24-003395.pdf

Richard B Rineer, Petitioner V City Of Frankfort, Respondent · 24-003395-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.

RECEIVED: 

REGEIMED 

men DGL 1 ) wz 

TAX TRIBUNAL 

' 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON 1. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Richard B Rineer, 

Petitioner, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

v 

MTT Docket No. 24-003395 

City Of Frankfort, 

Respondent. 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

The Tribunal has reviewed the file in the above-captioned case and finds that: 

The petition was not filed by May 31 or the next business day after the Tribunal offices 

were closed. See MCL 205.735a(6). 

Therefore, 

IT IS ORDERED that the case is DISMISSED. 

This Order resolves all pending issues and closes the case. 

APPEAL RIGHTS 

If you disagree with the final decision in this case, you may file a motion for 

reconsideration with the Tribunal or a claim of appeal with the Michigan Court of 

Appeals. 

A motion for reconsideration must be filed with the Tribunal with the required filing fee 

within 21 days from the date of entry of the final decision. Because the final decision 

closes the case, the motion cannot be filed through the Tribunal's web-based e-filing 

system; it must be filed by mail or personal service. The fee for the filing of such 

motions is $50.00 in the Entire Tribunal and $25.00 in the Small Claims Division, unless 

the Small Claims decision relates to the valuation of property and the property had a 

principal residence exemption of at least 50% at the time the petition was filed or the 

decision relates to the grant or denial of a poverty or disabled veterans exemption and, 

if so, there is no filing fee. You are required to serve a copy of the motion on the 

opposing party by mail or personal service or by email if the opposing party agrees to

MTT Docket No. 24-003395 

Page 2 of 2 

the claim is filed more than 21 days after the entry of the final decision, it is an “appeal 

by leave.” A copy of the claim of appeal must be filed with the Tribunal to certify the 

record on appeal. There is no certification fee. 

’ I. 

; 

vo 

Lbs 

By: 

aliens 

oo 

Tne 

Patricia L.. Halm, Tribunal Chair 

Entered: September 10, 2024 

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 

or email addresses on file, as provide by those parties, attorneys, or authorized 

representatives. 

By: Tribunal Clerk

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

DIRECTOR 

LANSING 

Richard B Rineer, 

Petitioner, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

v 

MTT Docket No. 24-003395 

City Of Frankfort, 

Respondent. 

NOTICE OF DOCKET NUMBER 

TAKE NOTICE that a Small Claims petition has been filed and the above-noted docket 

number has been assigned to that petition. The assignment of the docket number does 

not mean that the Tribunal has authority over the petition or that the petition complies 

with the Tribunals rules. The docket number needs to be included on all documents 

submitted in this case. 

Respondent shall file an answer to the petition within 28 days of the issuance of a 

copy of this Notice to Respondent. Tribunal answer forms are available on our 

website at www.michigan.govitaxtiib. Respondents must utilize the appropriate answer 

form. Failure to file the answer within the 28-day time frame may result in the 

placement of Respondent in default, as provided by TTR 279. Further, an electronic 

copy of the petition can be reviewed by utilizing the Docket Lookup Search on the 

Tribunals website. 

By: _ Tribunal Clerk 

Entered: September 10, 2024 

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 

or email addresses on file, as provide by those parties, attorneys, or authorized 

representatives. 

By: Tribunal Clerk

2 October 2024 

| had submitted a document on my situation in Frankfort Michigan asking for help. You have 

provided none. The issue is a tax increase that 

| cannot respond to because 

| do not have any 

documentation. 

| do not know if the assessment is too high or too low. What 

| do know is that the 

assessment is based on a permit filed for another Company in a building across town. 

| appealed to the 

local Tax review board and was denied because 

| did not provide "documentation" with my filing. That 

was because 

1 did not have any documentation as 

| never submitted the new construction permit. 

When 

| tried to get a copy of the permit 

| was told that it was protected under privacy as it was a 

different Company. When 

| appealed the review it was "denied" by the local review board and they 

acknowledged that they had access to the documentation and still denied it based on the assessors 

recommendation. They stated that 

| would have to file an appeal with the MTT. 

| looked at the 

guidelines on your site and realized that my situation did not meet the conditions for an appeal because 

i had no standing in the assessment, the Company that was the party to the action would have to take 

up the appeal. 

This is the third time this assessor has raised my taxes at this location. The first was for new 

usage increase for a through street because in what 

1 felt was doing my civil duty and providing, at my 

own expense, the space for recycling containers for the City of Frankfort. The assessor stated that 

because the public was driving into my parking lot, depositing the recycled goods and then driving off, 

that it represented new usage for my property and that this was a new through fare and the taxes were 

raised. The second was when the assessor looked up and saw windows at the top of the lift bay, they 

wrote me up for a "second floor with failure to report" and again raised my taxes. On appeal they 

stated they had not my received my appeal, which 

| personally delivered to the Post office, and would 

not hear my case. The assessor recommended to the Board that it be denied, and they did. 

There is a lot more bad of history here and it is obvious you do not care. 

If you had actually 

looked at, and read, what 

| submitted you on your mandatory form, you would have seen that all 

| was 

asking for was help. There is not direction available to me other than expensive litigation and 

i really do 

not want to go down that path. 

Right now my building is assessed above the market value. So 

looked into selling the building 

to get out of this mess. Two real estate companies would not take the sales offer because the building is 

upside down on valuation. 

| am working to not put this obvious affront on the part of your tax 

representatives onto the tax payers in my community. 

t will keep trying but my expectations have been met in getting no support from your office.

Richard B. Rineer 

8921 Narrow Gauge Rd. 

Beulah, MI 49617-9772 

Mlation 

+ 

faliciq 

{ 

Hata

Hlowa 

Sul ug 

b (Iw. 

OTs wig 

7.0 

Ro 3% 0 

Lange cle pl 

Hil Wofjiigiot nil whip

← View full record