26 - Chester POS.pdf

Bayview Mc Associates LLC Petitioner Vs. Township Of Chesterfield Respondent · 26-001543-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.

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

BAYVIEW MC ASSOCIATES LLC, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

MTT Docket # 26-001543 

TOWNSHIP OF CHESTERFIELD, 

Respondent. 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

) 

) ss. 

COUNTY OF OAKLAND) 

Aaron M. Fales, being duly sworn, deposes and says that on September IS 

2026 he served a 

copy of Petitioner's Petition on the parties named on the attached list. 

Aaron M. Fales

8Y CERTIFIED UNITED STATES MAL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED: 

AND BY FIRST-CLASS UNITED STATES MAIL 

DIRECTOR OF ZOUAUIATION 

MACOMB CCU 

LEN. MAINS 

MT. CLEMENS, “i 48043-6533 

v

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON 

I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Bayview MC Associates LLC, 

Petitioner, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

v 

MTT Docket No.: 26-001543 

Township Of Chesterfield, 

Respondent. 

NOTICE OF DOCKET NUMBER 

TAKE NOTICE that an Entire Tribunal petition has been filed and the above-noted 

docket number has been assigned to that petition. This docket number shall be noted 

on the petition and the petition shall be served within 45 days of the issuance of 

this notice, as required by TTR 227 and MCL 205.735a, even if the petition was served 

when filed. A proof of service shall also be filed with the Tribunal within 45 days of the 

issuance of this notice evidencing the service of the petition. 

If you submitted a proof of service with the petition, you must still serve the petition and 

file a second proof of service including the docket number, pursuant to this notice. 

Failure to serve the petition and file a proof of service within 45 days of the issuance of 

the notice may result in the dismissal of this case. 

Under TTR 235(1), “[tlhe respondent shall file an answer or responsive motion within 28 

days after the date of service of the petition with noted docket number.” 

Failure to do so 

will result in Respondent being placed in default. 

The docket number also needs to be noted on all other documents submitted in this 

case. 

Further, the assignment of the docket number does not mean that the Tribunal 

has authority over the petition or that the petition complies with statutory requirements 

or the Tribunals rules. 

By: Tribunal Clerk 

Entered: August 18, 2026 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

| certify that a copy of the foregoing was sent on the entry date indicated above to the

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

MICHIGAN ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS SYSTEM 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

BAYVIEW MC ASSOCIATES LLC, 

Petitioner, 

MITT Docket #26- 001543 

Vs. 

Parcel No. 15-09-15-400-031 

CHESTERFIELD TOWNSHIP, 

Respondent. 

/ 

PETITION 

BAYVIEW MC ASSOCIATES LLC 

(“Petitioner”), through 

its attorneys, Law 

Office of Aaron M. Fales, P.C., says: 

1. 

Petitioner's principal office address 

is 43900 Garfield Rd., Ste. 203, 

Clinton Twp., Ml 48038. 

Petitioner is a party in interest with respect to property 

faxes on real property tax parcel no. 15-09-15-400-031 ("Petitioner's Property"), at 

32743 23 Mile, Chesterfield Twp., MI 48047. 

2. 

Respondent, Chesterfield Township assesses and collects property 

taxes on Petitioner's Property. 

3. 

In 2026, Respondent determined the taxable value of Petitioner's 

Property to be $977,024 and assessed Petitioner's Property at $1,425,200 resulting 

in 

a 

state 

equalized 

value 

of 

the same amount 

based 

on 

the 

tenative

Petitioner's 

Property 

was 

originally 

designed 

to 

be 

used 

for 

commercial 

purposes. 

5. 

This matter involves issues relating to: (a) valuation, (b) assessment, 

(c) taxable value, and (d} uniformity. 

6. 

At this time, Petitioner believes, as 

it relates to taxable value, that 

there is a dispute relative fo the value of a loss. 

7. 

The 2026 assessment, including state equalized value and taxable 

value, 

imposed 

on 

Petitioner's 

Property, 

and 

the 

taxes 

to 

be 

levied 

and 

collected thereon, are invalid and unlawful and operate as a fraud upon the 

taxpayer for the reasons that: 

(a) 

The 

assessment, 

including 

state 

equalized 

value 

and/or 

taxable value, exceeds the amount permitted by the Michigan Constitution and 

applicable statutes; 

(b) 

The 

assessment, 

including 

state 

equalized 

value 

and/or 

taxable value, are at higher percentages of true cash value than permissible 

under the Michigan Constitution and applicable statutes; 

{c) 

The 

assessment, 

including 

taxable 

value 

and/or 

state 

equalized value, are based upon an erroneous determination of the true cash 

value of that portion of Petitioner's Property that is taxable under Michigan law,

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 

reducing 

the 

2026 

taxable 

value 

of 

Petitioner's 

Property 

from 

$977,000 

to 

$500,000, 

and 

reducing 

the 

2026 

assessed 

and 

state 

equalized 

values 

of 

Petitioner's Property from $1,425,200 to $500,000, and requiring Respondent to 

pay Petitioner the refunds attributable to such reductions, plus interest and costs. 

Respectfully submitted, 

LAW OFFICE OF AARON M. FALES, P.C. 

Attorney for Petitioner 

Lp 

Aaron M. Fales (P72864) 

330 Hamilton Row, Ste. 350 

Birmingham, MI 48009 

(248) 767-9840 

By: 

Dated: May 27, 2026

← View full record