Record Finder / 26-000030-TT
Michigan
5555 Arnold, LLC, Petitioner V Township Of Acme, Respondent
- Petitioner
- 5555 Arnold, LLC
- Respondent
- Township Of Acme
Case overview
- Docket number
- 26-000030-TT
- Status
- Disposed
- CaseType
- SC Property
- Division
- Small Claims Division
- County
- Grand Traverse
- Judge
- No judge assigned
Docket history
| Line # | Subject | Filer | Line Ref | Enter Date/Post Mark | Fee | Related Item |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 9 | Denied | PET | 6 | 02/12/2026 | Not recorded | Download |
| 8 | Order Denying Motion | Not recorded | 6 | 02/12/2026 | Not recorded | Download |
| 7 | Appearance | PET | Not recorded | 02/02/2026 | Not recorded | Download |
| 6 | Motion for Reconsideration was received. | PET | Not recorded | 02/02/2026 | $25.00 | Download |
| 5 | Order of Dismissal | Not recorded | Not recorded | 01/14/2026 | Not recorded | Download |
| 4 | Petition has been verified | PET | 1 | 01/14/2026 | Not recorded | Download |
| 3 | Notice of Docket Number SC | Not recorded | Not recorded | 01/12/2026 | Not recorded | Download |
| 2 | Attachments to the Petition were filed | Not recorded | Not recorded | 01/07/2026 | Not recorded | Download |
| 1 | A petition was received. | PET | Not recorded | 01/07/2026 | $25.00 | Download |
Documents
26-000030.pdfRead complete document text →
Read document text excerpt
Page 1
RECEIVED FEB 0 4 2026 LYNCH LAW MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 934 E. Eighth Street Traverse City, MI 49686 Deborah Lynch, Esq. Phone: (231) 922-2690 John Patrick Lynch, Esq.* Fax: (231) 922-0236 *Also admitted in the State of Illinois Email: deb@lynchlawtc.com Jjohn@lynchlawtc.com February 2, 2026 Via UPS Overnight Delivery Lid a Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs me LY 1 Mail Services Attn: Michigan Tax Tribunal 2407 N. Grand River Avenue Lansing, MI 48906 Re: 5555 Arnold, LLC v Township of Acme Michigan Tax Tribunal Small Claims Division, File No. 26-000030 Dear Sir/Madam, Our office represents the interest of 5555 Arnold, LLC, Petitioner in the above-mentioned matter. Enclosed, please find a Motion for Reconsideration, Exhibits, Appearance and Proof of Mailing to Acme Township. I have also enclosed a check in the amount of $25.00 for the motion filing fee. If you have any questions or need anything further from our office, please feel free to contact our office. Thank you for your help in this matter. Sincerely, LYNCH LAW
Page 2
STATE OF MICHIGAN GRETCHEN WHITMER DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS MARLON I. BROWN, DPA GOVERNOR LANSING DIRECTOR 5555 Arnold, LLC , MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL , Petitioner(s) Vv MTT Docket No. 26-000030 Acme Township Respondent(s) APPEARANCE Please type or neatly print the name and contact information for the attorney or authorized representative: 1. Full name (first, middle initial, last) 2. Bar License # (if applicable) John P. Lynch P 3. Firm Name (if applicable) Lynch LAw 3. Address gs E gth St, Traverse City, MI 49686 4. Telephone No. 5. E-mail Address 231-922-2690 john@lynchlawtc.com 1. | appear on behalf of 5555 ARNOLD, LLC as [/] attorney or] authorized representative. a SE Attorney7Representative signature John P. Lynch, Esq. [Print/type name of person signing]
Page 3
STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS LANSING 5555 ARNOLD, LLC, PETITIONER, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION \Y MTT DOCKET No. 26-000030 TowNSHIP OF ACME, RESPONDENT. John P. Lynch, Esq. (P73571) Lynch Law Attorney for the Petitioner 934 E. 8" Street Traverse City, MI 49686 (231) 922-2690 MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION Now COMES, Petitioner, 5555 Arnold, LLC, a Michigan limited liability company, by and through their attorney of record, John P. Lynch, Esq., of LYNCH LAW, and does hereby move to this Honorable Tribunal for a Motion of Reconsideration Pursuant to R792.10261 of this Tribunal’s Order of Dismissal. 1. Petitioner respectfully requests that this Honorable Tribunal reconsider its administrative Order of Dismissal and reinstate the case to be heard in the small claims division, pursuant to R792.10261. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Page 4
Motion for Reconsideration Page 2 3. Petitioner claimed that the 2025 Notice of Assessment that was produced by Acme Township was improper because: a. It provided misleading information, specifically stating “Market Reason” for the change in taxes (when in fact the change in the taxation was due to the removal of the Qualified Agricultural Property Exemption); b. That it failed to provide a clear statement of reasons of why the exemption is being removed; see further MDT Form 1019, Section 6 and MCL 211.7ee; and c. That the removal of the exemption was in error, as the property still was used for agricultural purposes pursuant to MCL 211.7dd and MCL 324.3610. 4. Petitioner argued that a Notice of Assessment that is either false or misleading does not provide the proper notice as required in MCL 211.7ee, and that failure to provide proper notice: a. Invalidated the Qualified Agricultural Property Exemption; b. That the property qualifies for the exemption; and c. The defective notice constituted a qualified error that could be corrected by the December Board of Review. 5. On December 12, 2025, the Acme Township December Board of Review denied Petitioner’s review. Please see attached Exhibit 2. 6. On January 7, 2026, Petitioner timely appealed to this Honorable Tribunal. Please see attached Exhibit 3. 7. On January 14, 2026, this Honorable Tribunal administratively entered an Order of Dismissal. Please see attached Exhibit 4. 8. The Order of Dismissal cited the following: “Petitioner failed to protest the denial of the qualified agricultural exemption to Respondent's March Board of Review, as required by MCL 205.735a. See also MCL 211.7ee. As such, and inasmuch as the Tribunal has no equitable power to waive or otherwise disregard statutory filing requirements and deadlines, it has no authority to hear the appeal or grant the relief requested. See Sixarp, LLC v Byron Twp, _ Mich;
Page 5
Motion for Reconsideration Page 3 LAW AND ARGUMENT This Honorable Tribunal cites MCL 205.735a and MCL 211.7ee as the proper authority for requiring that disputing the exemption must be appealed to the March Board of Review for the Michigan Tax Tribunal to have proper jurisdiction. If the Petitioner was merely filing a late protest of the exemption of the property, we would agree with the Tribunal’s holding. However, the Petitioner’s appeal is that the Notice of Assessment itself was defective, by being false or misleading, and thus the Notice itself violated the Petitioner’s due process and therefore the removal of the exemption subsequently also violated the Petitioner's due process. This comes from the misleading language issued by the Acme Township on Section 6, Assessor Change Reason, which states that the only change is “Market Adjustment,” when in fact the Assessor had removed the Qualified Agricultural Property Exemption: SOA CARO THER. THIS IS NOT A TAX BILL L-4400 Notice of Assessment, Taxable Valuation, and Property Classification This form Is issued under the authority of PA. 208 of 1893, Sec. 211.24 (c) and Sec211.34c, 2s amended. This is a model
Page 6
Motio
These are text excerpts, not the complete document. Text recognition and reading order can contain errors. Check the PDF for complete wording, formatting, and context.
26-000030 Recon.pdfRead complete document text →
Read document text excerpt
Page 1
STATE OF MICHIGAN GRETCHEN WHITMER GOVERNOR DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS LANSING MARLON I. BROWN, DPA DIRECTOR MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL · 611 W. OTTAWA ST., LANSING, MI 48933 · 517-335-9760 PO BOX 30232, LANSING, MI 48909 · Other Carriers: 2407 N. GRAND RIVER AVE., LANSING, MI 48906 5555 Arnold LLC, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL Petitioner, SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION v MTT Docket No. 26-000030 Acme Township, Presiding Judge Respondent. Marcus L. Abood ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION On February 2, 2026, Petitioner filed a motion requesting that the Tribunal reconsider the Order of Dismissal (order) entered in this case on January 14, 2026. In the motion, Petitioner states that the Tribunal erred in entering the order because Respondent’s purported notice of the Qualified Agricultural Exemption denial is deficient. Petitioner contends that the notice is defective because it is false and misleading. Petitioner contends this case is distinguishable from Sixarp, LLC v Township of Byron,1 as was relied upon by the order, because the notice in the Sixarp case was “clear and unambiguous,” whereas the subject notice was misleading due to a reference to market adjustment. Such an error either constitutes a “qualified error” for purposes of MCL 211.53b or results in a due-process violation. The Tribunal has considered the motion and the case file and finds that Petitioner has failed to demonstrate a palpable error relative to the order that misled the Tribunal and the parties and that would have resulted in a different disposition if the error was corrected.2 The Tribunal properly concluded that it has no authority over Petitioner’s appeal because Petitioner did not appeal the assessor determination to the March Board of Review as required by MCL 211.7ee(7). Although Petitioner contends that the notice was defective, the Michigan Supreme Court recently reaffirmed that the Tribunal lacks any equitable authority to assume jurisdiction in cases presenting potential due- process violations when the statutory requirements for filing an appeal under MCL 205.735a have not been met, and that jurisdiction in such cases may only be vested upon the Tribunal by a judicial body with powers of equity.3 The same reasoning applies to the filing and protest requirements of MCL 211.7ee. For these reasons, no consideration is given to the motion’s contention that the Tribunal has authority to consider the appeal if there was a due-process violation. 1 Sixarp, LLC v Byron Twp, _ NW3d _ (Mich Supreme Court Docket No. 166190) (2025) (Sixarp). 2 See MCR 2.119(F)(3). A palpable error is one that is “easily perceptible, plain, obvious, readily visible, noticeable, patent, distinct, or manifest.” Luckow v Luckow, 291 Mich App 417, 426 (2011) (quotation marks and citation omitted). 3 See Sixarp. See also Federal-Mogul Corp v Dep’t of Treasury, 161 Mich App 346 (1987), Elec Data Sys Corp v Flint Twp, 253 Mich App 538 (2002), and VanderWerp v Plainfield Twp, 278 Mich App 624 (2008), noting that the Tribunal’s powers are limited to those authorized by statute and do not include powers of equity.
Page 2
MTT Docket No. 26-000030 Page 2 of 2 The motion also contends that the December Board of Review has authority over the appeal because the defective notice in February or March 2025 constitutes a qualified error for purposes of MCL 211.53b. However, this interpretation of the subject facts ignores the plain language of MCL 211.7ee(7). Further, the purported facts, in the light most favorable to Petitioner, do not constitute any definition of qualified error under MCL 211.53b(6). The Tribunal also notes that the Michigan Court of Appeals recently determined that a notice with incorrect appeal rights constitutes sufficient notice for due-process purposes.4 Only the appellate court may utilize equitable authority to reinstate a correctly dismissed Tribunal appeal. Therefore, IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED. This order resolves all pending claims in this matter and closes this case. APPEAL RIGHTS If you disagree with the final decision in this case, you may file a claim of appeal with the Michigan Court of Appeals. If the claim is filed within 21 days of the entry of the final decision, it is an “appeal of right.” If 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. By Entered: February 12, 2026 bw PROOF OF SERVICE I 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 provided by those parties, attorneys, or authorized representatives. By: Tribunal Clerk 4 See IIP-MI 4 LLC v City of Warren, unpublished per curiam opinion of the Michigan Court of Appeals, issued January 22, 2026 (Docket No. 373070).
These are text excerpts, not the complete document. Text recognition and reading order can contain errors. Check the PDF for complete wording, formatting, and context.
26-000030.pdfRead complete document text →
Read document text excerpt
Page 1
RECEIVED FEB 0 4 2026 LYNCH LAW MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 934 E. Eighth Street Traverse City, MI 49686 Deborah Lynch, Esq. Phone: (231) 922-2690 John Patrick Lynch, Esq.* Fax: (231) 922-0236 *Also admitted in the State of Illinois Email: deb@lynchlawtc.com Jjohn@lynchlawtc.com February 2, 2026 Via UPS Overnight Delivery Lid a Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs me LY 1 Mail Services Attn: Michigan Tax Tribunal 2407 N. Grand River Avenue Lansing, MI 48906 Re: 5555 Arnold, LLC v Township of Acme Michigan Tax Tribunal Small Claims Division, File No. 26-000030 Dear Sir/Madam, Our office represents the interest of 5555 Arnold, LLC, Petitioner in the above-mentioned matter. Enclosed, please find a Motion for Reconsideration, Exhibits, Appearance and Proof of Mailing to Acme Township. I have also enclosed a check in the amount of $25.00 for the motion filing fee. If you have any questions or need anything further from our office, please feel free to contact our office. Thank you for your help in this matter. Sincerely, LYNCH LAW
Page 2
STATE OF MICHIGAN GRETCHEN WHITMER DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS MARLON I. BROWN, DPA GOVERNOR LANSING DIRECTOR 5555 Arnold, LLC , MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL , Petitioner(s) Vv MTT Docket No. 26-000030 Acme Township Respondent(s) APPEARANCE Please type or neatly print the name and contact information for the attorney or authorized representative: 1. Full name (first, middle initial, last) 2. Bar License # (if applicable) John P. Lynch P 3. Firm Name (if applicable) Lynch LAw 3. Address gs E gth St, Traverse City, MI 49686 4. Telephone No. 5. E-mail Address 231-922-2690 john@lynchlawtc.com 1. | appear on behalf of 5555 ARNOLD, LLC as [/] attorney or] authorized representative. a SE Attorney7Representative signature John P. Lynch, Esq. [Print/type name of person signing]
Page 3
STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS LANSING 5555 ARNOLD, LLC, PETITIONER, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION \Y MTT DOCKET No. 26-000030 TowNSHIP OF ACME, RESPONDENT. John P. Lynch, Esq. (P73571) Lynch Law Attorney for the Petitioner 934 E. 8" Street Traverse City, MI 49686 (231) 922-2690 MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION Now COMES, Petitioner, 5555 Arnold, LLC, a Michigan limited liability company, by and through their attorney of record, John P. Lynch, Esq., of LYNCH LAW, and does hereby move to this Honorable Tribunal for a Motion of Reconsideration Pursuant to R792.10261 of this Tribunal’s Order of Dismissal. 1. Petitioner respectfully requests that this Honorable Tribunal reconsider its administrative Order of Dismissal and reinstate the case to be heard in the small claims division, pursuant to R792.10261. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Page 4
Motion for Reconsideration Page 2 3. Petitioner claimed that the 2025 Notice of Assessment that was produced by Acme Township was improper because: a. It provided misleading information, specifically stating “Market Reason” for the change in taxes (when in fact the change in the taxation was due to the removal of the Qualified Agricultural Property Exemption); b. That it failed to provide a clear statement of reasons of why the exemption is being removed; see further MDT Form 1019, Section 6 and MCL 211.7ee; and c. That the removal of the exemption was in error, as the property still was used for agricultural purposes pursuant to MCL 211.7dd and MCL 324.3610. 4. Petitioner argued that a Notice of Assessment that is either false or misleading does not provide the proper notice as required in MCL 211.7ee, and that failure to provide proper notice: a. Invalidated the Qualified Agricultural Property Exemption; b. That the property qualifies for the exemption; and c. The defective notice constituted a qualified error that could be corrected by the December Board of Review. 5. On December 12, 2025, the Acme Township December Board of Review denied Petitioner’s review. Please see attached Exhibit 2. 6. On January 7, 2026, Petitioner timely appealed to this Honorable Tribunal. Please see attached Exhibit 3. 7. On January 14, 2026, this Honorable Tribunal administratively entered an Order of Dismissal. Please see attached Exhibit 4. 8. The Order of Dismissal cited the following: “Petitioner failed to protest the denial of the qualified agricultural exemption to Respondent's March Board of Review, as required by MCL 205.735a. See also MCL 211.7ee. As such, and inasmuch as the Tribunal has no equitable power to waive or otherwise disregard statutory filing requirements and deadlines, it has no authority to hear the appeal or grant the relief requested. See Sixarp, LLC v Byron Twp, _ Mich;
Page 5
Motion for Reconsideration Page 3 LAW AND ARGUMENT This Honorable Tribunal cites MCL 205.735a and MCL 211.7ee as the proper authority for requiring that disputing the exemption must be appealed to the March Board of Review for the Michigan Tax Tribunal to have proper jurisdiction. If the Petitioner was merely filing a late protest of the exemption of the property, we would agree with the Tribunal’s holding. However, the Petitioner’s appeal is that the Notice of Assessment itself was defective, by being false or misleading, and thus the Notice itself violated the Petitioner’s due process and therefore the removal of the exemption subsequently also violated the Petitioner's due process. This comes from the misleading language issued by the Acme Township on Section 6, Assessor Change Reason, which states that the only change is “Market Adjustment,” when in fact the Assessor had removed the Qualified Agricultural Property Exemption: SOA CARO THER. THIS IS NOT A TAX BILL L-4400 Notice of Assessment, Taxable Valuation, and Property Classification This form Is issued under the authority of PA. 208 of 1893, Sec. 211.24 (c) and Sec211.34c, 2s amended. This is a model
Page 6
Motio
These are text excerpts, not the complete document. Text recognition and reading order can contain errors. Check the PDF for complete wording, formatting, and context.
26-000030.pdfRead complete document text →
Read document text excerpt
Page 1
RECEIVED FEB 0 4 2026 LYNCH LAW MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 934 E. Eighth Street Traverse City, MI 49686 Deborah Lynch, Esq. Phone: (231) 922-2690 John Patrick Lynch, Esq.* Fax: (231) 922-0236 *Also admitted in the State of Illinois Email: deb@lynchlawtc.com Jjohn@lynchlawtc.com February 2, 2026 Via UPS Overnight Delivery Lid a Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs me LY 1 Mail Services Attn: Michigan Tax Tribunal 2407 N. Grand River Avenue Lansing, MI 48906 Re: 5555 Arnold, LLC v Township of Acme Michigan Tax Tribunal Small Claims Division, File No. 26-000030 Dear Sir/Madam, Our office represents the interest of 5555 Arnold, LLC, Petitioner in the above-mentioned matter. Enclosed, please find a Motion for Reconsideration, Exhibits, Appearance and Proof of Mailing to Acme Township. I have also enclosed a check in the amount of $25.00 for the motion filing fee. If you have any questions or need anything further from our office, please feel free to contact our office. Thank you for your help in this matter. Sincerely, LYNCH LAW
Page 2
STATE OF MICHIGAN GRETCHEN WHITMER DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS MARLON I. BROWN, DPA GOVERNOR LANSING DIRECTOR 5555 Arnold, LLC , MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL , Petitioner(s) Vv MTT Docket No. 26-000030 Acme Township Respondent(s) APPEARANCE Please type or neatly print the name and contact information for the attorney or authorized representative: 1. Full name (first, middle initial, last) 2. Bar License # (if applicable) John P. Lynch P 3. Firm Name (if applicable) Lynch LAw 3. Address gs E gth St, Traverse City, MI 49686 4. Telephone No. 5. E-mail Address 231-922-2690 john@lynchlawtc.com 1. | appear on behalf of 5555 ARNOLD, LLC as [/] attorney or] authorized representative. a SE Attorney7Representative signature John P. Lynch, Esq. [Print/type name of person signing]
Page 3
STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS LANSING 5555 ARNOLD, LLC, PETITIONER, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION \Y MTT DOCKET No. 26-000030 TowNSHIP OF ACME, RESPONDENT. John P. Lynch, Esq. (P73571) Lynch Law Attorney for the Petitioner 934 E. 8" Street Traverse City, MI 49686 (231) 922-2690 MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION Now COMES, Petitioner, 5555 Arnold, LLC, a Michigan limited liability company, by and through their attorney of record, John P. Lynch, Esq., of LYNCH LAW, and does hereby move to this Honorable Tribunal for a Motion of Reconsideration Pursuant to R792.10261 of this Tribunal’s Order of Dismissal. 1. Petitioner respectfully requests that this Honorable Tribunal reconsider its administrative Order of Dismissal and reinstate the case to be heard in the small claims division, pursuant to R792.10261. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Page 4
Motion for Reconsideration Page 2 3. Petitioner claimed that the 2025 Notice of Assessment that was produced by Acme Township was improper because: a. It provided misleading information, specifically stating “Market Reason” for the change in taxes (when in fact the change in the taxation was due to the removal of the Qualified Agricultural Property Exemption); b. That it failed to provide a clear statement of reasons of why the exemption is being removed; see further MDT Form 1019, Section 6 and MCL 211.7ee; and c. That the removal of the exemption was in error, as the property still was used for agricultural purposes pursuant to MCL 211.7dd and MCL 324.3610. 4. Petitioner argued that a Notice of Assessment that is either false or misleading does not provide the proper notice as required in MCL 211.7ee, and that failure to provide proper notice: a. Invalidated the Qualified Agricultural Property Exemption; b. That the property qualifies for the exemption; and c. The defective notice constituted a qualified error that could be corrected by the December Board of Review. 5. On December 12, 2025, the Acme Township December Board of Review denied Petitioner’s review. Please see attached Exhibit 2. 6. On January 7, 2026, Petitioner timely appealed to this Honorable Tribunal. Please see attached Exhibit 3. 7. On January 14, 2026, this Honorable Tribunal administratively entered an Order of Dismissal. Please see attached Exhibit 4. 8. The Order of Dismissal cited the following: “Petitioner failed to protest the denial of the qualified agricultural exemption to Respondent's March Board of Review, as required by MCL 205.735a. See also MCL 211.7ee. As such, and inasmuch as the Tribunal has no equitable power to waive or otherwise disregard statutory filing requirements and deadlines, it has no authority to hear the appeal or grant the relief requested. See Sixarp, LLC v Byron Twp, _ Mich;
Page 5
Motion for Reconsideration Page 3 LAW AND ARGUMENT This Honorable Tribunal cites MCL 205.735a and MCL 211.7ee as the proper authority for requiring that disputing the exemption must be appealed to the March Board of Review for the Michigan Tax Tribunal to have proper jurisdiction. If the Petitioner was merely filing a late protest of the exemption of the property, we would agree with the Tribunal’s holding. However, the Petitioner’s appeal is that the Notice of Assessment itself was defective, by being false or misleading, and thus the Notice itself violated the Petitioner’s due process and therefore the removal of the exemption subsequently also violated the Petitioner's due process. This comes from the misleading language issued by the Acme Township on Section 6, Assessor Change Reason, which states that the only change is “Market Adjustment,” when in fact the Assessor had removed the Qualified Agricultural Property Exemption: SOA CARO THER. THIS IS NOT A TAX BILL L-4400 Notice of Assessment, Taxable Valuation, and Property Classification This form Is issued under the authority of PA. 208 of 1893, Sec. 211.24 (c) and Sec211.34c, 2s amended. This is a model
Page 6
Motio
These are text excerpts, not the complete document. Text recognition and reading order can contain errors. Check the PDF for complete wording, formatting, and context.
Order_of_Dismissal.2026-01-14_09-49-18.0000.pdfRead complete document text →
Read document text excerpt
Page 1
STATE OF MICHIGAN GRETCHEN WHITMER GOVERNOR DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS LANSING MARLON I. BROWN, DPA DIRECTOR MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL · 611 W. OTTAWA ST., LANSING, MI 48933 · 517-335-9760 PO BOX 30232, LANSING, MI 48909 · Other Carriers: 2407 N. GRAND RIVER AVE., LANSING, MI 48906 5555 Arnold, LLC, Petitioner, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION v MTT Docket No. 26-000030 Township Of Acme, Respondent. ORDER OF DISMISSAL The Tribunal has reviewed the file in the above-captioned case and finds that: Petitioner failed to protest the denial of the qualified agricultural exemption to Respondent’s March Board of Review, as required by MCL 205.735a. See also MCL 211.7ee. As such, and inasmuch as the Tribunal has no equitable power to waive or otherwise disregard statutory filing requirements and deadlines, it has no authority to hear the appeal or grant the relief requested. See Sixarp, LLC v Byron Twp, __Mich__; __NW3d__ (2025). 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 electronic service, and proof demonstrating that service must be submitted with the
Page 2
MTT Docket No. 26-000030 Page 2 of 6 motion. Responses to motions for reconsideration are prohibited and there are no oral arguments unless otherwise ordered by the Tribunal. Alternatively, you may file a claim of appeal with the Michigan Court of Appeals. If the claim is filed within 21 days of the entry of the final decision, it is an “appeal of right.” If 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. By:___________________________________ Patricia L. Halm, Tribunal Chair Entered: January 14, 2026 PROOF OF SERVICE I 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 provided by those parties, attorneys, or authorized representatives. By: Tribunal Clerk
Page 3
STATE OF MICHIGAN GRETCHEN WHITMER GOVERNOR DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS LANSING MARLON I. BROWN, DPA DIRECTOR MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL · 611 W. OTTAWA ST., LANSING, MI 48933 · 517-335-9760 PO BOX 30232, LANSING, MI 48909 · Other Carriers: 2407 N. GRAND RIVER AVE., LANSING, MI 48906 5555 Arnold, LLC, Petitioner, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION v MTT Docket No. 26-000030 Township Of Acme, Respondent. ORDER OF DISMISSAL The Tribunal has reviewed the file in the above-captioned case and finds that: Petitioner failed to protest the denial of the qualified agricultural exemption to Respondent’s March Board of Review, as required by MCL 205.735a. See also MCL 211.7ee. As such, and inasmuch as the Tribunal has no equitable power to waive or otherwise disregard statutory filing requirements and deadlines, it has no authority to hear the appeal or grant the relief requested. See Sixarp, LLC v Byron Twp, __Mich__; __NW3d__ (2025). 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 electronic service, and proof demonstrating that service must be submitted with the
Page 4
MTT Docket No. 26-000030 Page 4 of 6 motion. Responses to motions for reconsideration are prohibited and there are no oral arguments unless otherwise ordered by the Tribunal. Alternatively, you may file a claim of appeal with the Michigan Court of Appeals. If the claim is filed within 21 days of the entry of the final decision, it is an “appeal of right.” If 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
Page 5
ST
These are text excerpts, not the complete document. Text recognition and reading order can contain errors. Check the PDF for complete wording, formatting, and context.
02._Property_Tax_Appeal_Petition_Form_Principal_Residence_Qualified_Agricultural_Exemption.bf8c4207-14c0-4d70-8001-5c886174992e.pdfRead complete document text →
Read document text excerpt
Page 1
STATE OF MICHIGAN GRETCHEN WHITMER GOVERNOR DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS LANSING ORLENE HAWKS DIRECTOR PROPERTY TAX APPEAL PETITION FORM PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE EXEMPTION / QUALIFIED AGRICULTURAL EXEMPTION MOAHR DOCKET NO. Pursuant to Michigan Tax Tribunal Rule (TTR) 277(3), you MUST submit a copy of the notice giving rise to the appeal (e.g. Notice of Denial or Board of Review Decision) with this Small Claims Petition, if applicable. If you do not submit this document, you may be placed in default. Section 1: Petitioner’s Contact Information Filer Type: Individual First Name 5555 Arnold, LLC M.I. Last Name/Company Name 5555 Arnold, LLC Mailing Address (No., Street, P.O. Box or Rural Route) PO BOX 12 City or Town Williamsburg State Michigan ZIP Code 49690 Telephone Number 231-620-6020 Fax Number E-mail Address (do not enter unless you want MTT to send all correspondence via e-mail) mark@44northtc.com Section 2: Petitioner’s Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Contact Information First Name John M.I. Patrick Last Name Lynch Firm Name (if any) Lynch Law Address (No., Street, P.O. Box or Rural Route) 934 East Eighth Street City or Town Traverse City State Michigan ZIP Code 49686 Telephone Number 231-922-2690 Fax Number E-mail Address john@lynchlawtc.com Section 3: Subject Property Information Parcel Identification Number: 28-01-002-001-03 How many parcels are you appealing? 1 If you are appealing more than one parcel, are they contiguous or adjoining? If yes, use the attached multiple parcel form for information regarding any contiguous parcels. If no, you must file separate appeals for each non- contiguous or non-adjoining parcels or you will be defaulted. Property Address (No., Street, City, ST, ZIP) (If multiple, list first property’s address) 5720 BATES RD Williamsburg
Page 2
STATE OF MICHIGAN GRETCHEN WHITMER GOVERNOR DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS LANSING ORLENE HAWKS DIRECTOR Michigan 49690 Taxing Authority: Township Of Acme (GRAND TRAVERSE) County: Grand Traverse Classification of Property: Real Commercial Section 4: Check which of the following you are appealing Qualified Agricultural Exemption Section 5: Explain the Reason for this Appeal 1. Acme Township failed to provide adequate notice for removal of the QAPE. MCL 211.7ee (7) requires "notifying the owner in writing at the time required for providing a notice under section 24c." The Township sent two correspondences to the property owner: a request for the property owner to rescind their QAPE in October 2024, and 2025 March Treasury Form 1019 Notice of Assessment. Neither document provided: (a) clear notice that the exemption was being removed; (b) a statement of reasons for removal as required by Michigan Department of Treasury Form 1019, Section 6; or (c) notice of the appeal period on the same document. MCL 211.7ee. Providing inadequate notice is a violation of 211.7ee (7), the Michigan Treasury QAPE Guidelines, Mich Const Article I, Sec 2; Article X, Sec 2; and US Const, Am XIV. 2. Acme Township provided misleading information. Section 6 of the 2025 March Treasury Form 1019 Notice of Assessment attempted to remove the QAPE, however, Section 6 of form Assessor’s Change Reason stated only “Market Adjustment.” To date, the Township has provided no written reason for why the QAPE was being removed. A property owner could not have “reasonably calculated” with the notice provided that the Township was removing the QAPE. Providing misleading notice is a violation of 211.7ee (7), the Michigan Treasury QAPE Guidelines, Mich Const Article I, Sec 2; Article X, Sec 2; and US Const, Am XIV. 3. The inadequate/misleading notice constitutes either a clerical error or error regarding the taxable status of the property under MCL 211.53b, and is appealable by the December Board of Review of Acme Township. The December Board of Review had proper jurisdiction and their denial and decision should be reversed. See MCL 211.7ee(6). 4. Acme Township failed to legally remove the QAPE by May 1, 2025. Under MCL 211.7ee, the Township cannot remove the QAPE for the tax year of 2025. MCL 211.7ee; Michigan Treasury QAPE Guidelines. 5. As of May 1, 2025, the subject property was continuously devoted to agricultural use. "Agricultural use" under MCL 211.7dd and MCL 324.3610. The property qualifies for the QAPE. Petitioner respectfully requests the reinstatement of the QAPE for the tax year of 2025 for the property. Section 6: Jurisdictional Issues List the year(s) denied: 2025 Indicate who denied the exemption under appeal: Local Unit If you checked “other” above, explain: List the date the Principal Residence Exemption or Qualified Agricultural Exemption was denied: 12/11/2025 Fee Information A fee of $25.00 is required for the filing of this appeal unless you possess a Principal Residence Exemption of at least 50% at the time of the filing of this petition. Electronic Signature *Typing your name below will serve as your signature Petitioner or Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Signature: John P. Lynch, Esq. /s/
These are text excerpts, not the complete document. Text recognition and reading order can contain errors. Check the PDF for complete wording, formatting, and context.
SC_Notice_of_Docket_Number.2026-01-12_15-30-30.0000.pdfRead complete document text →
Read document text excerpt
Page 1
STATE OF MICHIGAN GRETCHEN WHITMER GOVERNOR DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS LANSING MARLON I. BROWN, DPA DIRECTOR MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL · 611 W. OTTAWA ST., LANSING, MI 48933 · 517-335-9760 PO BOX 30232, LANSING, MI 48909 · Other Carriers: 2407 N. GRAND RIVER AVE., LANSING, MI 48906 5555 Arnold, LLC, Petitioner, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION v MTT Docket No. 26-000030 Township Of Acme, 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 Tribunal’s 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.gov/taxtrib. 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 281. Further, an electronic copy of the petition can be reviewed by utilizing the Docket Lookup Search on the Tribunal’s website. By: __Tribunal Clerk_____ Entered: January 12, 2026 PROOF OF SERVICE I 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 provided by those parties, attorneys, or authorized representatives. By: Tribunal Clerk
Page 2
STATE OF MICHIGAN GRETCHEN WHITMER GOVERNOR DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS LANSING MARLON I. BROWN, DPA DIRECTOR MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL · 611 W. OTTAWA ST., LANSING, MI 48933 · 517-335-9760 PO BOX 30232, LANSING, MI 48909 · Other Carriers: 2407 N. GRAND RIVER AVE., LANSING, MI 48906 5555 Arnold, LLC, Petitioner, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION v MTT Docket No. 26-000030 Township Of Acme, 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 Tribunal’s 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.gov/taxtrib. 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 281. Further, an electronic copy of the petition can be reviewed by utilizing the Docket Lookup Search on the Tribunal’s website. By: __Tribunal Clerk_____ Entered: January 12, 2026 PROOF OF SERVICE I 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 provided by those parties, attorneys, or authorized representatives. By: Tribunal Clerk
These are text excerpts, not the complete document. Text recognition and reading order can contain errors. Check the PDF for complete wording, formatting, and context.
Attachment to Appeal Denial.pdfRead complete document text →
Read document text excerpt
Page 1
Michigan Department of Treasul 4031 (Rev. 09.22) i Assessment Year: 2025 July/December Board of Review Affidavit 12/11/2025 11:40 A Issued under authority of P.A. 206 of 1893. Filing is mandatory. Petition/Docket #: The authority for July/December board of review action is stated in the General Property Tax Act, MCL 211.53b. The July/December Board of Review can take action regarding qualified errors verified by the assessor (MCL 211.53b(1), (8)). The July/December Board of Review can also take action under MCL.211.53b regarding a poverty exemption for the current year under MCL 211.7u; a qualified agricultural property exemption under MCL 211.ee for the current year; which has been denied by the assessor; a qualified agricultural property exemption under MCL 211.ee that was not on the assessment roll for the current year and one prior year; or a qualified forest property exemption under MCL 211.7jj(1) that was not on the assessment roll for the current year and one prior year. In addition, other statutes, such as MCP 211.7b related to the disabled veterans exemption, and MCL 211.7ss related to the eligible development property exemption, provide authority for the July/December Board of Review to take action. Form 3128 (L-4035a) must be completed by the Board of Review and made a part of the Board of Review records whenever a change is made to an individual parcel of property which causes a change in Taxable Value. PART A: IDENTIFICATION Owner Name 5555 ARNOLD LLC Owner Street Address City State ZIP Code PO BOX 12 WILLIAMSBURG MI [49690 Parcel Number Property School District Property Classification 2801-002-001-03 TRAVERSE CITY SCHOOL DI 001 Property Street Address City State ZIP Code 5720 BATES RD WILLIAMSBURG MI 49690 PART B: ADJUSTMENTS Co i} Item or Taxing Authority Note or Millage Original Adjusted Difference ACME TOWNSHIP Assessed Value DBOR 2,831,700 2,831,700 0 Taxable Value 12/11/2025 1,969,142 1,969,142 0 P.R.E. 0.00 % 0.00 % 0.00 9, Property Class 201 School District 28010 Classification Ad Valorem Veteran Exemption None None TOTALS Reason for change (see instructions on page 2): | Poverty Exemption [Jauaiified Agricultural Exemption ] Disabled Veterans Exemption ™ Qualified Forest Exemption | Ee Poperty 1 Qualified Error Explanation: DECEMBER BOARD OF REVIEW DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO HEAR THE APPEAL FOR THE REMOVAL OF THE QUALIFIED AGRICULTURAL EXEMPTION THAT WAS GIVEN NOTICE ON THE ASSESSMENT PUANARE NOTICE PART C: CERTIFICATION, BOARD OF REVIEW MEMBERS We, the undersigned members of ACME TOWNSHIP Board of Review, swear of affirm the above information is, to the best of our knowledge, true. ’ Signdifte Da Signature Date NVI Nte I CALL] a Sig e) [VW Date Signature Date 2 "O° alps Signature Date Signature Date The Board of Review is required to file an affidavit within 30 days with the proper officials to have all affected official records corrected. If the qualified error results in an overpayment or underpayment, the rebate, including any interest paid, must be made to the taxpayer or the taxpayer must be notified and payment made within 30 days of the notice. (MCL 211.53b (1)) Distribute copies of this form to the property owner, the County Treasurer, the County Equalization Department, and the treasurers of all other affected taxing authorities. Retain a copy on file at the local unit.
Page 2
Michigan Department of Treasury 618 (Rev. 11-12) Petition to Board of Review L-4035 This form is issued under the authority of P.A. 206 of 1893, as amended. Filing is voluntary, however you may not appeal to the Michigan Tax Tribunal or the State Tax Commission unless you first protest to the Board of Review. TO BE COMPLETED BY OWNER OR OWNER'S AGENT Owner's Name (Please Print or Type) Petitioner's Name (If Other than Owner. Please Print or Type) 5555 Arnold, LLC Lynch Law Township or City . County Acme Township Grand Traverse County The undersigned protests the assessed value and/or the tentative taxable value and/or the property classification and/or the qualified agricultural property exemption of the following described property: Property Identified (Parcel code required. Property address & legal description optional) 1] 28-01-002-001-03 Protested Item [| | Assessed Value [| Tentative Taxable Value | | Classification [x] Qualified Agricultural P rty E: i 1. PROTEST OF ASSESSMENT raperty Exemption (Complete this section for a protest of assessed value and/or tentative taxable value) Assessed Amount Owner's Estimate of True Cash Value Tentative Taxable Value Year 2. PROTEST OF CLASSIFICATION (Complete this section for a request to change the classification. The Board of Review must make their decision regarding classification in accordance with Section 211.34c of the Michigan Compiled Laws. The Board of Review shall not be influenced by the effect that a particular classification has on that property's status as a homeowner's principal residence or qualified agricultural property.) Classification of property on this year's assessment roll Classification should be (check one of the following): ] Agricultural OJ Industrial J Timber Cutover ] Utility (Personal Property Only) [] commercial [| Residential [| Developmental 3. PROTEST OF EXEMPTION FOR QUALIFIED AGRICULTURAL PROPERTY (If the assessor has denied or changed the percentage of the exemption from the 18 mills of local school operating tax for qualified agricultural property, the owner may appeal this action to the March Board of Review. THE BOARD OF REVIEW HAS NO AUTHORITY TO CONSIDER OR ACT UPON THE EXEMPTION FROM THE 18 SCHOOL OPERATING MILLS FOR HOMEOWNER'S PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE PROPERTIES.) Percent qualified agricultural exemption granted by assessor (Enter 0 if exemption Percent qualified agricultural exemption requested by owner (Enter 100 if full
Page 3
Form
Page 4
LYN
These are text excerpts, not the complete document. Text recognition and reading order can contain errors. Check the PDF for complete wording, formatting, and context.
02._Property_Tax_Appeal_Petition_Form_Principal_Residence_Qualified_Agricultural_Exemption.bf8c4207-14c0-4d70-8001-5c886174992e.pdfRead complete document text →
Read document text excerpt
Page 1
STATE OF MICHIGAN GRETCHEN WHITMER GOVERNOR DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS LANSING ORLENE HAWKS DIRECTOR PROPERTY TAX APPEAL PETITION FORM PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE EXEMPTION / QUALIFIED AGRICULTURAL EXEMPTION MOAHR DOCKET NO. Pursuant to Michigan Tax Tribunal Rule (TTR) 277(3), you MUST submit a copy of the notice giving rise to the appeal (e.g. Notice of Denial or Board of Review Decision) with this Small Claims Petition, if applicable. If you do not submit this document, you may be placed in default. Section 1: Petitioner’s Contact Information Filer Type: Individual First Name 5555 Arnold, LLC M.I. Last Name/Company Name 5555 Arnold, LLC Mailing Address (No., Street, P.O. Box or Rural Route) PO BOX 12 City or Town Williamsburg State Michigan ZIP Code 49690 Telephone Number 231-620-6020 Fax Number E-mail Address (do not enter unless you want MTT to send all correspondence via e-mail) mark@44northtc.com Section 2: Petitioner’s Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Contact Information First Name John M.I. Patrick Last Name Lynch Firm Name (if any) Lynch Law Address (No., Street, P.O. Box or Rural Route) 934 East Eighth Street City or Town Traverse City State Michigan ZIP Code 49686 Telephone Number 231-922-2690 Fax Number E-mail Address john@lynchlawtc.com Section 3: Subject Property Information Parcel Identification Number: 28-01-002-001-03 How many parcels are you appealing? 1 If you are appealing more than one parcel, are they contiguous or adjoining? If yes, use the attached multiple parcel form for information regarding any contiguous parcels. If no, you must file separate appeals for each non- contiguous or non-adjoining parcels or you will be defaulted. Property Address (No., Street, City, ST, ZIP) (If multiple, list first property’s address) 5720 BATES RD Williamsburg
Page 2
STATE OF MICHIGAN GRETCHEN WHITMER GOVERNOR DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS LANSING ORLENE HAWKS DIRECTOR Michigan 49690 Taxing Authority: Township Of Acme (GRAND TRAVERSE) County: Grand Traverse Classification of Property: Real Commercial Section 4: Check which of the following you are appealing Qualified Agricultural Exemption Section 5: Explain the Reason for this Appeal 1. Acme Township failed to provide adequate notice for removal of the QAPE. MCL 211.7ee (7) requires "notifying the owner in writing at the time required for providing a notice under section 24c." The Township sent two correspondences to the property owner: a request for the property owner to rescind their QAPE in October 2024, and 2025 March Treasury Form 1019 Notice of Assessment. Neither document provided: (a) clear notice that the exemption was being removed; (b) a statement of reasons for removal as required by Michigan Department of Treasury Form 1019, Section 6; or (c) notice of the appeal period on the same document. MCL 211.7ee. Providing inadequate notice is a violation of 211.7ee (7), the Michigan Treasury QAPE Guidelines, Mich Const Article I, Sec 2; Article X, Sec 2; and US Const, Am XIV. 2. Acme Township provided misleading information. Section 6 of the 2025 March Treasury Form 1019 Notice of Assessment attempted to remove the QAPE, however, Section 6 of form Assessor’s Change Reason stated only “Market Adjustment.” To date, the Township has provided no written reason for why the QAPE was being removed. A property owner could not have “reasonably calculated” with the notice provided that the Township was removing the QAPE. Providing misleading notice is a violation of 211.7ee (7), the Michigan Treasury QAPE Guidelines, Mich Const Article I, Sec 2; Article X, Sec 2; and US Const, Am XIV. 3. The inadequate/misleading notice constitutes either a clerical error or error regarding the taxable status of the property under MCL 211.53b, and is appealable by the December Board of Review of Acme Township. The December Board of Review had proper jurisdiction and their denial and decision should be reversed. See MCL 211.7ee(6). 4. Acme Township failed to legally remove the QAPE by May 1, 2025. Under MCL 211.7ee, the Township cannot remove the QAPE for the tax year of 2025. MCL 211.7ee; Michigan Treasury QAPE Guidelines. 5. As of May 1, 2025, the subject property was continuously devoted to agricultural use. "Agricultural use" under MCL 211.7dd and MCL 324.3610. The property qualifies for the QAPE. Petitioner respectfully requests the reinstatement of the QAPE for the tax year of 2025 for the property. Section 6: Jurisdictional Issues List the year(s) denied: 2025 Indicate who denied the exemption under appeal: Local Unit If you checked “other” above, explain: List the date the Principal Residence Exemption or Qualified Agricultural Exemption was denied: 12/11/2025 Fee Information A fee of $25.00 is required for the filing of this appeal unless you possess a Principal Residence Exemption of at least 50% at the time of the filing of this petition. Electronic Signature *Typing your name below will serve as your signature Petitioner or Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Signature: John P. Lynch, Esq. /s/
These are text excerpts, not the complete document. Text recognition and reading order can contain errors. Check the PDF for complete wording, formatting, and context.