Trident Realty Group LLC.pdf
Trident Realty Group LLC, Petitioner Vs. City Of Farmington Hills, Respondent · 25-002379-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
RECEIVED RECEIVED py V/ MAY 29 205 MAY 27 2005 \pY oo MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL Trident Realty Group, L.L.C., Petitioner, Ve MTT Docket No. Lo . . P. .22-23-04-228-012, City of Farmington Hills, Se 13 8-0 R 22-23-04-228-014, and espondent, 22-23-04-228-015 Stewart L. Mandell (P33781) Honigman LLP Attorneys for Petitioner 39400 Woodward Avenue, Suite 101 Bloomfield Hills, MI 48304-5151 (313) 465-7420 slmandell@honigman.com Petition Trident Realty Group, L.L.C. (“Petitioner”), through its attorneys, Honigman LLP, says: 1. Petitioner's principal office is at 251 E. Merrill, Suite 201, Birmingham, MI 48009. Petitioner is a party in interest with respect to property taxes on tax parcel numbers 22-23-04-228- 012, 22-23-04-228-013, 22-23-04-228-014, and 22-23-04-228-015, (collectively, "Petitioner's Property"), with addresses that include 33481 Fourteen Mile Road, Farmington Hills, located in Oakland County, Michigan. The tax parcels are contiguous. 2: Respondent, City of Farmington Hills, assesses and collects property taxes on
Page 2
3. In 2025, Respondent determined each assessed and taxable value of Petitioner’s Property at the values shown in the chart below. Also included in the chart are Petitioner's requested values for 2025: Respondent's Original Petitioner's Requested 2025 Values 2025 Values Assessed/ Assessed/ Parcel No. State Equalized Taxable State Equalized Taxable 22-23-04-228-012 $275,680 $183,920 $192,300 $183,920 22-23-04-228-013 $147,150 $86,220 $84,600 $84,600 22-23-04-228-014 $212,770 $142,350 $100,200 $100,200 22-23-04-228-015 $189,590 $121,490 $141,050 $121,490 TOTALS $825,190 $533,980 $518,150 $490,210 4. The setting of each 2025 assessed value as shown will result in state equalized values in the same amounts based upon the tentative equalization factor. 5. Petitioner’s Property is classified as commercial improved. Petitioner's Property is presently used or available for use for commercial purposes. Petitioner believes that Petitioner's Property was originally designed to be used for commercial purposes 6. This matter involves issues relating to: (a) valuation, (b) assessment, (c) taxable value, and (d) uniformity. 7. At this time, Petitioner believes, as it relates to taxable value, that there is a dispute relative to the value of a loss. 8. No board of review protest was required for Petitioner's Property. 9. The 2025 assessments, including state equalized value and two taxable values,
Page 3
(a) The 2025 assessments, including state equalized values and/or two taxable values, exceed the amounts permitted by the Michigan Constitution and applicable statutes; (b) The 2025 assessments, including state equalized value and/or two taxable values, are at a higher percentage of true cash value than permissible under the Michigan Constitution and applicable statutes; (c) The 2025 assessments, including two taxable values and/or state equalized values, are based upon an erroneous determination of the true cash value of that portion of Petitioner’s Property that is taxable under Michigan law, and are based upon the application of wrong principles; and, (d) The 2025 assessments, including state equalized value and/or two taxable values, and the mode of assessment adopted by Respondent, discriminate against Petitioner and deny Petitioner its constitutional rights to uniformity, equal protection, and due process of law. WHEREFORE, Petitioner requests that the Tax Tribunal enter an Order: (i) reducing two 2025 taxable values and all of the assessed values and state equalized values of Petitioner's Property to the requested values shown in the table in paragraph three above; (ii) requiring payment to Petitioner of the refunds attributable to such reductions, plus interest and costs; and (iii) awarding Petitioner any other relief to which it is entitled. Respectfully submitted, HONIGMAN LLP Attorneys for Petitioner Yo
Page 4
Hotigman LLP COSTS ADVANCED ACCOUNT I Invoice Date Invoice Number Invoice Narrative Payment Amount 5/27/25 ne 262077/395821/SLM *RX$700.00%+* Filing Fee for Petition 21074678.1