Congregation Khal Cheredim, Petitioner V City Of Oak Park, 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

Congregation Khal Cheredim,

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 

 SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v

MTT Docket No.: 25-003517

City Of Oak Park, 

Respondent.

NOTICE OF TELEPHONE HEARING

The Tribunal has scheduled a telephone hearing to be conducted as follows. Hearings are 

generally 30 minutes in length. 

HEARING DATE:

December 16, 2026 

HEARING TIME:

2:30 PM Eastern Time

JOIN BY PHONE:

1-248-509-0316

ACCESS CODE:

577108031 

 

This hearing will be held by telephone conference call with the Judge as the host. In order to join 

the hearing, call the phone number listed above at least 5 minutes prior to the hearing time. You 

will then be required to input the access code, followed by # to connect. The Tribunal judge will call 

in and join by phone at the hearing time. Failure to timely call in may result in the placement of a 

party or parties in default.

This is an important legal document. Please have someone translate the document.

Este es un documento legal importante. Por favor, haga traducir este documento.

এটি একটি গুরুত্বপূর্ণ আইনি দলিল, অনুগ্রহ করে কেউ দলিলটিকে অনুবাদ করুন।

.ﻫﺬﺍ ﻫﻮ ﻭﺛﻴﻘﺔ ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻧﻴﺔ ﻫﺎﻣﺔ ﻳﺮﺟﻰ ﻟﺪﻳﻚ ﺷﺨﺺ ﺗﺘﺮﺟﻢ ﺍﻟﻮﺛﻴﻘﺔ

Ito ay isang mahalagang legal na dokumento. Mangyari lamang na magkaroon ng isang tao isalin ang 

dokumento.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-003517

Page 2 of 4

HEARING INFORMATION – PLEASE READ IMMEDIATELY

GENERAL INFORMATION: An impartial hearing will be conducted in accordance with the Michigan Tax 

Tribunal Rules (R 792.10201-R 792.10297) and the Michigan Administrative Procedures Act, MCL 24.201 et 

seq. The Michigan Rules of Evidence and the Michigan Court Rules may be applicable. Parties are expected 

to exercise proper respect and courtesy toward other parties, witnesses, and administrative law judges, which 

includes attending the hearing on time, silencing cell phones, and choosing a quiet, private location to 

participate in the hearing to limit distractions and ensure minimal background noise. The hearing may be 

recorded for notetaking purposes, but the recording is not a formal record, unless otherwise provided for by the 

Tribunal.

REPRESENTATION: You may have an attorney or anyone else of your choice represent you at the hearing. 

The Tribunal does not recommend or appoint representatives for you and will not pay for your representative.

WITNESSES: You may have anyone join you at the hearing to speak in support of your case. However, the 

time to present your case is limited and additional time may not be provided to accommodate witness 

testimony.

DOCUMENTATION: Parties are required to submit all documents in support of their contentions to both the 

Tribunal and the opposing party at least 21 days before the hearing date even if the documents were 

previously submitted to the local Board of Review or the Michigan Department of Treasury. If the 

documents are not timely submitted to both the Tribunal and the opposing party, the documents may be 

excluded. Documents may be submitted to the Tribunal by mail or through the Tribunal’s electronic filing (e-

filing) system. Documents may be sent to the opposing party by mail or by e-mail, if the parties agree to 

submission by e-mail. If sent by mail, the documents must be sent to the opposing party or their authorized 

representative at the address identified in the petition or answer for that party or authorized representative, 

unless the party or authorized representative filed an appearance or other documentation identifying a different 

mailing address. The documents do not need to be resubmitted after the Notice of Hearing if they were 

previously submitted to the Tribunal and the opposing party in this case.

If a hearing had previously been scheduled in this case and adjourned, and the adjournment order indicates 

that the parties are precluded from submitting any further documentary evidence, no further documentary 

evidence will be accepted even if filed and exchanged as indicated above.

INCLUSION OF SUBSEQUENT TAX YEARS: Subsequent tax year assessments are automatically included 

in valuation appeals once the assessment has been established for that tax year. For purposes of 

administrative efficiency, the Tribunal considers this date April 1st. As such, the parties should submit 

documentation and be prepared to discuss subsequent tax year assessments at hearings to be conducted on 

or after April 1st in a subsequent year. If the hearing is to be conducted prior to April 1st in a subsequent year, 

taxpayers are required to file a new petition and, if necessary, protest the subsequent tax year assessment at 

the March Board of Review for that year. 

MOTIONS/REQUESTS: A motion is a written request filed by a party asking the Tribunal to take certain action. 

The following motions and requests may be filed by either party regarding the scheduled hearing. Motions and 

requests may be submitted to the Tribunal by mail or through the Tribunal’s e-filing system. Motions and 

requests may be sent to the opposing party by mail or by e-mail, if the parties agree to submission by e-mail. If 

sent by mail, motions and requests must be sent to the opposing party or their authorized representative at the 

address identified in the petition or answer for that party or authorized representative, unless the party or 

authorized representative filed an appearance or other documentation identifying a different mailing address. 

1. Motion to Adjourn: Parties may request the hearing be rescheduled (i.e. adjourned). The motion must be 

submitted to both the Tribunal and the opposing party at least 28 days before the hearing unless there are 

emergency circumstances. The emergency circumstances must be detailed to justify the granting of

Page 3

MT

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 

NOV 0 4 2025 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

PROPERTY TAX APPEAL ANSWER FORM 

VALUATION / EXEMPTION / CLASSIFICATION APPEAL 

MTT DOCKET NO. 25-003517 

Section 1: Respondent’s Contact Information 

First Name 

M.1. 

Last Name 

City of Oak Park 

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

14000 Oak Park Blvd 

City or Town 

State 

ZIP Code 

Oak Park 

MI 

[48237 

Telephone “248-69 1 -7552 

Email Address (do not enter unless you want MTT to send all correspondence via email) 

wcaassessor@oakparkmi.gov 

Section 2: Respondent’s Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Contact Information 

First Name 

M.1. 

Last Name 

Dawn 

Scheitz 

Firm Name (if any) 

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

14000 Oak Park Blvd 

City or Town 

State 

ZIP Code 

Oak Park 

he 

= 

Telephone “m4 8-69 1 -7552 

Email Address (do not enter unless you want MTT to send all correspondence via email) 

wcaassessor@oakparkmi.gov 

Section 3: Subject Property Information 

Does the subject property have a Principal Residence Exemption of 50% or more? 

[7 Yes 

No 

Are the parcels listed by Petitioner contiguous or adjoining? 

If not, list which parcels adjoin one another.

Page 2

Urgrayes® 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Section 4: Explain Your Answer to this Appeal 

Pursuant to the information indicated on the Application for Exemption from Property 

Taxes and the sworn testimony given to the March Board of Review Members by the 

petitioner, we believe this exemption was properly denied. 

Section 5: Jurisdictional Issues 

IF PETITIONER IS APPEALING THE TRUE CASH AND/OR TAXABLE VALUES 

Did Petitioner protest the assessment at a Board of Review (BOR)? 

Yes 

a No 

If yes, check which BOR Petitioner attended: 

March 

[] July 

Od December 

If no, was the Notice of Assessment properly sent to Petitioner prior to the March BOR? O Yes 

[| No 

*Submit a copy of the Notice of Assessment with the Answer. 

If the July or December BOR revised the assessment(s) at issue, did it have authority? O Yes 

[0] No 

If yes, cite the Board's authority. 

Was the assessment(s) at issue established as the result of 

a clerical error or mutual mistake of fact? OJ Yes 

No 

If yes, explain 

Is Petitioner appealing from a State Tax Commission Order? 

[Yes 

[MANo 

If so, what is the issue date?

Page 3

Orga 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

MARLON 

|. BROWN, DPA 

DIRECTOR 

Did Petitioner request a Poverty Exemption at a BOR? (] Yes 

Od No 

If Yes, check which BOR Petitioner attended: O March 

[] July 

[Tw December 

List the date the BOR denied Petitioner's Poverty Exemption: 

IF PETITIONER IS APPEALING THE DENIAL OF AN EXEMPTION 

OTHER THAN POVERTY, PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE, OR QUALIFIED AGRICULTURAL EXEMPTIONS 

Did Petitioner request the exemption at 

a BOR? 

Yes 

[Hl] No 

If Yes, check which BOR Petitioner attended: [M4 March 

[] uly 

[] December 

Tax Year(s) denied: 

List the date the exemption was denied: 

2025 

1/22/25 

What statutory section did Petitioner request the subject property be exempt? 

211.7s 

IF PETITIONER IS APPEALING THE CLASSIFICATION OF PROPERTY 

What do you believe the classification should be: 

Real 

Personal 

(check one) 

Agricultural 

Commercial 

Industrial 

Residential 

Timber-Cutover 

Developmental 

Utility 

(check one) 

Section 6: Valuation Information use the multiple parcel form for additional, contiguous parcels. 

Parcel Identification Number: 

25-30-126-036 

Classification of Property: 

Real 

Personal 

(check one) 

Agricultural 

Commercial 

Industrial 

Residential 

Timber-Cutover 

Developmental 

Utility 

(check one) 

Current Assessed Value (also known as State Equalized Value) as established by the BOR: 

127200 

Current Taxable Value as established by the BOR: 

127200 

What do you believe is the fair market value (also known as True Cash Value)? 

254400 

Multiply the True Cash Value by .5 and enter here. This is your contention of Assessed Value. 

127200 

Ifyou believe the Taxable Value differs from your contention of Assessed Value, enter your contention of Taxable Value.

Page 4

CITY OF OAK PARK 

Assessing 

14000 Oak Park Blvd. 

Oak Park, 

MI 48237 

METROPLEX Mi 

Fn 

US POST

31 OCT 2025p os Hen ¢@r =r 

5 

5 

48237 § 0

x 

“£ 

00080336990CT

Michigan Tax TA bunal 

To. Bok 30232 

Rece

Lansing, mL 

¥8909 

OY 43

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

Congregation Khal Cheredim,

Petitioner,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v 

MTT Docket No. 25-003517

City Of Oak Park,

Respondent.

NOTICE OF FILING

TAKE NOTICE that a Small Claims answer has been filed and the electronic copy of the 

answer can be reviewed by utilizing the Docket Lookup on the Tribunal’s website. 

Unless Respondent was defaulted, this case is ready to be scheduled for a Small 

Claims hearing and will be scheduled in the normal course of scheduling. You will 

receive a Notice of Hearing from the Tribunal by e-mail if you have identified an email 

address in the petition or other documentation. The Notice of Hearing will inform you of 

the date, time, and location of your hearing (note that your hearing will likely be 

conducted by telephone). Please read the Notice of Hearing as it includes important 

information.

EVIDENCE: Parties are required to submit all evidence to the Tribunal and send a copy 

to the opposing party at least 21 days before the hearing date even if the documents 

had been submitted to the local Board of Review or the Michigan Department of 

Treasury. If the documents are not timely submitted to the Tribunal and served on the 

opposing party, the documents may be excluded. Documents may be filed with the 

Tribunal by mail or through the Tribunal’s e-filing system. Documents may be sent to the 

opposing party by mail or by e-mail, if the parties agree to service by e-mail.

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

documents are public records and will appear for public viewing on the Tax 

Docket Lookup. Users who file documents are responsible for ensuring sensitive or 

personal identifying information is withheld or redacted. See TTR 209. If a user wishes 

to file a document for consideration by the Michigan Tax 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.

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

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-003517

Page 2 of 6

submitting a Request for Redactions. The Request for Redactions form will be 

available on the Entire Tribunal and Small Claims pages of our website. 

Alternate Dispute Resolution Options

INFORMAL SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE: Parties have the option of handling this 

case through an informal settlement conference. An informal settlement conference 

is a meeting between the parties and/or their representatives to discuss the issues in a 

case in an effort to settle the case. This process may be an alternative to a hearing with 

a judge and may result in the parties’ filing a Joint Stipulation for Entry of Consent 

Judgment. Visit the Tribunal’s ADR webpage for more information.

NOTE: The parties may not request an informal settlement conference to discuss an 

appeal of a principal residence exemption that was denied by either the Michigan 

Department of Treasury or a County. Also, state taxes levied by the Michigan 

Department of Treasury, such as income taxes, are not subject to the informal 

settlement conference process.

MEDIATION: Parties have the option of handling this case through mediation. 

Mediation is a voluntary process where a mediator facilitates communication between 

the parties, assists in identifying issues, and helps explore solutions to promote a 

mutually acceptable settlement. This process may be an alternative to a hearing with a 

judge and may result in the parties’ filing a Joint Stipulation for Entry of Consent 

Judgment. Visit the Tribunal’s ADR webpage for more information.

If you have any questions, please contact the Tribunal by phone at (517) 335-9760 or 

email taxtrib@michigan.gov.

By: Tribunal Clerk

Entered: November 26, 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

Congregation Khal Cheredim,

Petitioner,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v 

MTT Docket No. 25-003517

City Of Oak Park,

Respondent.

NOTICE OF FILING

TAKE NOTICE that a Small Claims answer has been filed and the electronic copy of the 

answer can be reviewed by utilizing the Docket Lookup on the Tribunal’s website. 

Unless Respondent was defaulted, this case is ready to be scheduled for a Small 

Claims hearing and will be scheduled in the normal course of scheduling. You will 

receive a Notice of Hearing from the Tribunal by e-mail if you have identified an email 

address in the petition or other documentation. The Notice of Hearing will inform you of 

the date, time, and location of

Page 4

MT

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 0 1 2025 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

~~ MICHIGAN TAX JRIBUNAL, 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIR 

RLON 1. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

PROPERTY TAX APPEAL PETITION FORM 

VALUATION / EXEMPTION / CLASSIFICATION APPEAL 

Do not use this form to appeal Principal Residence Exemption, Qualified Agricultural Exemption, Special Assessment, or 

Non-Property tax disputes. 

Pursuant to Michigan Tax Tribunal Rule (TTR) 279, you MUST submit a copy of the notice giving rise to the appeal 

(e.g. Board of Review Decision or Notice of Uncapping) with this Small Claims Petition, if applicable. If you do not 

submit this document, you may be held in default, 

Section 1: Petitioner’s Contact Information 

First Name 

M1 

Last Name/Company Name 

Congregation Khal Cheredim 

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

15050 Burton Ave 

City or Town 

State 

ZIP Code 

oP 

MI 

48237 

Telephone Number 

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

Section 2: Petitioner’s Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Contact Information 

| 

First Name 

M.l. 

Last Name 

Stephen 

Polter 

Firm 

Name 

(if 

any) 

meme 

polter Law Group - EPTA 

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

2600 W Big Beaver Ste L100 

City or Town 

State 

ZiP Code 

Troy 

Wi 

48084 

Telephone Number 

482 136800 

Email Address {do not enter unless you want MTT to send alt correspondence via email) 

spolter@polterlaw.com 

Section 3: Subject Property Information 

How many 

If you are appealing more than one parcel, are they contiguous or adjoining? 

parceisare you | [] vest 

[] No™ 

appealing? 

*if yes, use a muitiple parcel form for information regarding any contiguous parcels. 

1 

*if no, you must file separate appeats for each non-contiguous or non-adjoining parcel or you will be defaulted. 

Property Address (No., Street, City, ST, ZIP} 

[If multiple, list first property's address]

Page 2

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON |. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Section 4: Issues Being Appealed (check ail that apply) 

True Cash and Taxable Value 

O Poverty Exemption 

{1 Taxable Value Only (calculation) 

{J Disabled Veterans Exemption 

Uncapping of Taxable Value 

OJ Eligible Manufacturing Personal Property (ESA) 

Exemption from Taxation (other than the denial of a 

Classification 

Principal Residence or Qualified Agricultural Exemption) 

Section 5: Explain the Reason for this Appeal 

Petitioner has been and is a legal 501¢3 non profit organization as such definition is established by the Internal Revenue Code. As 

such, Petitioner has been property tax exempt for better than sixty (60) years. In 2024, Respondent performed a blanket audit on all 

its organizations {within City boundary) failing under such rubric. On said audit form, Petitioner inadvertantly entered "synagouge” as 

the nature of property useftype. Respondent therefore denied such exemption based on an "illegal" entity residing at such property 

location as it is not zoned for same, and full uncapped the property tax (excessively) under the commercial property millage. When 

representative then inquired as to how Petitioner entity was defined and or qualified previously, all the years it enjoyed tax 

exemption, it was told, property tax exemption for Peititioner was previously categorized "Parsonage." Contrary though to 

Respondent's fallacious belief, that position or property use hasn't changed. A rabbi that counsels certain community members does 

In fact live in the subject residence and enjoys parsonage privilieges therefor. Furthermore, while it is true that "once" per week ten 

(10) community members hold a 2-hour prayer vigil, this still, pursuant to either IRC and or MCL, does not qualify as a "synagouge” 

in the strict or even loosest definition of that term. The property further doubles, on occasion, as a study hail to which said rabbinic 

figure resident, Rabbi Deutsch, ministers (See MCL 211.7. Also see, St. Joseph's Church v. Detroit, and St. John's v, Bay City). And 

while, Petitioner may not be defined a "synagogue" by any stretch, it is nonetheless incorporated as a “religious society” (see legal 

name of Petitioner), and use of the property is in fact minister's (rabbi's) parsonage, while simultaneously a quorom (or "minyan") 

utilizes the space less than four hours per wesk as a prayer and or study group. There is no doubt that accordingly BOR reversal is 

in order, Petitioner is rightly a property tax exempt organization and it should retain same status in the future as nothing has changed 

from the past sixty (60) years except for a lay ignorant individual called upon to complete the audit paperwork, did so without 

idnetifying the true nature of the propery's use and or inquiring same from either a professional or even an individual well versed in 

Petitioner's purpose and signifcance - merely sloppy work caused such fallout, now costing Petitioner a whopping $10k it can hardly 

afford as it derives $0 income from any source and never has. We therefore request the Honorable Tribunal to restore such tax 

exempt status to Petitioner, as it is clearly deserving of same. 

Section 6: Jurisdictional Issues 

Year(s) you are appealing: 

2025 

Did you protest the assessment at a Board of Review (BOR)? 

Yes 

[mm] No 

if Yes, check which BOR you attended AND attach the BOR decision: [# March 

[[] duly 

[] December 

If No, check the applicable reason(s): 

[H| Not required to attend 

Assessment Change Notice was not received by Petitioner 

] Appealing a purported Clerical Error or Mutual Mistake of Fact (if yes, include explanation in Section 5)

Page 3

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Section 7: Valuation Information *use the multiple parcel form for additional, contiguous parcels. 

Parcel Identification Number:

Page 4

STATE OF

Page 5

20

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

Congregation Khal Cheredim,

Petitioner,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v 

MTT Docket No. 25-003517

City Of Oak Park,

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: October 7, 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

Congregation Khal Cheredim,

Petitioner,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v 

MTT Docket No. 25-003517

City Of Oak Park,

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: October 7, 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 

AUG 0 1 2025 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

~~ MICHIGAN TAX JRIBUNAL, 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIR 

RLON 1. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

PROPERTY TAX APPEAL PETITION FORM 

VALUATION / EXEMPTION / CLASSIFICATION APPEAL 

Do not use this form to appeal Principal Residence Exemption, Qualified Agricultural Exemption, Special Assessment, or 

Non-Property tax disputes. 

Pursuant to Michigan Tax Tribunal Rule (TTR) 279, you MUST submit a copy of the notice giving rise to the appeal 

(e.g. Board of Review Decision or Notice of Uncapping) with this Small Claims Petition, if applicable. If you do not 

submit this document, you may be held in default, 

Section 1: Petitioner’s Contact Information 

First Name 

M1 

Last Name/Company Name 

Congregation Khal Cheredim 

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

15050 Burton Ave 

City or Town 

State 

ZIP Code 

oP 

MI 

48237 

Telephone Number 

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

Section 2: Petitioner’s Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Contact Information 

| 

First Name 

M.l. 

Last Name 

Stephen 

Polter 

Firm 

Name 

(if 

any) 

meme 

polter Law Group - EPTA 

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

2600 W Big Beaver Ste L100 

City or Town 

State 

ZiP Code 

Troy 

Wi 

48084 

Telephone Number 

482 136800 

Email Address {do not enter unless you want MTT to send alt correspondence via email) 

spolter@polterlaw.com 

Section 3: Subject Property Information 

How many 

If you are appealing more than one parcel, are they contiguous or adjoining? 

parceisare you | [] vest 

[] No™ 

appealing? 

*if yes, use a muitiple parcel form for information regarding any contiguous parcels. 

1 

*if no, you must file separate appeats for each non-contiguous or non-adjoining parcel or you will be defaulted. 

Property Address (No., Street, City, ST, ZIP} 

[If multiple, list first property's address]

Page 2

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON |. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Section 4: Issues Being Appealed (check ail that apply) 

True Cash and Taxable Value 

O Poverty Exemption 

{1 Taxable Value Only (calculation) 

{J Disabled Veterans Exemption 

Uncapping of Taxable Value 

OJ Eligible Manufacturing Personal Property (ESA) 

Exemption from Taxation (other than the denial of a 

Classification 

Principal Residence or Qualified Agricultural Exemption) 

Section 5: Explain the Reason for this Appeal 

Petitioner has been and is a legal 501¢3 non profit organization as such definition is established by the Internal Revenue Code. As 

such, Petitioner has been property tax exempt for better than sixty (60) years. In 2024, Respondent performed a blanket audit on all 

its organizations {within City boundary) failing under such rubric. On said audit form, Petitioner inadvertantly entered "synagouge” as 

the nature of property useftype. Respondent therefore denied such exemption based on an "illegal" entity residing at such property 

location as it is not zoned for same, and full uncapped the property tax (excessively) under the commercial property millage. When 

representative then inquired as to how Petitioner entity was defined and or qualified previously, all the years it enjoyed tax 

exemption, it was told, property tax exemption for Peititioner was previously categorized "Parsonage." Contrary though to 

Respondent's fallacious belief, that position or property use hasn't changed. A rabbi that counsels certain community members does 

In fact live in the subject residence and enjoys parsonage privilieges therefor. Furthermore, while it is true that "once" per week ten 

(10) community members hold a 2-hour prayer vigil, this still, pursuant to either IRC and or MCL, does not qualify as a "synagouge” 

in the strict or even loosest definition of that term. The property further doubles, on occasion, as a study hail to which said rabbinic 

figure resident, Rabbi Deutsch, ministers (See MCL 211.7. Also see, St. Joseph's Church v. Detroit, and St. John's v, Bay City). And 

while, Petitioner may not be defined a "synagogue" by any stretch, it is nonetheless incorporated as a “religious society” (see legal 

name of Petitioner), and use of the property is in fact minister's (rabbi's) parsonage, while simultaneously a quorom (or "minyan") 

utilizes the space less than four hours per wesk as a prayer and or study group. There is no doubt that accordingly BOR reversal is 

in order, Petitioner is rightly a property tax exempt organization and it should retain same status in the future as nothing has changed 

from the past sixty (60) years except for a lay ignorant individual called upon to complete the audit paperwork, did so without 

idnetifying the true nature of the propery's use and or inquiring same from either a professional or even an individual well versed in 

Petitioner's purpose and signifcance - merely sloppy work caused such fallout, now costing Petitioner a whopping $10k it can hardly 

afford as it derives $0 income from any source and never has. We therefore request the Honorable Tribunal to restore such tax 

exempt status to Petitioner, as it is clearly deserving of same. 

Section 6: Jurisdictional Issues 

Year(s) you are appealing: 

2025 

Did you protest the assessment at a Board of Review (BOR)? 

Yes 

[mm] No 

if Yes, check which BOR you attended AND attach the BOR decision: [# March 

[[] duly 

[] December 

If No, check the applicable reason(s): 

[H| Not required to attend 

Assessment Change Notice was not received by Petitioner 

] Appealing a purported Clerical Error or Mutual Mistake of Fact (if yes, include explanation in Section 5)

Page 3

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Section 7: Valuation Information *use the multiple parcel form for additional, contiguous parcels. 

Parcel Identification Number:

Page 4

STATE OF

Page 5

20

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.