2025.06.22 Answer to Petition.pdf
Friedman Real Estate Management, Petitioner Vs. City Of Flint, Respondent · 25-001655-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
STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL FRIEDMAN REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT, MTT Docket No. 25-001655 Petitioner, v. CITY OF FLINT, a municipal corporation, Respondent. _____________________________________________________________________/ John-Paul Wolfe Authorized Representative for Petitioner 34975 W. Twelve Mile Road Farmington Hills, MI 48332 (248) 848-4154 jp.wolfe@freg.com Joseph N. Kuptz (P-68623) Chief Deputy City Attorney Attorney for Respondent City of Flint Law Department 1101 S. Saginaw St., 3rd Floor Flint, MI 48502 (810) 237-2085 jkuptz@cityofflint.com _____________________________________________________________________/ ENTIRE TRIBUNAL PROPERTY TAX ANSWER Respondent, City of Flint, answers Petitioner’s Entire Tribunal Property Tax Petition as follows: 1. In response to paragraph 1, Admitted. 2. In response to paragraph 2, Admitted. 3. Not applicable. 4. Not applicable. 5. Not applicable. 6. In response to paragraph 6, Admitted. 7. Not applicable.
Page 2
8. Not applicable. 9. Not applicable. 10. In response to paragraph 10, Admitted. 11. In response to paragraph 11, Admitted. 12. In response to paragraph 12, Respondent states that the principal office address for Petitioner that is on file with Respondent is 34505 W 12 Mile Rd, Farmington Hills, MI 48335. 13. In response to paragraph 13, Respondent admits that this appeal involves issues relating to TCV, TV and uniformity of assessment. 14. In response to paragraph 14, Admitted. 15. Not applicable. 16. In response to paragraph 16, Admitted. 17. In response to paragraph 17, Denied, for the reason that the values as established by Respondent’s Board of Review are correct. 18. In response to paragraph 18, Respondent admits that these are the values that are in dispute. 19. In response to paragraph 19, Denied. Respondent contends that the True Cash Value, State Equalized Value and Taxable Value for the subject property are as determined by the applicable Board of Review. 20. No response is necessary to paragraph 20.
Page 3
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES Respondent reserves the right to amend or supplement its affirmative defenses in this matter. Respectfully submitted, Dated: June 22, 2025 /s/ Joseph N. Kuptz_________ Joseph N. Kuptz (P-68623) Chief Deputy City Attorney Attorney for Respondent 1101 S. Saginaw Street, 3rd Fl. Flint, MI 48502 (810) 237-2085