Full record / 2026-10-07 901 Fulton Answer.pdf

2026-10-07 901 Fulton Answer.pdf

901 Fulton LLC Petitioner Vs. City Of Grand Rapids Respondent · 26-001243-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.

Page 1

1 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS AND RULES 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

_______________________ 

 

901 FULTON LLC, 

 

 

Petitioner, 

 

 

 

 

Docket No. 26-001243 

 

v. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Parcel No.: 41-13-26-283-012 

 

CITY OF GRAND RAPIDS, 

 

 

Respondent. 

_____________________________________________________________________________ 

Steve Johnson 

Michigan Tax Appeal Services 

Representative for Petitioner 

436 N. Center Street 

Northville, MI 48167 

(248)-392-4342 

info@mitaxappeal.com 

Kendall R. O’Connor (P84036) 

Lee S. Schofield (P62748) 

City of Grand Rapids Law Department 

Attorneys for Respondent 

300 Monroe Ave. NW, Suite 620 

Grand Rapids, MI 49503 

(616) 456-3103 

koconnor@grand-rapids.mi.us 

lschofield@grand-rapids.mi.us 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

 

RESPONDENT’S APPEARANCE AND ANSWER TO PETITION 

WITH PROOF OF SERVICE 

 

NOW COMES Kendall R. O’Connor and Lee S. Schofield for the City of Grand Rapids, 

who hereby enter their Appearance of Counsel on behalf of Respondent City of Grand Rapids, and 

answers Petitioner’s Petition as follows: 

1. Property Parcel No: 41-13-26-283-012 

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

addressing all other parcels at issue.) 

 

ANSWER: Respondent lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as 

to the truth the allegations in paragraph 1 of Petitioner’s Petition and leaves 

Petitioner to its proofs.

Page 2

2 

2. The property identified above is x real personal. 

 

ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegations in paragraph 2 of Petitioner’s 

Petition. 

 

3. If more than one parcel of real property is under appeal, are the properties contiguous? 

____ Yes ____ No. (If no, separate Petitioners are required for each non-contiguous parcel.) 

 

ANSWER: There are no allegations in paragraph 3 of Petitioner’s Petition and 

therefore no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Respondent 

lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth the 

allegations in paragraph 3 of Petitioner’s Petition and leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 

 

4. Are all of the parcels of personal property located on a parcel of real property under appeal? 

____ Yes _x__ No. (If no, separate Petitions are required for each parcel of personal 

property not located on a parcel of real property under appeal.) 

 

ANSWER: Respondent lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as 

to the truth the allegations in paragraph 4 of Petitioner’s Petition and leaves 

Petitioner to its proofs. 

 

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

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

N/A.

 

ANSWER: Respondent lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as 

to the truth the allegations in paragraph 5 of Petitioner’s Petition and leaves 

Petitioner to its proofs. 

 

6. The property identified above is classified as Commercial 

 

ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegations in paragraph 6 of Petitioner’s Petition. 

The real property with the parcel code number identified in paragraph 1 of 

Petitioner’s Petition is classified as 201 Commercial.

Page 3

3 

7. If the assessment or assessments at issue were protested, the protest was made to 

Respondent’s ____ March ____ July ____ December Board of Review. 

 

ANSWER: There are legal conclusions in paragraph 7 of Petitioner’s Petition and so 

no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Respondent lacks 

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth the allegations in 

paragraph 7 of Petitioner’s Petition and leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 

 

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). 

N/A

 

ANSWER: There are legal conclusions in paragraph 8 of Petitioner’s Petition and so 

no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Respondent lacks 

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth the allegations in 

paragraph 8 of Petitioner’s Petition and leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 

 

 

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 page if 

necessary): 

N/A

 

ANSWER: There are legal conclusions in paragraph 9 of Petitioner’s Petition and so 

no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Respondent lacks 

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth the allegations in 

paragraph 9 of Petitioner’s Petition and leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 

 

10. The property or properties at issue are located in Kent County. The property or properties’ 

address is: 

901 W Fulton St, Grand Rapids, MI 49504 

 

ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegations in paragraph 10 of Petitioner’s 

Petition. The real property with the parcel code number identified in paragraph 1 of 

Petitioner’s Petition has the location and common address alleged.

Page 4

4 

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

government unit): City of Grand Rapids 

 

ANSWER: Respondent admits only that it establishes the assessments for the real 

property with the parcel code number identified in paragraph 1. Respondent lacks 

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of any remaining 

allegations in paragraph 11 of Petitioner’s Petition and leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 

 

12. Petitioner’s legal residence or principal office address is: 

152 E 6th Street, Holland, MI 49423

 

ANSWER: Respondent lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as 

to the truth of the allegations in paragraph 12 of Petitioner’s Petition and leaves 

Petitioner to its proofs. 

 

13. This appeal involved 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 

 the property or the properties’ exemption from ad valorem taxation 

under MCL _____ 

ANSWER: Respondent lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as 

to the truth of the allegations in paragraph 13 of Petitioner’s Petition and leaves 

Petitioner to its proofs. 

 

14. The tax year(s) at issue are: 2026 

 

ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegations in paragraph 14 of Petitioner’s 

Petition. 

 

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): 

N/A 

 

ANSWER: There are no allegations in paragraph 15 of Petitioner’s Petition and 

therefore no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Respondent

Page 5

5 

lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth the 

allegations in paragraph 15 of Petitioner’s Petition and leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 

 

 

 

16. The values for the property identified above as established by Respondent’s Board of 

Review are: 

Tax Year 

True Cash Value 

State Equalized Value Taxable Value 

2026 

2,307,200 

1,153,600 

1,153,600 

 

 

 

 

 

ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegations and corresponding values in 

paragraph 16 of Petitioner’s Petition. 

 

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

Tax Year 

True Cash Value 

State Equalized Value Taxable Value 

2026 

1,849,480 

924,740 

924,740 

 

 

 

 

 

ANSWER: Respondent denies the allegations and corresponding values in paragraph 

17 of Petitioner’s Petition as untrue. 

 

18. The values in dispute for the property identified above are: 

Tax Year 

True Cash Value 

State Equalized Value Taxable Value 

2026 

457,720 

228,860 

228,860 

 

 

 

 

 

ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegations and corresponding values in dispute in 

paragraph 18 of Petitioner’s Petition. 

 

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

Petitioner requests that the Tribunal reduce the assessed, state equalized, and taxable values 

from 1,153,600 to 924,740 and order a refund with interest as provided by the Tax Tribunal 

Act.

 

ANSWER: Respondent denies the allegations in paragraph 19 of Petitioner’s Petition 

as untrue and denies that Petitioner is entitled to any relief whatsoever.

Page 6

6 

20. List the separate and specific facts upon which Petitioner relies to support the relief

requested (attach additional page if necessary)

Our initial review of the subject property indicates the assessment exceeds 50% of the true cash 

value.

ANSWER: Respondent denies the allegations in paragraph 20 of Petitioner’s Petition 

as untrue. 

WHEREFORE, Respondent City of Grand Rapids prays that this Honorable Tribunal 

dismiss the Petition and award Respondent its costs and attorney fees. 

CITY OF GRAND RAPIDS, 

a Michigan municipal corporation 

Dated: October 8, 2026 

By: /s/ Lee S. Schofield

 Lee S. Schofield (P62748) 

 Assistant City Attorney 

 Attorney for Respondent

Page 7

7 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

Alma Echeverria, being first duly sworn, deposes and says that she is a Paralegal in the 

Office of the City Attorney, attorneys for Respondent herein, and that on October 8, 2026, she 

served true and complete copies of Respondent’s Appearance and Answer to Petition via first 

class mail and email, upon: 

Steve Johnson 

Michigan Tax Appeal Services 

Representative for Petitioner 

At: info@mitaxappeal.com 

/s/ Alma Echeverria 

 Alma Echeverria

PDF reading copy

← View full record