Raed, Sons Holdings, LLC 25-002291 Respondent's Answer to Petition 7-25-25.pdf
Raed & Sons Holdings LLC, Petitioner Vs. Township Of Pittsfield, Respondent · 25-002291-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
1 S E C R E S T W A R D L E STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL RAED & SONS HOLDINGS, LLC, Petitioner, MTT Docket No. 25-002291 Parcel No. TB-12-24-300-007 -vs- PITTSFIELD TOWNSHIP Respondent. _________________________________________________________________________________/ PROPERTY TAX CONSULTANTS Jon Aylsworth Representative for Petitioner 861 Pinecrest Ave. SE Grand Rapids, MI 49506 (269) 366-0300 SECREST WARDLE Alana E. Knox (P85859) Attorney for Respondent 2600 Troy Center Drive P.O. Box 5025 Troy, MI 48007-5025 (248) 851-9500 aknox@secrestwardle.com _________________________________________________________________________________/ RESPONDENT’S ANSWER TO PETITIONER’S PETITION NOW COMES Respondent, PITTSFIELD TOWNSHIP, by and through its attorneys, SECREST WARDLE, and for its Answer to Petitioner’s Petition, states as follows: 1. Answering paragraph 1, Respondent admits that the Petitioner is Raed & Sons Holdings, LLC. Respondent neither admits nor denies the remainder of the allegations contained in paragraph 1 for lack of sufficient knowledge or information upon which to form a belief and leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 2. Answering paragraph 2, Respondent admits the allegations contained therein. 3. Answering paragraph 3, Respondent admits that the subject property is real property classified as commercial that has tax identification number L-12-24-300-007 and that the Petitioner’s property is presently being used for commercial purposes. Respondent neither admits nor denies the
Page 2
2 S E C R E S T W A R D L E remainder of the allegations contained in paragraph 3 for lack of sufficient knowledge or information upon which to form a belief and leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 4. Answering paragraph 4, Respondent admits the allegations contained therein. 5. Answering paragraph 5, Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations contained in paragraph 5 for lack of sufficient knowledge or information upon which to form a belief and leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 6. Answering paragraph 6, Respondent admits that the subject property has a 2025 assessed value of $622,818, state equalized value of $622,818, and a taxable value of $622,818. 7. Answering paragraph 7, Respondent admits that the Petitioner appealed the 2025 assessment of the subject property to the Board of Review and that the Board of Review denied the Petitioner’s requested relief. 8. Answering paragraph 8, Respondent denies the allegations contained therein for the reason that the same are untrue. 9. Answering paragraph 9, Respondent denies that the 2025 true cash value of the subject property should be $800,00 and Respondent also denies that the 2025 state equalized value and 2025 taxable value of the subject property should be $400,000. Respondent neither admits nor denies the remainder of the allegations contained in paragraph 9 for lack of sufficient knowledge or information upon which to form a belief and leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 10. Answering paragraph 10, Respondent denies that the Michigan Tax Tribunal should reduce the 2025 assessed value and 2025 taxable value of the subject property to $400,000 and also denies that the Michigan Tax Tribunal should order a refund with interest. WHEREFORE, Respondent, Pittsfield Township, denies that Petitioner is entitled to the relief it seeks and respectfully requests that the Respondent’s assessment and taxable value of the subject property be affirmed or increased, that Petitioner’s Petition be dismissed with prejudice and that Respondent be granted costs and attorney fees so wrongfully incurred.
Page 3
3 S E C R E S T W A R D L E Respectfully submitted, SECREST WARDLE BY: /s/ Alana E. Knox ALANA E. KNOX (P85859) Attorney for Respondent 2600 Troy Center Drive, P.O. Box 5025 Troy, Michigan 48007-5025 (248) 851-9500 Dated: July 25, 2025 aknox@secrestwardle.com
Page 4
4 S E C R E S T W A R D L E AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES For its further Answer to Petitioner’s Petition and by way of its Affirmative Defenses, Respondent respectfully requests unto this Honorable Tribunal as follows: 1. Petitioner fails to allege specific and sufficient facts to set forth a cause of action against Respondent and to support its claim for relief. 2. Petitioner fails to allege specific and sufficient facts to establish fraud, error of law, discrimination, application of wrong principles or illegality on the part of the Respondent. 3. Petitioner fails to allege that the mode and method of appraising its property failed to conform with the mode and method applied in the case of all of the properties in the Respondent’s taxing unit for the year in question. 4. Petitioner fails to allege specific and sufficient facts to establish the true cash value, assessed value and taxable value of its property. 5. Petitioner fails to allege specific and sufficient facts to support its allegation that the assessed value of its property, as equalized, is at a factor other than 50% and also fails to allege specific and sufficient facts to support its allegations that the property’s taxable value is improper. 6. Petitioner fails to show that any rate other than 50% after equalization was applied to the true cash value of its property, as well as to the properties of all others to arrive at the respective equalized assessments. 7. Petitioner, in essence, asks that this Honorable Tribunal grant it an illegal preference by application of a method of assessment different from that employed in the assessment other properties in the Respondent’s taxing unit. 8. Petitioner, in essence, seeks by Petition to challenge the process of county and state equalization as to which it has no legal standing and cannot maintain a cause of action. 9. Petitioner failed in its appearance before the Board of Review to specifically allege that:
Page 5
5 S E C R E S T W A R D L E A. The equalized assessment of the property is more than 50% of its true cash value and that the taxable value is in violation of applicable statutory and constitutional limitations. B. The property is assessed in a discriminatory manner and that the assessment is a higher level of true cash value than the average level of assessment of all other property within the Township, excepting this property and the assessment on other property which is also under appeal. C. The assessment and taxable value are unlawful and based upon the application of wrong principles and thereby operate as a constructive fraud upon the taxpayer. The failure to raise such objections to the Respondent’s Board of Review constitutes a failure to exhaust the administrative remedies provided for by the General Property Tax Act, constitutes a waiver of any such allegations contained in the Petition, and further amounts to a failure by the Petitioner to appear in protest to Respondent’s Board of review as required by the Tax Tribunal Act. 10. Any decrease in the value of Petitioner’s property was a result of its own intentional acts and/or negligence and cannot be allowed to reduce Petitioner’s otherwise equitable tax burden. 11. Respondent has properly and lawfully assessed Petitioner’s property and established its taxable value in accordance with statutory and constitutional requirements. 12. Petitioner has failed to pursue its appeal in a timely fashion. 13. Respondent reserves the right to add to these Affirmative Defenses any new Affirmative Defenses that discovery reveals. WHEREFORE, Respondent, Pittsfield Township, denies that Petitioner is entitled to the relief it seeks and respectfully requests that the Respondent’s assessment and taxable value of the subject property be affirmed or increased and that Petitioner’s Petition be dismissed with prejudice and that Respondent be granted costs and attorney fees so wrongfully incurred. Respectfully submitted, SECREST WARDLE BY: /s/ Alana E. Knox
Page 6
6 S E C R E S T W A R D L E ALANA E. KNOX (P85859) Attorney for Respondent 2600 Troy Center Drive, P.O. Box 5025 Troy, Michigan 48007-5025 (248) 851-9500 Dated: July 25, 2025 aknox@secrestwardle.com PROOF OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on July 25, 2025, a copy of the foregoing document, Respondent’s Answer to Petitioner’s Property Tax Petition and Affirmative Defenses, was filed electronically with the Michigan Tax Tribunal, and was served upon: Property Tax Consultants Jon Aylsworth 861 Pinecrest Ave. SE Grand Rapids, MI 49506 by depositing same in the United States mail with postage fully prepaid thereon. /s/ Tamera Briggs Tamera Briggs (10010801.1)