
2. Water Access ~ The property cannot connect to the municipal water system running along Center Rd. The existing well produces water with an unpleasant odor, limiting usability. 3. Utility Easement — Consumers Energy has erected high-voltage power lines directly | through the center of the property, negatively impacting value and marketability. | 4. Comparative Sales — Nearby properties provide context for market value: Parcel # Description Notes 11-515-003-00 Two homes on one parcel Larger property, different configuration 11-336-102-00 Similar size and Closer comparison for market value characteristics 11-336-098-00 Subject property 2-bed, 1.5-bath, built 1947, well water with odor, high-voltage line easement 5. Tax Administration Issue — My IRA administrator is responsible for paying bills and is not expected to question assessment accuracy. A recent change in their name and address resulted in my summer tax bill being returned to the township treasurer and not delivered to me. | did not notice the increase in the taxable value in time, due in part to this administrative issue. This was an unintended oversight, and | request consideration of this context when reviewing the assessment and late fees. By the time | became aware, over $400 in late fees had accrued. Considering these factors, | respectfully request that the Board of Review adjust the taxable value to better reflect the property's market conditions, age, condition, and encumbrances. Specifically, | believe the taxable value should be closer to the purchase price of $240,000, with reasonable adjustments for subsequent years. I am prepared to provide supporting documentation, including the purchase agreement, comparable sales, photographs, and evidence of the IRA administration issue. Thank you for your time and consideration. | appreciate your attention to this matter and look forward to a fair review. Ny TE Kohler
Page 3
220, -04§-00 Sally Murray From: Kohler <kohler@chartermi.net> Sent: Monday, March 2, 2026 10:12 AM To: Sally Murray Cc: kohler@chartermi.net Subject: RE: MBOR appeal Good morning Sally, thanks for the opportunity to add this information to my appeal to the board of review, | am not very experienced in this process. There are two parcels with recent sale that are within 160" of my parcel. 11-336-094-01 sold in 2021 for $259,900, the current SEV is $141,900, and current taxable value is $108,000. 11-336-094-00 sold in 2023 for $459,000, the current SEV is $180,000, and the current taxable value is $171,042. At this time, | am not sure why | am unable to connect to the municipal water service. Grand Traverse County DPW originally indicated that Peninsula township did not make water hookup available in this area. GTC DPW is checking and promised to get back with me as soon as possible. | will pass along that info when | receive it. Thanks again for your quick response, and the opportunity add this important information to my appeal. Will you be adding this information to my appeal? Best regards, Ted Kohler From: "Sally Murray" <assessor@peninsulatownship.com> To: <kohler@chartermi.net> Sent: February 26, 2026 at 9:47 AM CST Subject: MBOR appeal Ted, I've received your written appeal and have added it to the March board of review docket. You indicated in your letter that you were prepared to provide additional information and I think it would be a good idea for them to have those in advance. Additionally, WHY can’t the property connect to the municipal water line? You mentioned that. Photos are excellent pieces of evidence.
Page 4
33, 09% 00 i | am appealing to the 2022 assessed value of my rental property. Ine property was purchased in 2021 for $240,000 in an arm’s-length transaction after being listed for over one year, reflecting fair market value. The current SEV of $239,500 implies a market value of - approximately $479,000, nearly double the verified sale price. No significant improvements were made prior to December 31, 2021, aside from routine maintenance such as window replacement. The property has additional factors that negatively affect market value: « No municipal water service is available; the property relies on a private well producing odorous water. « A high-tension Consumers Energy transmission line crosses the middle and rear of the property, restricting use under recorded easements. + Structure: 79 years old, 2 bedrooms, 1 bathroom. + Comparable Properties: Comp Year Purchased Sale Price Taxable Value Notes Comp | 2021 $259,900 $108,000 Older home, similar size Comp 2 2023 $459,000 $171,042 Newer home, no water/line issues ®) eo Allof these factors were present dt the time of purchase and reflected in the $240,000 sale price. Considering the verified sale price and the property’s unique conditions, I respectfully request that the SEV and taxable value be adjusted to reflect true market value of $240,000, with a corresponding SEV of approximately $120,000 for 2022