Carolyn Sue Harris Petitioner V

Page 1

William and Carolyn Sue Harris

67500 County Road 657

Lawton, MI 49065

269-720-9538

September 26, 2026

Porter Township Assessor

Krys Myers

88040 M-40 Hwy

Lawton, MI 49065

assessor@portertwpvbco.gov

Formal request to opt out of proposed Bankson Lake Sewer District

Property Address

80911 County Road 652

Lawton, MI 49065

Parcel Id number 80-16-155-004-00

Dear Krys,

My husband and I would like to formally request an exemption from the Bankson Lake Sewer

District for our property identified by Parcel Number 80-16-155-004-00 and located at 80911

County Road 652. In the photo on the second page of this letter, it is the parcel that is between

Gorton and Mangano.

We are seeking an exemption from the sewer district for this parcel on the grounds that our

property border does not touch the sewer district.

We are out of town and may be difficult to contact. If you cannot reach us, we authorize Scott

Gorton as our representative to speak on our behalf, review documents and attend hearings. Scott

can be reached at 574-298-5818 or scott.gorton@fapcoinc.com.

Thank you for considering our request and we would appreciate it if you would confirm receipt of

this letter by return email.

Thanks so much for your assistance

Sue Harris

269-720-9538

Sueharris55@msn.com

Page 2

Some parcels in the district are being charged for ½ REU for a bathroom in a garage or outbuilding.

Other that occasional guests, it generally is just the two of us staying in our cottage and since it is

only for the months of June, July, and August, we feel that our wastewater is estimated too high at

the 1 REU and if we were to connect to the public sewer our usage would be closer to the ½ and not

the full REU.

If we are unable to come up with the $27,500 when the assessment is applied, we will have to pay

in installments that could end up costing us $54,744.95 and that does not include connecting to the

sewer, disconnecting our current septic system and paying at the minimum $75 per month/$900

per year forever.

Please note that Parcel # 80-16-014-015-00 that is not included in the district also separates our

property (80-16-155-004-00 from the sewer line. We do not abut/touch to the sewer line being

proposed

Page 3

Please note that parcel # 80-16-014-015-00 (BLUE) is included in the Roll for the Special

Assessment District No. 1 HOWEVER it is not included in the “District” list of 203 parcels

(AƩachments L and G-1 the 9th parcel number from the top in the first column).

Please note we are also joint owners on two other parcels that are being appealed

Primary – 80-16-155-004-00, Joint owners – 80-16-014-016-10 & 80-16-014-015-00.

ScoƩ Gorton will be filing those appeals

Page 4

SECTION 4 – REASON FOR THE APPEAL

1. Unreasonable disproportionality between the amount of the assessment and the value that

accrues to MY PROPERTY.



Michigan law provides that a special assessment is only valid if the property specially

assessed receives a special benefit that is proportional to the cost of the assessment. The

general rule is that the benefits derived from a special assessment to a property should be

determined by the difference in the market value of the property before and after the

making of the improvement. See Dixon Road Group v City of Novi, 426 Mich. 390 (1986);

Kadzban v City of Grandville, 442 Mich 495 (1993); Michigan’s Adventure, Inc v Dalton

Twp, 290 Mich App 328 (2010).

o

The Township has not at any point in the special assessment district process stated

that the sewer project will increase the property values of affected parcels. In-fact,

the Township’s own engineer stated in a public hearing that he was surprised there

was interest in this project after determining that the cost would be more than

$12,500 per parcel.

o

I have a working septic system in good shape and repair. A sewer connection adds

no quantifiable benefit to my property. The added monthly expense of $75/mo. for

flat fee sewer service (subject to increase at the whim of LASA) negatively impacts

my property by at least $900/year. There is no direct measurable economic benefit

to my property; instead, the sewer creates a direct economic liability to my property.

o

In a rural setting with many of the homes on Bankson Lake being summer cottages

only, a home buyer does not care if a house is on sewer or septic; all they care about

is whether the toilet flushes. Sewer does not add value.

o

I intend to offer some or all of the following as evidence to show the unreasonable

disproportionality between the assessment against my property and the value (or

lack thereof) that accrues to my property by virtue of the sewer project:

assessments, quotes for a replacement system (if needed in the future), assessor

reports, financial data from other sewer projects, LASA financials, property record

cards, sales comparisons, and appraisal(s).

o

The total cost of $27,500 to my property ($24,500 benefit fee/REU + $3,000 parcel

fee) does not result in a proportional increase in the value of my property. Even if

my current sewer system were to fail, a brand-new system would cost around

$10,000 – about 1/3 of the cost of the assessment.

o

The Township will not be able to show any market value increase to my property

as a result of the sewer project, let alone a proportional increase to the exorbitant

cost of this project. If the Township and LASA wish to pursue the sewer project,

it must be paid for from a general levy and not from a special assessment against

my property.

2. The special assessment district was not properly or fairly determined.



Porter Township has cited Michigan Act 368 of 1978 (the Michigan Public Health Code)

as one of the key reasons in guiding this project, asserting that the sewer installation is a

Page 5

public health necessity required to protect the water quality and environmental integrity of

Bankson Lake. Despite the stated environmental and public health purpose of protecting

the lake’s ecosystem, the Township’s infrastructure plan excludes certain properties

surrounding the lake. Consequently,

Page 6



Page 7



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

PROPERTY TAX APPEAL PETITION FORM

SPECIAL ASSESSMENT

MTT DOCKET NO. 

 

Section 1: Petitioner’s Contact Information

Filer Type:

Individual 

Local Unit of Government:

First Name

Carolyn

M.I.

Sue

Last Name/Company Name

Harris

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

67500 CR 657

City or Town

Lawton

State

 Michigan

ZIP Code

49065

Telephone Number

269-720-9538

E-mail Address

sueharris55@msn.com

 

 

Section 3: Subject Property Information

How many parcels are you appealing?

1

If you are appealing more than one parcel, are they contiguous or adjoining? *If no, you must file separate 

appeals for each non-contiguous or non-adjoining parcel.

 N/A

Property Address (No., Street, City, ST, ZIP) (If multiple, list first property’s address)

80911 CR 652

Lawton

Michigan

49065

Parcel Identification Number(s):

80-16-155-004-00

Taxing Authority (City or Township)

Township Of Porter (VAN BUREN)

County 

Van Buren

 

Section 4: Explain the Reason for this Appeal

Pursuant to Michigan Tax Tribunal Rule (TTR) 277(3), you MUST submit a copy of the notice giving rise to the appeal (e.g. a copy of the resolution confirming the 

special assessment roll) with this Small Claims Petition, if applicable. If you do not submit this document, you may be held in default.

Page 2

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

DIRECTOR

Explanation is provided with the Attachments due to needing more space

Note: I submitted a written objection to this project on September 26th, 2026. The Roll was confirmed on October 6th, 2026.

 

Section 5: Jurisdictional Issues

Did you protest the special assessment at the hearing held to confirm the special assessment roll? 

Yes

If Yes, what was the date of the hearing held to confirm the special assessment roll?

2026-09-26

If No, explain:

 

Fee Information

A fee of $100.00 is required for the filing of a Special Assessment Appeal.

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

Petitioner or Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Signature: 

/s/ Carolyn Sue Harris

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.