MTT Petition- 29033 Grand River Ave.pdf

Jasdeep Mann Petitioner Vs. City Of Farmington Hills Respondent · 26-001404-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.

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

ENTIRE TRIBUNAL 

JASDEEP MANN, 

6630 Colby Lane 

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48301 

Phone: (313) 580-5734 

Email: jasdeepmann2@gmail.com 

Petitioner, 

CITY OF FARMINGTON HILLS, 

Assessors Office 

31555 W. Eleven Mile Road 

Farmington Hills, MI 48336 

Respondent. 

Docket No.: 

Tax Year(s) at Issue: 2026 

Petition Number (Board of Review): 893 

PETITION TO THE MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

(Entire Tribunal — Valuation Appeal) 

L INTRODUCTION

Property Address: 29033 Grand River Avenue, Farmington Hills, MI 48336 

Property Classification: 202 — Commercial 

Property Description: Vacant commercial lot, unimproved, no structures 

Petitioner appealed to the City of Farmington Hills Board of Review on February 27, 

2026. The Board of Review issued its decision on April 6, 2026 (Petition Number 893), 

denying any reduction and maintaining the current assessment. The Board's only stated 

rationale was: "IN LINE WITH CURRENT MARKET." No specific market evidence or 

comparable sales were cited in support of this conclusory determination. 

II. JURISDICTIONAL STATEMENT 

This Petition is timely filed within the statutory deadline of May 31, 2026 for commercial 

real property, pursuant to MCL 205.735a(6). Petitioner appeared before the Board of 

Review as required by MCL 211.30. The Board of Review issued its decision on April 6, 

2026. The Michigan Tax Tribunal has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to MCL 

205.731 et seq. 

III. ASSESSMENT AT ISSUE 

The following values are at issue: 

2026 Assessed Value 

2026 Taxable Value 

(SEV) 

Assessor's Value 

$126,730 

$122,240 

Board of Review Value 

$126,730 (no change) 

$122,240 (no change) 

Implied True Cash Value 

| $253,460 

— 

(SEVx2) 

Petitioner's Requested SEV | $75,000 

To be adjusted accordingly 

The current assessment implies a true cash value of $253,460. Petitioner contends this 

exceeds 50% of the property’s true cash value as determined by actual market evidence, 

and requests the assessed value be reduced to $75,000 (reflecting a true cash value of 

$150,000). 

IV. STATEMENT OF FACTS

2. At the time of acquisition, the property contained an approximately 5,000 

square foot commercial building that was in severe disrepair and actively sinking. 

3. In December 2012, Petitioner contracted with Walker Construction, Inc. of 

Macomb, Michigan for the complete demolition of the sinking building at a cost 

of $10,000. The scope of work included: demolition and legal disposal of all 

debris; removal of all blocks, concrete, footings, and asphalt; environmental 

asbestos reporting to the DEQ; City of Farmington Hills demolition permit and 

soil erosion permit; water and sewer disconnect; rodent control; backfill with 

clean workable dirt, grading, and seeding. Demolition was completed in January 

2013. 

4. The property has remained a vacant, unimproved lot since the building 

demolition in early 2013 — a period of over thirteen (13) years. 

B. Tax Burden and Total Investment 

5. Since acquiring the property, Petitioner has paid approximately $101,000 in 

property taxes over 13 years (2013-2025). Documented property tax payments for 

the period 2019-2025 total $47,229.29, as evidenced by tax records attached 

hereto. Taxes for the period 2013-2018 are conservatively estimated at 

approximately $54,000 based on the documented trend. 

Documented property tax payments (2019-2025): 

Year 

Summer 

Winter 

Annual Total 

2025 

$6,571.52 

$314.65 

$6,886.17 

2024 

$6,403.15 

$306.98 

$6,710.13 

2023 

$6,117.59 

$259.15 

$6,376.74 

2022 

$5,831.89 

$246.83 

$6,078.72 

2021 

$5,692.61 

$243.08 

$5,935.69 

2020 

$6,031.93 

$243.67 

$6,275.60 

2019 

$8,613.68 

$352.56 

$8,966.24 

TOTAL (2019-2025) 

| $47,229.29 

6. Petitioner’s total documented investment in this property is as follows: 

» Tax sale purchase price (2012): $30,000 

* Building demolition — Walker Construction (2012/2013): $10,000 

« Property taxes paid (2013-2025, estimated): ~$101,000

implying a true cash value of $253,460 bears no relationship to this economic 

reality. 

7. The property is located on Grand River Avenue in Farmington Hills, situated 

between a used-car dealership and an auto repair/transmission facility. These 

surrounding uses significantly depress the property’s marketability and value. 

8. Petitioner made multiple attempts to develop the property over the years 

following acquisition. Despite these efforts, development proved infeasible due to 

the constrained nature of the site, the surrounding commercial uses, and limited 

market demand along this section of the corridor. 

9. Petitioner has actively marketed the property for sale for approximately four (4) 

years. Despite continuous and active marketing efforts, the property has failed to 

sell. 

10. During the entire four-year marketing period, the only offer received was 

approximately $150,000, from a prospective buyer intending to use the property 

for light industrial purposes. This offer may require a rezoning process, adding 

cost and uncertainty for any potential buyer. 

11. The $150,000 offer represents the best and only evidence of what a willing 

buyer in the open market would pay for this property — the very definition of true 

cash value under Michigan law. 

12. The current SEV of $126,730 implies a true cash value of $253,460, which is 

69% higher than the only real offer this property has attracted in four years of 

active marketing. 

13. No improvements, development, or physical changes have been made to the 

property that would justify any increase in assessed value. 

14. The surrounding Grand River Avenue commercial corridor continues to 

experience increased vacancy, business closures, and limited new investment. 

15. Petitioner has served for the past ten years as a member of the Grand River 

Corridor Improvement Authority and has direct, personal knowledge of the 

corridor’s ongoing economic and market challenges. 

16. The property generates no income and has produced no revenue during 

Petitioner’s ownership.

After four years of active marketing, the only offer received was $150,000 for potential 

light industrial use. Under Michigan law, the extended marketing period and lack of any 

higher offers constitute compelling evidence that the property’s true cash value does not 

exceed $150,000. The implied true cash value of $253,460 (based on the current SEV) is 

not supported by any actual market transaction or offer. 

B. Subject Property — Tax Sale Purchase at $30,000 (2012) 

The property was acquired at an arms-length county tax sale for $30,000 in 2012. Even 

assuming generous appreciation over 14 years, a 745% increase from $30,000 to an 

implied value of $253,460 for a vacant commercial lot surrounded by an auto repair shop 

and used car dealer is not credible and is unsupported by any market evidence. 

C. 30544 Grand River Ave, Farmington Hills 

This improved commercial property (with a building) was listed at $449,000 in 2024 and 

required an 11% price reduction to $399,000 in 2025. As of the date of this petition, the 

property still has not sold. If an improved commercial property with a structure on the 

same corridor cannot sell at its asking price, a vacant lot with no improvements should be 

valued significantly lower. 

D. 28730 Grand River Ave, Farmington Hills 

This improved commercial property with structures sold in March 2024 for $450,000. 

The subject property, being entirely vacant land with no improvements whatsoever, 

should be valued substantially below improved properties that have sold in the corridor. 

E. 28975 Grand River Ave, Farmington Hills 

This property, including a used-car business operation and 5,760 SF building on 2.04 

acres, was listed at $1,300,000 and has remained on the market since mid-2025 without 

selling. The business (Quattro Motors) opened at this location less than two years ago but 

has seen limited success, further evidencing the location challenges and declining 

demand along the Grand River corridor. 

VI. MARKET CONDITIONS AND OTHER FACTORS 

1. Declining Commercial Market: Commercial Cafe market data shows

new investment. Vacant commercial land in this corridor is particularly difficult 

to sell due to limited demand for new commercial construction. 

3. Negative Return on Investment: Petitioner’s total investment of 

approximately $141,000 (purchase + demolition + taxes) against the only offer of 

$150,000 demonstrates a near-zero return over 13 years. This economic reality is 

fundamentally inconsistent with a property that the City claims has a true cash 

value of $253,460. 

4. No Improvements to Property: The property is and has always been a vacant 

lot during Petitioner’s ownership. There have been no improvements, 

development, or physical changes that would justify any increase in assessed 

value. 

5. No Area Improvements: The surrounding neighborhood has not benefited 

from public infrastructure investments, new development, or other factors that 

would increase vacant land values along this section of Grand River Avenue. 

6. Zoning Limitations: The commercial zoning of this parcel limits its potential 

uses, further constraining the pool of potential buyers. The only offer received 

was for light industrial use, which would require a costly and uncertain rezoning 

process. 

7. Surrounding Uses Depress Value: The property is flanked by a used-car 

dealership and an auto repair/transmission shop. These adjacent uses significantly 

diminish the property’s appeal to a broad range of commercial buyers and 

contribute to its extended time on market. 

8. Extended Marketing Period: Standard real estate practice considers a 

marketing period exceeding 12 months as an indicator of overpricing. This 

property has been on the market for approximately 48 months — four times the 

threshold — without a completed sale at any price. This is the strongest possible 

evidence that the assessment exceeds true cash value. 

9. Failed Development Attempts: Petitioner made multiple attempts to develop 

the property following acquisition. These attempts were unsuccessful due to the 

site’s constraints and surrounding uses, further demonstrating the limited utility 

and depressed value of the property.

market value — the price a willing buyer would pay a willing seller, neither being under 

compulsion. 

The Petitioner bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the 

assessment exceeds 50% of true cash value. Petitioner submits that the only offer 

received ($150,000) after four years of active marketing, combined with the $30,000 tax 

sale purchase price, the $10,000 demolition cost, approximately $101,000 in property 

taxes paid, the comparable sales data, and the market conditions described herein, 

satisfies this burden. 

The Board of Review’s conclusory statement that the assessment is "IN LINE WITH 

CURRENT MARKET" without any supporting evidence, comparable sales analysis, or 

response to Petitioner’s detailed market evidence fails to meet any standard of reasoned 

decision-making. 

VII1. RELIEF REQUESTED 

WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests that the Michigan Tax Tribunal: 

1. Reduce the 2026 Assessed Value (SEV) from $126,730 to $75,000, reflecting 

50% of the $150,000 true cash value as evidenced by the only market offer 

received after four years of active marketing; 

2. Adjust the 2026 Taxable Value accordingly; 

3. Award Petitioner any and all other relief the Tribunal deems just and equitable; 

4. Order the Respondent to refund any overpayment of property taxes resulting 

from the reduction, with applicable interest. 

IX. ATTACHMENTS 

Exhibit A: Copy of the Board of Review Decision dated April 6, 2026 (Petition 

#893) 

Exhibit B: Copy of the Assessment Appeal Letter dated February 27, 2026 

Exhibit C: Copy of the 2026 Assessment Change Notice 

Exhibit D: Copy of the most recent winter and summer Property Tax Bills 

Exhibit E: Property Tax Payment History (2019-2025)

NOTE: Petitioner will supplement exhibits as required by the Tribunal’s scheduling order 

and will provide a formal valuation disclosure in accordance with the Tribunal’s rules 

and deadlines. 

Respectfully submitted, 

Jasdeep Mann, Petitioner (Pro Se) 

6630 Colby Lane 

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48301 

Phone: (313) 580-5734 

Email: jasdeepmann2@gmail.com 

Date: Pm | 

7h 20624

VERIFICATION 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

COUNTY OF OAKLAND 

1, Jasdeep Mann, being duly sworn, state that the facts contained in the foregoing Petition 

are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. 

Jasdeep Mann / 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 7 

day of 

Ao ait 

2026. 

Wieoms) 

Sh 

Notary Public, State of Michigan 

-/ 

County of Macoms 

My commission expires: 

Now 

Looasy 

Notary Public 

- State of Michigan 

County of Macomb 

My Commission Expires Nov 1, 2028 

@ 

Acting 

in 

the County of Gov smys 

§

← View full record