Summary - LEANING Board Review Nov 2025.pdf
Keith S Leaning Petitioner V Township Of Garfield Respondent · 26-002533-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
3473 W. Sharon Rd SE, Fife Lake, MI, 49633 July 2024 - The property was purchased by Keith & Anita Leaning • The property (As purchased) was enrolled in the QFP and was extended to Keith & Anita Leaning (& recorded) prior to the deadline of Dec 31st, 2024 • In March 2025, I was notified by the Garfield Tax Assessor that the entire property would be uncapped due to the recent purchase, ignoring the QFP exception. • Upon eventual agreement with the Garfield Tax Assessor’s office that the property was indeed exempt due to the known and existing QFP (see copy). I then received a significant increase to my summer property tax when the tax bill arrived with no explanation. • After countless (all documented) emails, voice mails left & telephone discussions with the Garfield Tax Assessor over 4 months, I eventually concluded that the tax law uncapped the “structures” & the land the “Structures” sit on. And, that the uncapped “structures” & land they sit on would be subject to a significant increase in assessed value and hence a Tax increase. • The full summer tax payment was made in full (in September 2025) and in good faith as I continued to request & NOT receive responses to my questions regarding the revised valuation (& how it was calculated) given the “structures” lack of exemption. • After consulting with the Mi State QFP and Mi State Dept of Agriculture offices, I concluded that the valuation and magnitude of the subsequent increase in tax was questionable. • A Real Estate “Structure” appraisal was then executed (at my cost) with Robert Reamer, an experienced local Real Estate Appraiser & specifically requested valuation of the “Structures”. Robert Reamer - Certified General Appraiser (Real Estate Expert Since 1978) 2678 Danbury Rd. Kingsley, MI 49649 231-649-0877 bob@teamreamer.com www.robertjreamer.com • Upon many more attempts and requests to see the Garfield Tax Assessor’s valuation calculation (all attempts documented), it was finally received in Oct 2025 and ONLY after I communicated, I had paid for and was in receipt of the Real Estate “Structures” appraisal from Robert Reamer. • The Real Estate Appraiser (See doc) confirms that the property cannot be used as a residence, as it cannot be permanently inhabited due to no utility services. A fact the Garfield Tax Assessor was aware of as had been a point of discussion since March 2025. The consequence of this reality is the “structures” are valued differently in the market
Page 2
per the Real Estate Appraiser. The Real Estate Appraiser confirms the value of all 3 the “structures” to be $94,600. • In the Garfield Tax Assessors email to me (pasted below), it is stated that the calculation of the True Cash value of the 3 structures = $152,209. A significant difference from what the certified real estate appraiser concludes. • I have also argued that the total land the structures sit on does NOT amount to 3 acres and that 1 acre is a much more accurate assessment of land use. Go ahead and check it on Google Maps. Your Increase in land value for the 3 acres (Assumption made per the Sept 9th email) of land the 3 blgs sit on has increased from $83,800 to $115,000 per your “property card”. Clearly, I don’t understand the math here. • Finally, your “property card” (attached) does not align with the email you sent me on Sept 9th, 2025 (above). The “property card” appears to be an even bigger assessment. Which is correct, or are none of them ? Irrespective of the answer to that question, clearly the certified real estate appraiser does not agree with you regarding the “structures” and I / Google Maps don’t agree with you regarding the size of the land they sit on as there are no gardens, yards, only trails that are required to support the logging operations required by the QFP and planned for this winter and beyond. In Conclusion, I have spent a total of 7 months & my own resources (cash and time) struggling to get responses from the Garfield Tax Assessor and when I did, they did not & still do not make sense to me. At this juncture I feel I have no other option than to ask for the board’s consideration in review of this situation and specifically to be treated equitably given the facts and specific conditions presented. My position is, I believe I have been overcharged for the Summer 2025 Property tax paid and will continue to be overcharged moving forward unless this review board questions the conclusions drawn by the Garfield Tax Assessor. Sincerely Keith Leaning