Berkley Ventures LLC, Petitioner Vs. City Of Berkley, Respondent

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

Berkley Ventures LLC, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 

 ENTIRE TRIBUNAL

v 

 MTT Docket No. 25-002750

City Of Berkley,

Respondent.

ORDER GRANTING JOINT MOTION TO WITHDRAW

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

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

have filed a Joint Motion to Withdraw the appeal. Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that the parties’ Joint Motion to Withdraw is GRANTED. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED. 

This order resolves all pending issues and closes the case.

By:_____________________________________

Patricia L. Halm, Tribunal Chair

Entered: February 3, 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

Berkley Ventures LLC, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 

 ENTIRE TRIBUNAL

v 

 MTT Docket No. 25-002750

City Of Berkley,

Respondent.

ORDER GRANTING JOINT MOTION TO WITHDRAW

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

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

have filed a Joint Motion to Withdraw the appeal. Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that the parties’ Joint Motion to Withdraw is GRANTED. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED. 

This order resolves all pending issues and closes the case.

By:_____________________________________

Patricia L. Halm, Tribunal Chair

Entered: February 3, 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

Berkley Ventures LLC, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 

 ENTIRE TRIBUNAL

v 

 MTT Docket No. 25-002750

City Of Berkley,

Respondent.

ORDER GRANTING JOINT MOTION TO WITHDRAW

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

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

have filed a Joint Motion to Withdraw the appeal. Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that the parties’ Joint Motion to Withdraw is GRANTED. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED. 

This order resolves all pending issues and closes the case.

By:_____________________________________

Patricia L. Halm, Tribunal Chair

Entered: February 3, 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.

Page 1

RECEIVED 

FEB 6 8 2026 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Berkley Ventures LLC 

Petitioner, 

PID: 

04-25-07-383-037 

v. 

DOCKET #: 

25-002750 

City of Berkley, 

Respondent. 

STIPULATION TO WITHDRAW PETITION 

Petitioner, Berkley Ventures, LLC, and Respondent, City of Berkley, through their respective 

authorized representatives, hereby stipulate and agree as follows: 

1. 

Withdrawal of Petition. 

Petitioner voluntarily withdraws the above-captioned propetty tax appeal filed with the 

Michigan Tax Tribunal concerning the assessment of the property identified hereinabove, 

2. 

No Further Tribunal Action Needed. 

The patties agree that this withdrawal resolves all issues raised in this appeal and that no 

further action by the Tribunal is required, except for entty of an order acknowledging the

Page 2

valuation, classification, exemption, or any other substantive issue related to the subject 

property. 

4. 

Costs and Fees. 

Each party shall be responsible for its own costs, fees, and expenses incurred in 

connection with this appeal, unless otherwise stated below. 

5. 

Authority to Sign. 

The individuals executing this stipulation represent that they are authorized to do so on 

behalf of their respective parties. 

Signatures 

PETITIONER 

Name: Stephen 

Polter (P72591) 

Title/Capacify- 

Counsel for ei 

Signature: 

NAN 

I~ 

Date: Jan 30, 2026 

RESPONDENT 

Name: Aaron Powe, Ass 

(Seth O’Loughlin, Counsel — Hallahan & Assoc.) 

Title/Capacity pig 

eontn 

Signature: 

+ 

Date: 

=) - 28-6

Page 3

sabe alll, 

: 

EXPRESS PROPERTY 

TAX APPEALS LLC 

A division of Polter Law Group 

2600 W Big Beaver 

| Ste L100 

Troy, #1 48024 

METROPLEX MI 48 0 

ESTERS 

US

0

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.

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

NOTICE OF OCTOBER 16 - 30, 2026 PREHEARING GENERAL CALL AND ORDER 

OF PROCEDURE

Berkley Ventures LLC,

Petitioner,

v

 

 

City Of Berkley,

Respondent.

 MTT Docket No. 25-002750

Please be advised that 25-002750 has been placed on a two-week Prehearing General 

Call commencing October 16, 2026. Unless ordered otherwise, parties will be notified 

at least 28 days before they are scheduled to appear. Scheduling will not necessarily 

occur in the order in which the cases are listed below.

Parties are required to submit a valuation disclosure or written notification that no 

valuation disclosure is required by the dates indicated herein. A “valuation disclosure” 

is defined as documentary or other tangible evidence in a property tax proceeding that a 

party relies upon in support of the party’s contention as to the true cash value of the 

subject property or any portion thereof and contains the party’s value conclusion and 

data, valuation methodology, analysis or reasoning. See TTR 203 and TTR 241.

Users who file documents with the Tribunal are advised that filed documents are 

public records and will appear for public viewing on the Tribunal’s Tax Docket 

Lookup. If a user wishes to file a document for consideration by the Tribunal and 

prevent its publication on the Tax Docket Lookup, the user MUST file a Motion for 

Protective Order under MCR 2.302(C)(8). If a Protective Order is issued, documents 

covered by the order will not be published. Documents filed prior to the issuance of a 

Protective Order will be published.

In accordance with MCR 1.109(D)(9) and TTR 209, the responsibility for excluding or 

redacting personal identifying information (PII) from all documents filed with or offered to 

the Tribunal rests solely with the parties and their attorneys. The Tribunal is not 

responsible for or required to review, redact, or screen documents at the time of filing 

for PII whether filed electronically or on paper. A party, representative, or interested 

person (i.e. third party not part of an appeal) may request that the Tribunal redact PII 

contained in a previously filed document by submitting a Request for Redactions. The 

Request for Redactions form is available on the Entire Tribunal and Small Claims pages 

of the Tribunal’s website. 

Please refer to the Tribunal’s FAQs and Glossary of Terms pages on the Tribunal’s 

website for more information.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-002750

Page 2 of 3

IT IS ORDERED that the parties shall:

a. If no valuation disclosure is required, notify the Tribunal and the opposing parties 

in writing within 21 days of entry of this order that no valuation disclosure is being 

filed. The notice shall indicate the reason or reasons why no valuation disclosure 

is required (i.e., exemption claim, etc.).

b. If a valuation disclosure is required, file and exchange their valuation disclosures 

by June 22, 2026. Valuation disclosures will not be admitted into evidence 

unless disclosed and furnished in accordance with this order (even though 

admissible) except upon a finding of good cause by the Tribunal.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall file and exchange their Prehearing 

Statements by June 22, 2026. Witnesses, with the exception of rebuttal witnesses, will 

not be allowed to testify unless disclosed in the Prehearing Statement and the 

Prehearing Statement is furnished in accordance with this order except upon a finding 

of good cause by the Tribunal. Failure to file the Prehearing Statement may result in 

holding a party or parties in default. See TTR 237. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that “Pre-Valuation Disclosure” discovery is CLOSED on 

June 22, 2026, which means all discovery has been requested, all Motions to Compel 

have been filed, and all requested or ordered discovery has been exchanged by that 

date. Discovery relative to the valuation disclosure prepared for purposes of litigating 

this case or the valuation expert that prepared that valuation disclosure is not permitted 

during “Pre-Valuation Disclosure” discovery.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that “Post-Valuation Disclosure” discovery is CLOSED on 

October 16, 2026, which means all discovery has been requested, all Motions to 

Compel have been filed, and all requested or ordered discovery has been exchanged 

by that date. “Post-Valuation Disclosure” discovery is limited to the opposing party’s 

valuation disclosure, the opposing party’s valuation expert, and the witnesses identified 

on the opposing party’s Prehearing Statement.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if this case is not scheduled for a date certain 

prehearing conference during the time frame indicated it may be scheduled for a date 

certain prehearing conference at any time subsequent to the completion date for this 

Prehearing General Call. Parties will, however, be notified in writing approximately one 

week before they are scheduled to appear. 

By:_____________________________________

Patricia L. Halm, Tribunal Chair

Entered: November 17, 2025

Page 3

MTT Docket No. 25-002750

Page 3 of 3

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

Page 4

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.

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 

 

______________________, 

 

 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Petitioner, 

 

v 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MTT Docket No. _____________ 

 

______________________, 

Respondent. 

 

ENTIRE TRIBUNAL PROPERTY TAX ANSWER 

 

1. 

___Admit ___Deny. If denied, state the parcel number for the property identified 

on the Entire Tribunal Property Tax Petition for the tax year or years at issue: 

________________________________________________________________ 

(If more than one parcel is at issue, attach a completed Multiple Parcel Answer 

Form addressing all other parcels at issue.) 

 

2. 

___Admit ____Deny. If denied, the property identified on the Entire Tribunal 

Property Tax Petition is ___ real ___ personal. 

 

3. 

___Admit ___Deny. If denied, identify the contiguous and non-contiguous 

parcels by parcel number (attach additional page if necessary): 

 

4. 

___Admit ___Deny. If denied, identify the parcel or parcels of personal property 

that are not located on a parcel of real property under appeal by parcel number 

(attach additional page if necessary): 

 

5. 

___Admit ___Deny. 

 

a. If denied, state when the personal property statements were filed, if at all: 

______________________________________________________________ 

b. On what date did the March Board of Review commence: 

______________________________________________________________ 

 

6. 

___Admit ___Deny. If denied, state the classification of the property identified 

on the Entire Tribunal Property Tax Petition for the tax year or years at issue: 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

 

 

 

Berkley Ventures LLC

25-002750

City Of Berkley

X

X

X

N/A

N/A

N/A

Page 2

MTT Docket No. ______________ 

Page 2 of 4 

 

7. 

___Admit ___Deny. If denied, list the separate facts upon which Respondent 

relies in support of the denial (attach additional page if necessary): 

 

 

8. 

___Admit ___Deny ___Neither Admit Nor Deny. If denied, list the separate 

facts upon which Respondent relies in support of the denial (attach additional 

page if necessary): 

 

 

9. 

___Admit ___Deny ___Neither Admit Nor Deny. If denied, state the facts upon 

which Respondent relies in support of the denial (attach additional page if 

necessary): 

 

 

10. 

___Admit ___Deny. If denied, in what County are the property or properties 

located in and what is the address of the property or properties: 

 

 

11. 

___Admit ___Deny. If denied, what is the applicable local governmental unit: 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

12. 

___Admit ___Deny ___Neither Admit Nor Deny. If denied, list the separate facts 

upon which Respondent relies in support of the denial (attach additional page if 

necessary): 

 

 

13. 

If the property’s taxable value is at issue, was there an addition or loss for 

purposes of establishing the property’s taxable value for the tax year or years at 

issue? ___Yes ___No. 

 

25-002750

N/A

N/A

N/A

X

To clarify, property is located in Oakland County with an address of 3628 12 

Mile Road, Berkley, Michigan, 48072.

X

X

 X

Page 3

MTT Docket No. ______________ 

Page 3 of 4 

 

14. 

___Admit ___Deny ___Neither Admit Nor Deny. If denied, list the separate 

facts upon which Respondent relies in support of the denial (attach additional 

page if necessary): 

 

 

15. 

___Admit ___Deny ___Neither Admit Nor Deny. If denied, list the separate 

facts upon which Respondent relies in support of the denial (attach additional 

page if necessary): 

 

 

16. 

The values for the property identified above as established by Respondent’s 

Board of Review are: 

 

Tax Year

True Cash Value

Assessed Value

Taxable Value

 

17. 

Respondent contends that the values for the property identified above are: 

 

Tax Year

True Cash Value

State Equalized Value

Taxable Value

 

18. 

The values in dispute for the property identified above are: 

 

Tax Year

True Cash Value

State Equalized Value

Taxable Value

 

 

 

 

25-002750

X

N/A

2025

1,903,320

951,660

656,830

2025

1,903,320

951,660

656,830

2025

0

0

0

Page 4

MTT Docket No. ______________ 

Page 4 of 4 

 

19. 

___Admit ___Deny ___Neither Admit Nor Deny. If denied, list the separate 

facts upon which Respondent relies in support of the denial (attach additional 

page if necessary): 

 

 

20. 

___Admit ___Deny ___Neither Admit Nor Deny. If denied, list the separate 

facts upon which Respondent relies in support of the denial (attach additional 

page if necessary): 

 

 

21. 

List any separate and specific facts upon which Respondent relies to support 

every ground on which Respondent relies and also has the burden of proof 

(attach additional page if necessary): 

 

 

22. 

List affirmative defenses and the separate and specific facts upon which 

Respondent relies in support of those affirmative defenses (attach additional 

page if necessary): 

 

 

Signature of Respondent’s Authorized Representative or, if none, Respondent: 

______________________________________________________________________ 

 

Printed Name of Respondent’s Authorized Representative or, if none, Respondent: 

______________________________________________________________________ 

 

Email Address:

Page 5

PROOF OF SERVICE 

 

 

 

The undersigned, being

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.

Page 1

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

ORLENE HAWKS

DIRECTOR

Entire Tribunal Case Information Sheet - Respondent

MOAHR DOCKET NO. 25-002750

Section 1: Respondent’s Contact Information

Filer Type: Local Unit of Government

City Of Berkley (OAKLAND)

Local Unit of Government/First Name

M.I.

Last Name

Home Address (No., Street, P.O. Box or Rural Route)

City or Town

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

Telephone Number

Fax Number

E-mail Address (do not enter unless you want MTT to send all correspondence via e-mail)

Section 2: Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Contact Information

First Name

Aaron P

M.I.

Last Name

Powers

Firm Name (if any)

Address (No., Street, P.O. Box or Rural Route)

38110 Executive Dr.

STE 200

City or Town

Westland

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

48185

Telephone Number

734-331-3980

Fax Number

E-mail Address (do not enter unless you want MTT to send all correspondence via e-mail)

MTTappeals@wcaassessing.com

Electronic Signature *Typing your name below will serve as your signature

Respondent or Authorized Attorney/Representative’s Signature: 

Aaron P. Powers

/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.

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 

 

______________________, 

 

 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Petitioner, 

 

v 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MTT Docket No. _____________ 

 

______________________, 

Respondent. 

 

ENTIRE TRIBUNAL PROPERTY TAX ANSWER 

 

1. 

___Admit ___Deny. If denied, state the parcel number for the property identified 

on the Entire Tribunal Property Tax Petition for the tax year or years at issue: 

________________________________________________________________ 

(If more than one parcel is at issue, attach a completed Multiple Parcel Answer 

Form addressing all other parcels at issue.) 

 

2. 

___Admit ____Deny. If denied, the property identified on the Entire Tribunal 

Property Tax Petition is ___ real ___ personal. 

 

3. 

___Admit ___Deny. If denied, identify the contiguous and non-contiguous 

parcels by parcel number (attach additional page if necessary): 

 

4. 

___Admit ___Deny. If denied, identify the parcel or parcels of personal property 

that are not located on a parcel of real property under appeal by parcel number 

(attach additional page if necessary): 

 

5. 

___Admit ___Deny. 

 

a. If denied, state when the personal property statements were filed, if at all: 

______________________________________________________________ 

b. On what date did the March Board of Review commence: 

______________________________________________________________ 

 

6. 

___Admit ___Deny. If denied, state the classification of the property identified 

on the Entire Tribunal Property Tax Petition for the tax year or years at issue: 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

 

 

 

Berkley Ventures LLC

25-002750

City Of Berkley

X

X

X

N/A

N/A

N/A

Page 2

MTT Docket No. ______________ 

Page 2 of 4 

 

7. 

___Admit ___Deny. If denied, list the separate facts upon which Respondent 

relies in support of the denial (attach additional page if necessary): 

 

 

8. 

___Admit ___Deny ___Neither Admit Nor Deny. If denied, list the separate 

facts upon which Respondent relies in support of the denial (attach additional 

page if necessary): 

 

 

9. 

___Admit ___Deny ___Neither Admit Nor Deny. If denied, state the facts upon 

which Respondent relies in support of the denial (attach additional page if 

necessary): 

 

 

10. 

___Admit ___Deny. If denied, in what County are the property or properties 

located in and what is the address of the property or properties: 

 

 

11. 

___Admit ___Deny. If denied, what is the applicable local governmental unit: 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

12. 

___Admit ___Deny ___Neither Admit Nor Deny. If denied, list the separate facts 

upon which Respondent relies in support of the denial (attach additional page if 

necessary): 

 

 

13. 

If the property’s taxable value is at issue, was there an addition or loss for 

purposes of establishing the property’s taxable value for the tax year or years at 

issue? ___Yes ___No. 

 

25-002750

N/A

N/A

N/A

X

To clarify, property is located in Oakland County with an address of 3628 12 

Mile Road, Berkley, Michigan, 48072.

X

X

 X

Page 3

MTT Docket No. ______________ 

Page 3 of 4 

 

14. 

___Admit ___Deny ___Neither Admit Nor Deny. If denied, list the separate 

facts upon which Respondent relies in support of the denial (attach additional 

page if necessary): 

 

 

15. 

___Admit ___Deny ___Neither Admit Nor Deny. If denied, list the separate 

facts upon which Respondent relies in support of the denial (attach additional 

page if necessary): 

 

 

16. 

The values for the property identified above as established by Respondent’s 

Board of Review are: 

 

Tax Year

True Cash Value

Assessed Value

Taxable Value

 

17. 

Respondent contends that the values for the property identified above are: 

 

Tax Year

True Cash Value

State Equalized Value

Taxable Value

 

18. 

The values in dispute for the property identified above are: 

 

Tax Year

True Cash Value

State Equalized Value

Taxable Value

 

 

 

 

25-002750

X

N/A

2025

1,903,320

951,660

656,830

2025

1,903,320

951,660

656,830

2025

0

0

0

Page 4

MTT Docket No. ______________ 

Page 4 of 4 

 

19. 

___Admit ___Deny ___Neither Admit Nor Deny. If denied, list the separate 

facts upon which Respondent relies in support of the denial (attach additional 

page if necessary): 

 

 

20. 

___Admit ___Deny ___Neither Admit Nor Deny. If denied, list the separate 

facts upon which Respondent relies in support of the denial (attach additional 

page if necessary): 

 

 

21. 

List any separate and specific facts upon which Respondent relies to support 

every ground on which Respondent relies and also has the burden of proof 

(attach additional page if necessary): 

 

 

22. 

List affirmative defenses and the separate and specific facts upon which 

Respondent relies in support of those affirmative defenses (attach additional 

page if necessary): 

 

 

Signature of Respondent’s Authorized Representative or, if none, Respondent: 

______________________________________________________________________ 

 

Printed Name of Respondent’s Authorized Representative or, if none, Respondent: 

______________________________________________________________________ 

 

Email Address:

Page 5

PROOF OF SERVICE 

 

 

 

The undersigned, being

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.

Page 1

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

ORLENE HAWKS

DIRECTOR

Entire Tribunal Case Information Sheet - Respondent

MOAHR DOCKET NO. 25-002750

Section 1: Respondent’s Contact Information

Filer Type: Local Unit of Government

City Of Berkley (OAKLAND)

Local Unit of Government/First Name

M.I.

Last Name

Home Address (No., Street, P.O. Box or Rural Route)

City or Town

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

Telephone Number

Fax Number

E-mail Address (do not enter unless you want MTT to send all correspondence via e-mail)

Section 2: Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Contact Information

First Name

Aaron P

M.I.

Last Name

Powers

Firm Name (if any)

Address (No., Street, P.O. Box or Rural Route)

38110 Executive Dr.

STE 200

City or Town

Westland

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

48185

Telephone Number

734-331-3980

Fax Number

E-mail Address (do not enter unless you want MTT to send all correspondence via e-mail)

MTTappeals@wcaassessing.com

Electronic Signature *Typing your name below will serve as your signature

Respondent or Authorized Attorney/Representative’s Signature: 

Aaron P. Powers

/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.

Page 1

RECEIVED 

AUG 2 6 2025 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON |. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

BOE) VsnhirgerLLC 

; 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Petitioner(s) 

v 

MTT Docket No.25-002750 

City of Berkley 

, 

Respondent(s) 

PROOF OF SERVICE FOR PROPERTY TAX PETITION 

*To be filed after the Tribunal issues the Notice of Docket Number* 

Stephen Polter 

states that on August 21 

he/she 

[Name of person serving/mailing petition] 

[date of service] 

served a copy of the Petition relative to the above-captioned matter upon: 

[Provide name and address of the following entities] 

1. Assessor (via certified mail): 

3338 Coolidge Hwy, Berkley, Ml 48072 

2. 

City Clerk or Township Supervisor/Clerk (via certified mail): 

3338 Coolidge Hwy, Berkley, MI 48072 

3. 

County Equalization Director (via first class mail or personal service): 

250 Elizabeth Lake Rd # 1000W, Pontiac, MI 48341 

4. 

County Clerk (via first class mail or personal service): 

1200 N Telegraph Building #12E, Pontiac, MI 48341 

5. 

Secretary of the local school board (via first class mail or personal service): 

14501 Talbot 

Oak Park, MI 48237 

6. 

State Treasurer (via first class mail):

Page 2

Te X

EDTA 

RO 

: 

: 

EXPRESS PROPERTY TAX ARPEALS LL 

§ 

USposToEM 

© 

A division of Polter Law Group 

06350002268383 

FROM 48084 is

2600 W Big Beaver | Ste L100 

| 

Troy, MI'48084 

~ oe MTT 

OR 30232 

Lows 

ing Mz 4304

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.

Page 1

RECEIVED 

Loman, 

JUN 02 2025 

5 

1 

Q 

I 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

ames 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

TANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Berkley Venture LLC 

; 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Petitioner(s) 

v 

MTT Docket No. 

City of Berkley 

, 

Respondent(s) 

ENTIRE TRIBUNAL PROPERTY TAX PETITION 

1. 

Property Parcel No: 04-25-07-383-037 

(If more than one parcel is at issue, attach a completed Multiple Parcel Petition 

Form addressing all other parcels at issue.) 

2. 

The property identified above is 

x 

real ___ personal. 

3. 

If more than one parcel of real property is under appeal, are the properties 

contiguous? ___ Yes ___ No. 

(If no, separate Petitions are required for each non- 

contiguous parcel.) 

4. 

Are all of the parcels of personal property located on a parcel of real property 

under appeal? ___Yes __ No. 

(If no, separate Petitions are required for each 

parcel of personal property not located on a parcel of real property under 

appeal.) 

5. 

If parcels of personal property are under appeal, when were the personal 

property statements filed by parcel number (attach additional page if necessary): 

6. 

The property identified above is classified as 201 Comm

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 

Page 2 of 4 

8. 

10. 

11. 

12. 

13. 

If a protest was required and no protest was made, list the separate and specific 

facts upon which Petitioner relies to invoke the Tribunal’s authority over the 

assessment or assessments at issue (attach additional page if necessary): 

If the appeal was not submitted by the deadline for the filing of an appeal for the 

classification or classifications of the properties at issue (i.e., May 31 or July 31 

of the tax year involved), list the separate and specific facts upon which 

Petitioner relies to invoke the Tribunal’s authority over the assessment or 

assessments at issue (attach additional page if necessary): 

The property or properties at issue are located in Ingham Cte bad 

County. The 

property or properties’ address is: 

J 

3628 12 Mi Rd 

The assessment or assessments at issue were established by the (applicable 

local governmental unit): City of Berkley 

Petitioner's legal residence or principal office address is: 

32825 NW Hwy. 

FH, MI 48334 

This appeal involves issues relating to the (check all that are applicable): 

Xx 

the property or properties’ true cash and taxable values 

the property or properties’ taxable value only 

If the property or properties’ taxable value is at issue, is there a 

dispute as to the value of an addition orloss? Yes __ No 

uniformity of the property or properties’ assessment

Page 3

MTT Docket No. 

Page 3 of 4 

15. 

If more than the current tax year is being appealed, list the separate and specific 

facts upon which Petitioner relies to invoke the Tribunal's authority over the prior 

tax year or years (attach additional page if necessary): 

16. 

The values for the property identified above as established by Respondent's 

Board of Review are: 

Tax Year 

True Cash Value 

Assessed Value 

Taxable Value 

2025 

1,903,320 

951,660 

656,830 

17. 

Petitioner contends that the values for the property identified above are: 

Tax Year 

True Cash Value 

State Equalized Value 

Taxable Value 

2025 

1,000,000 

500,000 

500,000 

18. 

The values in dispute for the property identified above are: 

Tax Year 

True Cash Value 

State Equalized Value 

Taxable Value 

2025 

903,320 

451,660 

156,830 

19. 

Petitioner requests the following relief (attach additional page if necessary): 

Reduction of Assessed and Taxable to fall more in line with comps, market, income, 

condition.

Page 4

MTT Docket No. 

Page 4 of 4 

Signature of Petitigner's Authorized Representative or, if none, Petitioner: 

$huthorized Representative or, if none, Petitioner: 

Stephen Polter 

Email Address: spolter@polterlaw.com 

Mailing Address: 

2600 W Big Beaver, Ste L100, Troy, MI 48084 

Telephone Number: 248-213-6800 

Date: May 25, 2025

Page 5

May 27, 2025 

RECEIVED 

MAY: 80.2025 

= [=) 

i FAN 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

EXPRESS PROPERTY TAX APPEALS LLL 

A division of Polter Law Group 

2nd Floor Michigan Tax Tribunal 

2407 N. Grand River Avenue 

Lansing, Michigan 48906 

Re: 

Multiple 2025 PTA 

To whom it may concern, 

This mailing contains sixty-three (“63”) commetcial property tax appeals/petitions and one 

(“1”) multi (2) contiguous residential appeal / petition, along with the requisite filing fees, as follows: 

SXM LLC v Hadley Twp. (multi — 2) Res., along with 2 checks (#1345-46) for 

$125 ea. 

CCCU v Muskegon /Fruitpott, along with 2 checks; one (#1320) for $250, one 

(#1393) for $150 (totaling $400). 

CCCU v Commetce Twp., along with 2 checks; one (#1321) for $250, one (#1391) 

for $150 (totaling $400). 

CCCU v Notton Shores, along with 1 check (#1319) in the amount of $250. 

TOCU v Sandusky, along with 1 check (#1317) in the amount of $250. 

TOCU v Owosso, along with 1 check (#1318) in the amount of $250. 

W Investors v FH, along with 1 check (#1378) in the amount of $400. 

Rite Aid Corp (Lewis) v Pinckney, along with 1 check (#1336) in the amount of 

$400. 

Watten Manot v Warten, along with 2 checks; one (#1311) for $600, one (#1390) 

for $25 (totaling $625 — contiguous multi (2)). 

2Changs v N'Ville, along with 2 checks; one (#1350) for $250, one (#1389) for 

$150 (totaling $400). 

5016 Greenfield v Richfield, along with 1 check (#1330) in the amount of $250. 

Springfield v. Hampton, along with 1 check

Page 6

LJ

Page 7

JRV

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.

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

Berkley Ventures LLC, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

v

MTT Docket No.: 25-002750

City Of Berkley, 

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), “[t]he 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: July 21, 2025

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.

Page 1

RECEIVED 

Loman, 

JUN 02 2025 

5 

1 

Q 

I 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

ames 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

TANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Berkley Venture LLC 

; 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Petitioner(s) 

v 

MTT Docket No. 

City of Berkley 

, 

Respondent(s) 

ENTIRE TRIBUNAL PROPERTY TAX PETITION 

1. 

Property Parcel No: 04-25-07-383-037 

(If more than one parcel is at issue, attach a completed Multiple Parcel Petition 

Form addressing all other parcels at issue.) 

2. 

The property identified above is 

x 

real ___ personal. 

3. 

If more than one parcel of real property is under appeal, are the properties 

contiguous? ___ Yes ___ No. 

(If no, separate Petitions are required for each non- 

contiguous parcel.) 

4. 

Are all of the parcels of personal property located on a parcel of real property 

under appeal? ___Yes __ No. 

(If no, separate Petitions are required for each 

parcel of personal property not located on a parcel of real property under 

appeal.) 

5. 

If parcels of personal property are under appeal, when were the personal 

property statements filed by parcel number (attach additional page if necessary): 

6. 

The property identified above is classified as 201 Comm

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 

Page 2 of 4 

8. 

10. 

11. 

12. 

13. 

If a protest was required and no protest was made, list the separate and specific 

facts upon which Petitioner relies to invoke the Tribunal’s authority over the 

assessment or assessments at issue (attach additional page if necessary): 

If the appeal was not submitted by the deadline for the filing of an appeal for the 

classification or classifications of the properties at issue (i.e., May 31 or July 31 

of the tax year involved), list the separate and specific facts upon which 

Petitioner relies to invoke the Tribunal’s authority over the assessment or 

assessments at issue (attach additional page if necessary): 

The property or properties at issue are located in Ingham Cte bad 

County. The 

property or properties’ address is: 

J 

3628 12 Mi Rd 

The assessment or assessments at issue were established by the (applicable 

local governmental unit): City of Berkley 

Petitioner's legal residence or principal office address is: 

32825 NW Hwy. 

FH, MI 48334 

This appeal involves issues relating to the (check all that are applicable): 

Xx 

the property or properties’ true cash and taxable values 

the property or properties’ taxable value only 

If the property or properties’ taxable value is at issue, is there a 

dispute as to the value of an addition orloss? Yes __ No 

uniformity of the property or properties’ assessment

Page 3

MTT Docket No. 

Page 3 of 4 

15. 

If more than the current tax year is being appealed, list the separate and specific 

facts upon which Petitioner relies to invoke the Tribunal's authority over the prior 

tax year or years (attach additional page if necessary): 

16. 

The values for the property identified above as established by Respondent's 

Board of Review are: 

Tax Year 

True Cash Value 

Assessed Value 

Taxable Value 

2025 

1,903,320 

951,660 

656,830 

17. 

Petitioner contends that the values for the property identified above are: 

Tax Year 

True Cash Value 

State Equalized Value 

Taxable Value 

2025 

1,000,000 

500,000 

500,000 

18. 

The values in dispute for the property identified above are: 

Tax Year 

True Cash Value 

State Equalized Value 

Taxable Value 

2025 

903,320 

451,660 

156,830 

19. 

Petitioner requests the following relief (attach additional page if necessary): 

Reduction of Assessed and Taxable to fall more in line with comps, market, income, 

condition.

Page 4

MTT Docket No. 

Page 4 of 4 

Signature of Petitigner's Authorized Representative or, if none, Petitioner: 

$huthorized Representative or, if none, Petitioner: 

Stephen Polter 

Email Address: spolter@polterlaw.com 

Mailing Address: 

2600 W Big Beaver, Ste L100, Troy, MI 48084 

Telephone Number: 248-213-6800 

Date: May 25, 2025

Page 5

May 27, 2025 

RECEIVED 

MAY: 80.2025 

= [=) 

i FAN 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

EXPRESS PROPERTY TAX APPEALS LLL 

A division of Polter Law Group 

2nd Floor Michigan Tax Tribunal 

2407 N. Grand River Avenue 

Lansing, Michigan 48906 

Re: 

Multiple 2025 PTA 

To whom it may concern, 

This mailing contains sixty-three (“63”) commetcial property tax appeals/petitions and one 

(“1”) multi (2) contiguous residential appeal / petition, along with the requisite filing fees, as follows: 

SXM LLC v Hadley Twp. (multi — 2) Res., along with 2 checks (#1345-46) for 

$125 ea. 

CCCU v Muskegon /Fruitpott, along with 2 checks; one (#1320) for $250, one 

(#1393) for $150 (totaling $400). 

CCCU v Commetce Twp., along with 2 checks; one (#1321) for $250, one (#1391) 

for $150 (totaling $400). 

CCCU v Notton Shores, along with 1 check (#1319) in the amount of $250. 

TOCU v Sandusky, along with 1 check (#1317) in the amount of $250. 

TOCU v Owosso, along with 1 check (#1318) in the amount of $250. 

W Investors v FH, along with 1 check (#1378) in the amount of $400. 

Rite Aid Corp (Lewis) v Pinckney, along with 1 check (#1336) in the amount of 

$400. 

Watten Manot v Warten, along with 2 checks; one (#1311) for $600, one (#1390) 

for $25 (totaling $625 — contiguous multi (2)). 

2Changs v N'Ville, along with 2 checks; one (#1350) for $250, one (#1389) for 

$150 (totaling $400). 

5016 Greenfield v Richfield, along with 1 check (#1330) in the amount of $250. 

Springfield v. Hampton, along with 1 check

Page 6

LJ

Page 7

JRV

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.