Fultonbsh Answer to Petition.pdf
Fultonbsh Cfmi I, LLC Petitioner Vs. Township Of Chesterfield Respondent · 26-000977-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 FULTONBSH CFMI |, LLC Petitioner, -Vs- MTT Docket No. 26-000977 TOWNSHIP OF CHESTERFIELD, Respondent. / SARAH R. BELLOLI CHRISTINE D. ANDERSON (P45141) MATTHEW DINGMAN SEIBERT AND DLOSKI, PLLC JOAN KLEINER Attorney for Respondent Representative for Petitioner 19500 Hall Road, Suite 101 101 West Big Beaver, Suite 945 Clinton Township, MI 48038 Troy, MI 48084 (586) 469-3800 313-230-0104 canderson@seibertanddloski.com Sarah.Belloli@Ryan.com Matthew.Dingman@Ryan.com Joan.Kleiner@Ryan.com CHARTER TOWNSHIP OF CHESTERFIELD’S ANSWER TO ENTIRE TRIBUNAL PROPERTY TAX PETITION The Charter Township of Chesterfield (“Respondent”), by and through its attorneys, SEIBERT AND DLOSKI, PLLC, for its answer to Petitioner's Entire Tribunal Property Tax Petition states as follows: 1. Respondent admits the allegations contained in Paragraph 1. 2. Respondent admits the allegations contained in Paragraph 2. 3. Petitioner did not set forth any allegations in Paragraph 3, therefore, no
Page 2
5: Petitioner did not set forth any allegations in Paragraph 5, therefore, no response is required. 6. Respondent admits the allegations contained in Paragraph 6. 7. Petitioner admits the allegations contained in Paragraph 7. 8. Petitioner did not set forth any allegations in Paragraph 8, therefore, no response is required. 9. Petitioner did not set forth any allegations in Paragraph 9, therefore, no response is required. 10. Respondent admits the allegations contained in Paragraph 10. 11. Respondent admits the allegations contained in Paragraph 11. 12. Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge to form a belief as to the allegations contained in Paragraph 12. 13. Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge to form a belief as to the allegations contained in Paragraph 13. 14. Respondent admits the allegations set forth in Paragraph 14. 15. Petitioner did not set forth any allegations in Paragraph 15, therefore, no response is required. 16. Respondent admits the allegations set forth in Paragraph 16. 17. Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge to form a belief as to the allegations contained in Paragraph 17.
Page 3
20. Respondent denies that a lower valuation is supportable for the reason it is untrue and further states that the valuation of the subject property complies with Michigan statutory law and the Constitution. WHEREFORE, the Respondent respectfully requests the Tax Tribunal dismiss the Petition and award the Respondent its costs and attorney fees. Respectfully submitted, Vai RT AND DLOSKI, PLLC CN As By: Christine D! Anderson (P45141) Attorney for Respondent 19500 Hall Road, Suite 101 Clinton Township, MI 48038 Dated: July 6, 2026 (586) 469-3800