Petition to Tax Tribunal.pdf
Contour Acquisitions A Delaware Limited Liability Company Petitioner Vs. City Of Southfield Respondent · 26-001220-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
Petition to Tax Tribunal 4917-9208-7971 v.1 4917-9208-7971, v. 1 STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL CONTOUR ACQUISITIONS, a Delaware limited liability company Petitioner M.T.T. Docket V. No. 26-________ CITY OF SOUTHFIELD, a Michigan public body corporate, Respondent _______________________________________________________________________/ PETITION PETITIONER, by its attorneys, Kerr, Russell & Weber, PLC, hereby petitions the entire tribunal against the above-named Respondent, and states as follows: 1. Petitioner is a duly organized and existing Delaware limited liability company with its principal office located at 40950 Woodward Avenue, Suite 300, Bloomfield Hills, MI 48304. 2. Respondent is a Michigan public body corporate. 3. The parcels of land at issue are contiguous parcels of commercial real estate improved with 4 office buildings (collectively, the “Property”), more particularly described as: Parcel No. Address Approximate Square Footage 76-24-36-477-002 15565 Northland Drive 111,600 Square Feet 76-24-36-477-003 15530 Northland Drive 113,625 Square Feet 76-24-36-477-004 20905 Greenfield Road 63,220 Square Feet 76-24-36-477-005 20755 Greenfield Road 140,778 Square Feet
Page 2
Petition to Tax Tribunal 4917-9208-7971 v.1 4917-9208-7971, v. 1 4. The Property is classified as commercial and is located in Oakland County and the Oak Park Public School District. 5. Because the Property is classified as commercial real estate, appeal directly to the Tax Tribunal is authorized by Act 174 of Public Acts of 2006. Nonetheless, Petitioner appeared before Respondent’s Board of Review on March 5, 2026 to protest the Property’s assessed and taxable values. 6. The values of the Property as established by the Respondent's Board of Review following Petitioner’s appeal to the Board of Review are: Tax Year Parcel Nos. True Cash Value Assessed Value Taxable Value 2026 76-24-36-477-002 $1,291,160.00 $645,580.00 $645,580.00 2026 76-24-36-477-003 $1,268,300.00 $634,150.00 $634,150.00 2026 76-24-36-477-004 $2,257,780.00 $1,128,890.00 $1,128,890.00 2026 76-24-36-477-005 $1,533,760.00 $766,880.00 $766,880.00 Totals $6,351,000.00 $3,175,500.00 $3,175,500.00 7. Petitioner acquired the Property from the prior owner, Northland Towers Associates Limited Partnership, in an arms-length transaction on December 17, 2025, for the full consideration of $3,400,000.00. As part of normal closing prorations, Petitioner reimbursed Northland Towers Associates for a portion of the December 2024 tax bill and the July 2025 tax bill and is responsible for payment of all tax bills rendered by the taxing authorities thereafter. 8. In preparation for redevelopment of the Property and possible application for incentives under the Brownfield Redevelopment Financing Act, Act 381 of 1996, Petitioner obtained an Obsolescence Study of the Property prepared by Matthew J. Schmidt, a Michigan Master Assessing Officer (4). Mr Schmidt concluded that the
Page 3
Petition to Tax Tribunal 4917-9208-7971 v.1 4917-9208-7971, v. 1 Property is functionally obsolete and subject to significant impairment of functional capacity due to: a. the buildings are subject to substantial deferred maintenance; b. elevators in the building are old, several are inoperable, and replacement parts are no longer being manufactured for the units; c. the elevator sizes are not compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Any renovation of the buildings would require increasing the size and configuration of the elevator shafts to accommodate ADA compliant elevators; d. the existing heating and cooling systems are between 50 and 60 years old and need to be replaced. The manufacturers no longer maintain a replacement parts inventory. Repairs will require salvaging parts from other inoperable units; e. bathroom doors are not ADA compliant; f. the roofs require complete recovering and structural repairs to prevent water leaks in the upper floors of the building; and g. these deficiencies make it difficult to attract tenants and is a reason that occupancy is only between 30% and 40%. 9. Respondent's 2026 real property assessment and taxable value fail to take into consideration the following: a. The age of the subject Property; b. existing and projected vacancies and the length of existing vacancies; c. projected costs of leasehold improvements that will have to be expended in order to attract new tenants to the Property; d. the lack of current income generated by subject Property; e. deferred maintenance items; f. existing market and mortgage conditions;
Page 4
Petition to Tax Tribunal 4917-9208-7971 v.1 4917-9208-7971, v. 1 g. overall physical, economic and functional obsolescence factors; h. increased costs in maintaining and operating subject Property; i. proper depreciation factors; j. the marketing and sales history of this Property and sales of comparable properties; and k. adequate reserves for replacement; and, therefore, said assessment and taxable values are in excess of fifty (50%) percent of the true cash value of the Property on December 31, 2025, contrary to Article 9, Section 3, of the Michigan Constitution and MCL §211.27. 10. Based upon the foregoing, the Petition contends that the values of the Property identified above should not exceed: Tax Year Parcel Nos. True Cash Value State Equalized Value Taxable Value 2026 76-24-36-477-002 $691,220.00 $345,610.00 $345,610.00 2026 76-24-36-477-003 $678,980.00 $339,490.00 $339,490.00 2026 76-24-36-477-004 $1,208,700.00 $604,350.00 $604,350.00 2026 76-24-36-477-005 $821,100.00 $410,550.00 $410,550.00 11. The total state equalized value amount in controversy is, therefore, Four Million Six Hundred Fifty-One Thousand and 00/100 ($4,651,000) Dollars. WHEREFORE, Petitioner requests that Respondent be ordered to: (i) reduce the 2026 Original Assessed and State Equalized Values on the Property detailed in the chart below to the Revised Assessed and State Equalized Values detailed in the chart below, (ii) reduce the 2026 Original Taxable Value on the Property detailed in chart below to the Revised Taxable Value detailed in the chart below; and (iii) that Petitioner be refunded any and all real estate taxes that it may be required to pay to Respondent based upon any
Page 5
Petition to Tax Tribunal 4917-9208-7971 v.1 4917-9208-7971, v. 1 assessment, state equalized value and taxable value on the Property for tax year 2026 in excess of Revised Assessed, State Equalized and Revised Taxable Values on the Property, plus interest on said taxes from the date of payment to the date of refund, together with whatever costs Petitioners may herein incur. Tax Year Parcel Nos. Original Assessed and State Equalized Values Original Taxable Values Revised Assessed and State Equalized Values Revised Taxable Values 2026 76-24-36-477-002 $645,580.00 $645,580.00 $345,610.00 $345,610.00 2026 76-24-36-477-003 $634,150.00 $634,150.00 $339,490.00 $339,490.00 2026 76-24-36-477-004 $1,128,890.00 $1,128,890.00 $604,350.00 $604,350.00 2026 76-24-36-477-005 $766,880.00 $766,880.00 $410,550.00 $410,550.00 Dated: May 21, 2026 Kerr, Russell, & Weber, PLC By: /s/ C. David Bargamian C. David Bargamian (P43742) Attorneys for Petitioner 500 Woodward Avenue, Suite 2500 Detroit, MI 48226 (313) 961-0200