Michigan

Cascade Office Park II LLC, Petitioner Vs. Township Of Cascade, Respondent

Petitioner: Cascade Office Park II LLC
Respondent: Township Of Cascade

Case overview

Docket number: 25-002353-TT
Status: Disposed
CaseType: ET Property
Division: ET
County: Kent
Judge: No judge assigned

Docket history

Line #	Subject	Filer	Line Ref	Enter Date/Post Mark	Fee	Related Item
10	Order of Dismissal	Not recorded	Not recorded	09/05/2025	Not recorded	Download
9	Motion to Withdraw Appeal was received.	PET	Not recorded	09/05/2025	$0.00	Download
8	Prehearing General Call	Not recorded	Not recorded	08/01/2025	Not recorded	Download
7	Proof of Service of Misc Documents was received.	Not recorded	Not recorded	07/11/2025	Not recorded	Download
6	Answer was received	Not recorded	Not recorded	07/11/2025	Not recorded	Download
5	ET Case Info Sheet	Not recorded	Not recorded	07/11/2025	Not recorded	Download
4	Proof of service of petition was received.	PET	Not recorded	06/11/2025	Not recorded	Download
3	Petition has been verified	PET	1	06/10/2025	Not recorded	Download
2	Notice of Docket Number ET	Not recorded	Not recorded	06/10/2025	Not recorded	Download
1	A petition was received.	PET	Not recorded	05/27/2025	$400.00	Download

Documents

Order_of_Dismissal-Joint_Withdraw.2025-09-05_15-39-43.0000.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

Cascade Office Park II LLC, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 

 ENTIRE TRIBUNAL

v 

 MTT Docket No. 25-002353

Township Of Cascade,

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: September 5, 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

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

Cascade Office Park II LLC, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 

 ENTIRE TRIBUNAL

v 

 MTT Docket No. 25-002353

Township Of Cascade,

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: September 5, 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

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

Cascade Office Park II LLC, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 

 ENTIRE TRIBUNAL

v 

 MTT Docket No. 25-002353

Township Of Cascade,

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: September 5, 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.

Cascade Office Park v Cascade Twp. - Joint Motion to Withdraw (25-002353).pdfRead complete document text →

Read document text excerpt

Page 1

61905709.1 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

 

CASCADE OFICE PARK II, LLC, 

 

 

 

 

Petitioner, 

 

 

v. 

 

CASCADE CHARTER TOWNSHIP, 

 

Respondent.

 

 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-002353 

 

 

___________________________________________________________________________/ 

 

Michael B. Shapiro (P20282) 

Daniel L. Stanley (P57052) 

HONIGMAN LLP 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

39400 Woodward Avenue 

Suite 101 

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48304-5151 

(313) 465-7622 

mshapiro@honigman.com 

dstanley@honigman.com 

Laura J. Genovich (P72278) 

Thomas K. Dillon (P81136) 

FOSTER SWIFT COLLINS & SMITH, P.C. 

Attorneys for Respondent 

1700 E. Beltline Avenue NE 

Suite 200 

Grand Rapids, MI 49525 

(616) 726-2258) 

lgenovich@fosterswift.com 

tdillon@fosterswift.com 

__________________________________________________________________________/ 

 

 

JOINT MOTION TO WITHDRAW APPEAL 

 

Petitioner desires to withdraw its Petition and files this Motion pursuant to Tax Tribunal 

Rule 237(4), R 792.10237(4). Respondent’s counsel has advised Petitioner’s representative that 

Respondent concurs in the Tribunal’s granting the relief requested herein. 

 

WHEREFORE, the parties request that the Tribunal enter an order allowing the Petition 

to be withdrawn, or dismissing this case, with each party bearing its own costs.

Page 2

2 

61905709.1 

HONIGMAN LLP 

 

 

 

 FOSTER SWIFT COLLINS & SMITH, P.C. 

 

By: 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael B. Shapiro (P20282) 

Daniel L. Stanley (P57052) 

39400 Woodward Avenue 

Suite 101 

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48304-5151 

(313) 465-7622 

mshapiro@honigman.com 

dstanley@honigman.com 

By: 

 

 

 

 

 

Laura J. Genovich (P72278) 

Thomas K. Dillon (P81136) 

1700 E. Beltline Avenue NE 

Suite 200 

Grand Rapids, MI 49525 

(616) 726-2258) 

lgenovich@fosterswift.com 

tdillon@fosterswift.com 

 

Dated: __________________ 

 

 Dated: ____________________ 

 

 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

 

 

Lisa Joseph hereby affirms that on _____________, 2025, she served a copy of the 

foregoing on Respondent’s counsel of record, via electronic mail. 

 

 

Dated: _______________, 2025 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lisa Joseph 

 

/s/ Daniel L. Stanley 

 

 

 /s/ Thomas K. Dillon (w/permission)

September 5, 2025 

 

 

 

 September 5, 2025

September 5

September 5

/s/ Lisa Joseph

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.

Prehearing_General_Call.2025-08-01_08-38-43.0000.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

ACTING 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 JULY 1 - 15, 2026 PREHEARING GENERAL CALL AND ORDER OF

PROCEDURE

Cascade Office Park II LLC,

Petitioner,

Township Of Cascade,

Respondent.

MTT Docket No. 25-002353

Please be advised that 25-002353 has been placed on a two-week Prehearing General

Call commencing July 01, 2026. Parties will be notified at least one week before they

are scheduled to appear.

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, as provided by TTR 237.

In accordance with MCR 1.109(D)(9), as of January 1, 2021, 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. Please refer to the

Tribunal’s FAQs and Glossary of Terms pages on our website for more information.

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 March 4, 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.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-002353

Page 2 of 2

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

Statements by March 4, 2026. 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, as provided by

TTR 237.

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

March 4, 2026, which means all discovery has been requested, all motions to compel

have been filed and resolved, 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

July 1, 2026, which means all discovery has been requested, all motions to compel

have been filed and resolved, 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: August 1, 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 provide 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

ACTING 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 JULY 1 - 15, 2026 PREHEARING GENERAL CALL AND ORDER OF 

PROCEDURE

Cascade Office Park II LLC,

Petitioner,

v

 

 

Township Of Cascade,

Respondent.

 MTT Docket No. 25-002353

Please be advised that 25-002353 has been placed on a two-week Prehearing General 

Call commencing July 01, 2026. Parties will be notified at least one week before they 

are scheduled to appear.

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, as provided by TTR 237.

In accordance with MCR 1.109(D)(9), as of January 1, 2021, the responsibility for 

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

or offered to the

Page 4

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.

POS - Answer and Aff. Defenses Cascade Office Park 25-002353.pdfRead complete document text →

Read document text excerpt

Page 1

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING SYSTEM 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

CASCADE OFFICE PARK II, LLC, 

MTT Docket No. 25-002353 

Petitioner, 

Parcel ID No. 41-19-07-376-034 

v. 

CASCADE CHARTER TOWNSHIP, 

Respondent. 

Michael B. Shapiro (P20282) 

Laura J. Genovich (P72278) 

Daniel L. Stanley (P57052) 

Thomas K. Dillon (P81136) 

HONIGMAN LLP 

FOSTER SWIFT COLLINS & SMITH, P.C. 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

Attorneys for Respondent 

660 Woodward Avenue 

1700 East Beltline Avenue NE, Suite 200 

2290 First National Bldg. 

Grand Rapids, MI 49525 

Detroit, MI 48226-3506 

(616) 726-2258 

(313) 465-7622 

Igenovich@fosterswift.com 

mshapiro@honigman.com 

tdillon@fosterswift.com 

dstanley@honigman.com 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

On July 11, 2025, I served a copy of Respondent Cascade Charter Township’s Answer 

and Affirmative Defenses to Entire Tribunal Property Tax Petition, along with a copy of this 

Proof of Service, upon the parties of record at their last known business address, by first class U.S. 

mail, postage prepaid. 

I declare that the statements above are true to the best of my information, knowledge, and 

belief. 

Date: 

July 11,2025 

87192:00031:201736612-1

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.

Respondent's Answer and Aff. Defenses to 2025 Petition - Cascade Office Park 25-002353.pdfRead complete document text →

Read document text excerpt

Page 1

STATE OF MICHIGAN

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS

MICHIGAN ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING SYSTEM

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

______________________

CASCADE OFFICE PARK II, LLC,

Petitioner,

CASCADE CHARTER TOWNSHIP,

Respondent.

MTT Docket No. 25-002353

Parcel ID No. 41-19-07-376-034

______________________________________________________________________________

Michael B. Shapiro (P20282)

Daniel L. Stanley (P57052)

HONIGMAN LLP

Attorneys for Petitioner

660 Woodward Avenue

2290 First National Bldg.

Detroit, MI 48226-3506

(313) 465-7622

mshapiro@honigman.com

dstanley@honigman.com

Laura J. Genovich (P72278)

Thomas K. Dillon (P81136)

FOSTER SWIFT COLLINS & SMITH, P.C.

Attorneys for Respondent

1700 East Beltline Avenue NE, Suite 200

Grand Rapids, MI 49525

(616) 726-2258

lgenovich@fosterswift.com

tdillon@fosterswift.com

______________________________________________________________________________

RESPONDENT CASCADE CHARTER TOWNSHIP’S ANSWERS & AFFIRMATIVE

DEFENSES TO ENTIRE TRIBUNAL PROPERTY TAX PETITION

Respondent, Cascade Charter Township, by and through its attorneys, Foster, Swift,

Collins & Smith, P.C., states as follows for its Answers to Petitioner’s Entire Tribunal Property

Tax Petition:

Petitioner's principal office address is 750 Trade Center Way, Suite 1000,

Portage, MI 48002. Petitioner is a party in interest with respect to property taxes on tax parcel

no(s). 41-19-07-376-034 ("Petitioner's Property"), also known as Horizon Office Park at 2660

Horizon Drive SE located in Kent County, Michigan.

Page 2

ANSWER:

Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations regarding Petitioner’s

principal office address and whether Petitioner is a “party in interest” as Respondent is

without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the allegations.

Respondent leaves Petitioner to its proofs.

Respondent, Cascade Twp., assesses and collects property taxes on Petitioner's

Property.

ANSWER:

Respondent admits the allegation contained in paragraph 2 of the Petition.

In 2025, Respondent determined the taxable value of Petitioner's Property to be

$531,908 and assessed Petitioner's Property at $875,000, which will result in a state equalized

value in the same amount based upon the tentative equalization factor.

ANSWER:

Respondent admits the allegation contained in paragraph 3 of the Petition.

Petitioner's Property is classified as Commercial Real. Petitioner's Property is

presently used or available for use for Office purposes. Petitioner believes that Petitioner's

Property was originally designed to be used for Office purposes.

ANSWER:

Respondent admits that the property is classified as Commercial Real.

Respondent neither admits nor denies the remaining allegations in paragraph 4 as

Respondent is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the

remaining allegations in paragraph 4. Respondent leaves Petitioner to its proofs.

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

value and (d) uniformity.

ANSWER:

Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations in paragraph 5 of the

Petition and leaves Petitioner to its proofs.

At this time, Petitioner believes, as it relates to taxable value, that there is a

dispute relative to the value of a loss.

ANSWER:

As Paragraph 6 pleads no facts, this Paragraph is insufficient to raise an

issue for appeal (TTR 227(1)) and fails to state a claim on which relief can be granted

(MCR 2.116 (C) (8)). The allegations are denied.

If P.A. 174 of 2006 requires a board of review protest for Petitioner’s Property,

Page 3

a board of review protest was filed in March, 2025. 

ANSWER: 

Paragraph 7 of the Petition does not contain a factual allegation requiring 

a response but is a hypothetical. To the extent that paragraph 7 contains a factual 

allegation, Respondent denies the allegation and leaves Petitioner to its proofs as to whether 

the Tribunal has jurisdiction. Respondent reserves its right to object to jurisdiction if 

Petitioner failed to comply to the requirements of MCL 205.735a. 

8. 

The 2025 assessment, including state equalized value and taxable value, imposed 

on Petitioner's Property, and the taxes to be levied and collected thereon, are invalid and 

unlawful and operate as a fraud upon the taxpayer for the reasons that: 

(a) 

The assessment, including state equalized value and/or taxable value, 

exceeds the amount permitted by the Michigan Constitution and applicable statutes; 

(b) 

The assessment, including state equalized value and/or taxable value, are 

at higher percentages of true cash value than permissible under the Michigan Constitution and 

applicable statutes; 

(c) 

The assessment, including taxable value and/or state equalized value, are 

based upon an erroneous determination of the true cash value of that portion of Petitioner's 

Property that is taxable under Michigan law, and are based upon the application of wrong 

principles; and, 

(d) 

The assessment, including state equalized value and/or taxable value, and 

the mode of assessment adopted by Respondent, discriminate against Petitioner and deny 

Petitioner its constitutional rights to uniformity, equal protection and due process of law. 

ANSWER: 

Respondent denies the allegations contained in paragraph 8 of the Petition, 

including all allegations made in subparagraphs a. through d., and leaves Petitioner to its 

proofs as the assessed, state equalized and taxable values do not exceed permitted amounts, 

do not exceed the percentage for true cash value permitted by law, were correctly determined 

and are based upon the correct application of proper principals, and do not discriminate 

against Petitioner.

Page 4

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 

Respondent, Cascade Charter Township, by and through its attorneys, Foster, Swift, 

Collins & Smith, P.C., and states that it may rely on one or all of the following Affirmative

Page 5

8.

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.

10._Entire_Tribunal_Case_Information_Sheet_Must_Upload_Answer_.7ba6109a-96c5-4395-9e2f-86a17695224e.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

Entire Tribunal Case Information Sheet - Respondent

MOAHR DOCKET NO. 25-002353

Section 1: Respondent’s Contact Information

Filer Type: Local Unit of Government

Township Of Cascade (KENT)

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

Tom

M.I.

Last Name

Dillon

Firm Name (if any)

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

1700 E Beltline NE, Ste 200

City or Town

Grand Rapids

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

49525

Telephone Number

616-726-2258

Fax Number

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

tdillon@fosterswift.com

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

Respondent or Authorized Attorney/Representative’s Signature: 

Thomas K. Dillon

/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.

25-002353.pdfRead complete document text →

Read document text excerpt

Page 1

< 

RECEIVED On. 

© 

JUN 11205 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT 

OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Cascade Office Park II, LLC, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

MTT Docket No. 25-002353 

[Parcel No(s). 41-19-07-376-034] 

Cascade Twp., 

Respondent. 

/ 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

Lisa Joseph states that she is employed by HONIGMAN LLP, attorneys for Petitioner, and 

that on June 11, 2025, she did serve a copy of Petitioner's Petition, with docket number, upon the 

/s/ fon Crap 

Lisd J oseph 

parties named on the attached list.

Page 2

BY CERTIFIED UNITED STATES MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED: 

CLERK 

CASCADE TWP. 

2865 THORNHILLS DRIVE SE 

GRAND RAPIDS, MI 49546-7192 

ASSESSOR 

CASCADE TWP. 

2865 THORNHILLS DRIVE SE 

GRAND RAPIDS, MI 49546-7192 

AND BY FIRST-CLASS UNITED STATES MAIL: 

CLERK 

KENT COUNTY 

300 MONROE AVENUE, NW 

GRAND RAPIDS, MI 49503-2288 

DIRECTOR OF EQUALIZATION 

KENT COUNTY 

300 MONROE AVENUE, NW 

GRAND RAPIDS, MI 49503-2288 

SECRETARY OF SCHOOL BOARD 

FOREST HILLS PUBLIC SCHOOLS 

6590 CASCADE ROAD SE 

GRAND RAPIDS, MI 49546-6497 

STATE TREASURER 

MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY 

TREASURY BUILDING 

430 W. ALLEGAN ST. 

LANSING, MI 48922 

25-0100

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.

Cascade Office Park II LLC.pdfRead complete document text →

Read document text excerpt

Page 1

D 

aeCEVN® 

RECEIVED 

5 

9, 10 

JNO 

MAY 

29 2025 

JRUNA 

ia 

TTR 

CG 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Cascade Office Park II, LLC, 

Petitioner, 

\2 

MTT Docket No. 

[Parcel No(s). 41-19-07-376-034] 

Cascade Twp., 

Tranlnfo:d606 6O1983-1 

05/30/25 

Respamdent. 

Chick: 

40619 

mt: $400.00 

10: 

HONTGHAN LLP 

PETITION 

Cascade Office Park IT, LLC (“Petitioner”), through its attorneys, HONIGMAN LLP, says: 

1. 

Petitioner's principal office address is 750 Trade Center Way, Suite 1000, Portage, 

MI 48002. 

Petitioner is a party in interest with respect to property taxes on tax parcel no(s). 41- 

19-07-376-034 ("Petitioner's Property"), also known as Horizon Office Park at 2660 Horizon Drive 

SE located in Kent County, Michigan. 

If this petition includes more than one (1) real property tax 

parcel, the tax parcels are contiguous. 

2. 

Respondent, Cascade Twp., assesses and collects property taxes on Petitioner's 

Property. 

3. 

In 2025, Respondent determined the taxable value of Petitioner's Property to be 

$531,908 and assessed Petitioner's Property at $875,000, which will result in a state equalized 

value in the same amount based upon the tentative equalization factor.

Page 2

5. 

This matter involves issues relating to: 

(a) valuation, (b) assessment, (c) taxable 

value and (d) uniformity. 

6. 

At this time, Petitioner believes, as it relates to taxable value, that there is a dispute 

relative to the value of a loss. 

7. 

If P.A. 174 of 2006 requires a board of review protest for Petitioner’s Property, a 

board of review protest was filed in March, 2025. 

8. 

The 2025 assessment, including state equalized value and taxable value, imposed 

on Petitioner's Property, and the taxes to be levied and collected thereon, are invalid and unlawful 

and operate as a fraud upon the taxpayer for the reasons that: 

(a) 

The assessment, including state equalized value and/or taxable value, 

exceeds the amount permitted by the Michigan Constitution and applicable statutes; 

®) 

The assessment, including state equalized value and/or taxable value, are at 

higher percentages of true cash value than permissible under the Michigan Constitution and 

applicable statutes; 

(©) 

The assessment, including taxable value and/or state equalized value, are 

based upon an erroneous determination of the true cash value of that portion of Petitioner's 

Property that 

is taxable under Michigan law, and are based upon the application of wrong 

principles; and, 

(d) 

The assessment, including state equalized value and/or taxable value, and 

the mode of assessment adopted by Respondent, discriminate against Petitioner and deny

Page 3

WHEREFORE, Petitioner requests that the Tax Tribunal enter an Order reducing the 2025 

taxable value of Petitioner's Property from $531,908 to $365,000, and reducing the 2025 assessed 

and state equalized value of Petitioner's Property from $875,000 to $3,365,000, and requiring 

Respondent to pay Petitioner the refunds attributable to such reductions, plus interest and costs. 

Respectfully submitted, 

HONIGMAN LLP 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

By: 

/s/ Michael B. Shapiro 

Michael B. Shapiro (P20282) 

Daniel L. Stanley (P57052 

39400 Woodward Avenue 

Suite 101 

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48304-5151 

(313) 465-7622 

Dated: 

May 29, 2025 

mshapiro@honigman.com 

dstanley@honigman.com

Page 4

Honigman LLP 

COSTS ADVANCED ACCOUNT 

Invoice Date 

Invoice Number 

Invoice Narrative 

Payment Amount 

5/29/25 

040619 

278318/547672/DLS 

#EEGA00,00% 

Filing Fee for Petition — Cascade Office 

Park 

15106939.1

Page 5

Envelc

Recycle

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.

ET_Notice_of_Docket_Number.2025-06-10_14-02-38.0000.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

Cascade Office Park II LLC,

Petitioner,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

MTT Docket No.: 25-002353

Township Of Cascade,

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: June 10, 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