26 - SAGINAW POS.pdf

Bbc Saginaw LLC Petitioner Vs. City Of Saginaw Respondent · 26-001328-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 

BBC SAGINAW LLC, 

Petitioner, 

Vv. 

MTT Docket # 26-001328 

CITY OF SAGINAW, 

Respondent. 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

} 

) ss. 

COUNTY OF OAKLAND) 

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

, 2026 he served a 

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

Aaron M. Fales

BY CERTIFIED UNITED STATES MAIL. RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED: 

« 4 

aw 

TON AVENUE

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

BBC Saginaw LLC, 

Petitioner, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

v 

MTT Docket No.: 26-001328 

City Of Saginaw, 

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 Tribunal’s rules. 

By: Tribunal Clerk 

Entered: August 6, 2026 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

| 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

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

MICHIGAN ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS SYSTEM 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

BBC SAGINAW LLC, 

Petitioner, 

MTT Docket #26- 001328 

VS. 

Parcel No. 21-4333-00400 

CITY OF SAGINAW, 

Respondent. 

; 

PETITION 

BBC SAGINAW 

LLC 

(“Petitioner”), through 

its attorneys, Law Office 

of 

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

1. 

Petitioner's principal office address 

is PO Box 810, Royal Oak, MI 

48068. 

Petitioner 

is a party 

in interest with respect fo property taxes on real 

property tax parcel no. 21-4333-00400 ("Petitioner's Property"), at 2220 Veterans 

Memorial Pkwy., Saginaw, Ml. 

2. 

Respondent, City of Saginaw, assesses and collects property taxes 

on Petitioner's Property. 

3. 

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

Property 

to 

be 

$1,039,200 

and 

assessed 

Petitioner's 

Property 

at 

$1,039,900 

resulting in a state equalized value of the same amount based on the tenative

4, 

Petitioner's 

Property 

is 

classified 

as 

Industrial 

Real 

Property. 

Petitioner's Property 

is industrial property. 

Petitioner believes that Petitioner's 

Property was designed to be used for industrial purposes. 

5. 

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

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

6. 

Af this time, Petitioner believes, as 

it relates to taxable value, that 

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

7. 

The 2026 assessment, including state equalized value and taxable 

value, 

imposed 

on 

Petitioners 

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 

equdlized 

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 af higher percentages of true cash value than permissible 

under the Michigan Constitution and applicable statutes; 

lc) 

The 

assessment, 

including 

taxable 

value 

and/or 

state 

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

(d} 

The 

assessment, 

including 

state 

equalized 

value 

and/or 

taxable 

value, 

and 

the 

mode 

of 

assessment 

adopted 

by 

Respondent, 

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 $1,039,900 

to 

$540,000, 

and 

reducing 

the 

2026 

assessed 

and 

state 

equalized values 

of 

Petitioner's Property from $1,039,900 to $540,000, 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 

AY 

Aaron M. Fales (P72864) 

330 Hamilton Row, Ste. 350 

Birmingham, MI 48009 

(248) 767-9840 

By: 

Dated: May 24, 2026

← View full record