24-004214 SAD Part Dismiss.pdf
John P Kauffman, Petitioner V Township Of Assyria, Respondent · 24-004214-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 GRETCHEN WHITMER GOVERNOR DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS LANSING MARLON I. BROWN, DPA DIRECTOR MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL · 611 W. OTTAWA ST., LANSING, MI 48933 · 517-335-9760 PO BOX 30232, LANSING, MI 48909 · Other Carriers: 2407 N. GRAND RIVER AVE., LANSING, MI 48906 John P Kauffman, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL Petitioner, SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION v MTT Docket No. 24-004214 Assyria Township, Presiding Judge Respondent. Patricia L. Halm ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’S MOTION TO SET ASIDE DEFAULT ORDER OF PARTIAL DISMISSAL On June 12, 2025, Petitioner filed a response to the Tribunal’s June 2, 2025 Order for Default Hearing and Order Placing Petitioner in Default (hereinafter “orders”).1 Petitioner’s response indicates that he was unable to apply for reclassification of the subject property because the assessor did not update ownership even though a Property Transfer Affidavit had been signed, dated, and submitted. The Tribunal has considered Petitioner’s response to the orders and the case file and finds that, on April 25, 2025, Petitioner was ordered to submit information or documentation showing that Petitioner provided the assessor with a copy of the recorded Qualified Forest School Tax Affidavit by December 31 of the tax years at issue. When Petitioner failed to respond, the Tribunal entered an order placing Petitioner in default on June 2, 2025. While Petitioner timely responded to the orders, Petitioner failed to provide a recorded Qualified Forest School Tax Affidavit or indication that it submitted a copy of that affidavit to the assessor by December 31 of the tax years at issue. Although Petitioner provided an explanation for not submitting the requested information, it appears that Petitioner failed to comply with the application process outlined in MCL 211.7 7jj[1].2 The Tribunal’s authority is limited to “a proceeding for direct review of a final decision, finding, ruling, determination, or order of an agency relating to assessment, valuation, rates, special assessments, allocation, or equalization, under the property tax laws of this state.”3 If there is no final decision, finding, ruling, determination or order, the Tribunal has no jurisdiction or authority, and “a court which has determined that it has no jurisdiction should not proceed further except to dismiss the action.”4 Additionally, the Tribunal notes that it has no jurisdiction over any alleged errors related to the classification of the subject property because 1 Petitioner’s letter and accompanying documentation was construed to serve as the requisite Motion to Set Aside Default. 2 MCL 211.77jj[1](7) provides that, in order to “claim an exemption . . . the owner of qualified forest property shall provide a copy of the recorded qualified forest school tax affidavit attesting that the land is qualified forest property to the local tax collecting unit and assessor by December 31.” 3 MCL 205.731(a). 4 Fox v Board of Regents of the University of Michigan, 375 Mich 238, 243; 134 NW2d 146 (1985).
Page 2
MTT Docket No. 24-004214 Page 2 of 2 Petitioner was required to “notify the assessor and [] protest the assigned classification to the March board of review.” Further, “[a]n owner . . . may appeal the decision of the March board of review by filing a petition with the state tax commission not later than June 30 in that tax year.”5 As such, the Tribunal is not the proper venue for a classification claim brought forward by a property owner. While Petitioner was placed in default for failing to submit the appropriate documentation related to the qualified forest exemption, the Tribunal finds that Petitioner provided an assessor affidavit regarding the uncapping of the taxable value for the subject property for the 2023 and 2024 tax years, along with a letter6 explaining the uncapping and calculation of the taxable value for the subject property. The letter directed Petitioner to file an appeal with the Tribunal if Petitioner disagreed with the decision. Having now filed a notice giving rise to the appeal, Petitioner has complied with TTR 279. As such, the Tribunal finds good cause to grant the motion and set aside the default and allow the appeal to continue regarding the calculation of taxable value for the subject property. Therefore, IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion to Set Aside Default is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner’s qualified forest exemption claims are DISMISSED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner’s classification appeal is DISMISSED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a hearing will be scheduled in the normal course. Entered: August 25, 2025 By _____________________________ smm/gc PROOF OF SERVICE I certify that a copy of the foregoing was sent on the entry date indicated above to the parties or their attorneys or authorized representatives, if any, utilizing either the mailing or email addresses on file, as provided by those parties, attorneys, or authorized representatives. By: Tribunal Clerk 5 MCL 211.34c(6). (Emphasis added.) 6 Although the letter and assessor affidavits were dated November 14, 2024, Petitioner was advised that “[t]he execution of this recalculating will occur at the December Board of Review (DBOR) that will meet on a December 12th @ 12:30 p.m. [sic] and will result in recalculating of both the summer and winter tax bills for 2023 and 2024.” Petitioner filed their appeal on December 27, 2024, within 35 days of the December Board of Review meeting. See MCL 205.735a(6).