Coughlin Partners LLC, Petitioner Vs. City Of Lansing, 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 

Coughlin Partners LLC, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Petitioner, 

 

 

v 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-001746 

 

City of Lansing, 

 

Presiding Judge 

Respondent. 

 

Patricia L. Halm 

 

ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’S MOTION TO AMEND 

 

ORDER CORRECTING DOCKET 

 

ORDER GRANTING JOINT STIPULATION FOR ENTRY OF CONSENT JUDGMENT 

 

CONSENT JUDGMENT 

 

On November 5, 2025, Petitioner filed a Motion to Amend. In the motion, Petitioner 

states that the petition filed on May 29, 2025, correctly identified the subject property as 

consisting of four parcels of property and correctly listed the parcel numbers. However, 

after the petition was filed, Respondent combined the four parcels of property and 

assigned Parcel No. 33-01-01-17-226-292 to this new parcel. Given this, the docket 

needs to be corrected to reflect the new parcel number. In its answer, filed September 

25, 2025, Respondent acknowledges that the parcels have been combined and that 

Respondent assigned Parcel No. 33-01-01-17-226-292 to the combined parcel. 

Therefore, the Tribunal finds that good cause exists to grant Petitioner’s motion and to 

update the subject property’s parcel number. 

 

The Tribunal has reviewed the Stipulation and finds that it comports with the mandates 

of State law.1 As a result, the Tribunal shall enter the parties’ Stipulation. Therefore, 

 

IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion to Amend is GRANTED. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the docket shall be updated to reflect the change in the 

subject property’s parcel number, as indicated herein. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Joint Stipulation for Entry of Consent Judgment 

including all attachments, terms and conditions is GRANTED and ADOPTED, unless 

otherwise indicated. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the officer charged with maintaining the assessment 

rolls for the tax years at issue shall correct or cause the assessment rolls to be 

 

1 See MCL 211.27a.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-001746 

Page 2 of 2 

 

corrected to reflect the property’s true cash and taxable values as provided in this 

Consent Judgment within 20 days of the entry of the Consent Judgment.2 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the officer charged with collecting or refunding the 

affected taxes shall collect taxes and any applicable interest or issue a refund as 

required by the Consent Judgment within 28 days of the entry of the Consent 

Judgment. If a refund is warranted, it shall, unless otherwise indicated, include a 

proportionate share of any property tax administration fees paid and of penalty and 

interest paid on delinquent taxes. The refund shall also, unless otherwise indicated, 

separately indicate the amount of the taxes, fees, penalties, and interest being 

refunded. A sum determined by the Tribunal to have been unlawfully paid shall, unless 

otherwise indicated, bear interest from the date of payment to the date of judgment and 

the judgment shall bear interest to the date of its payment. A sum determined by the 

Tribunal to have been underpaid shall not bear interest for any time period prior to 28 

days after the issuance of this Consent Judgment. Pursuant to MCL 205.737, interest 

shall accrue (i) after December 31, 2020, through June 30, 2022, at the rate of 4.25%, 

(ii) after June 30, 2022, through December 31, 2022, at the rate of 4.27%, (iii) after 

December 31, 2022, through June 30, 2023, at the rate of 5.65%, (iv) after June 30, 

2023, through December 31, 2023, at the rate of 8.25%, (v) after December 31, 2023, 

through June 30, 2024, at the rate of 9.30%, (vi) after June 30, 2024, through December 

31, 2024, at the rate of 9.50%, (vii) after December 31, 2024, through June 30, 2025, at 

the rate of 9.47%, and (viii) after June 30, 2025, through December 31, 2025, at the rate 

of 8.66%. 

 

This Consent Judgment resolves all pending claims in this matter and closes this case. 

 

See docket look up for a copy of stipulation and for any possible refund paragraph. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

By _____________________________ 

Entered: November 10, 2025 

sb 

 

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

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

1 

4903-4007-2823.1 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

COUGHLIN PARTNERS, LLC, 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Petitioner, 

 

 

 

 

MTT Docket No 25-001746-TT 

 

v 

 

CITY OF LANSING, 

 

 

 

Respondent. 

_____________________________________________/ 

 

STIPULATION FOR ENTRY OF CONSENT JUDGMENT 

 

1. 

The case is pending in the X Entire Tribunal OR __ Small Claims Division. 

 

2. 

Property Parcel No: 33-01-01-17-226-292 

 

3. 

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

 

 

Review are: 

Tax Year

Parcel Number

True Cash Value

Assessed Value

Taxable Value

2025 

33-01-01-17-226-

292

$1,099,400 

$549,700 

$549,700 

 

 

4. 

The values for the property identified above as stipulated by the parties for settlement 

 

 

purposes are: 

Tax Year

Parcel Number

True Cash Value

Assessed Value

Taxable Value

2025 

33-01-01-17-226-

292

$550,000 

$275,000 

$275,000 

 

5. 

If stipulation addresses tax years other than the tax year originally appealed or tax years 

 

 

added through motions to amend that have been granted by the Tribunal, list the separate 

 

 

facts upon which the parties rely to invoke the Tribunal’s authority over those tax year or 

 

 

years: 

 

6. 

List separately any special terms or conditions being proposed by the parties that would 

 

 

affect the execution of this Consent Judgment including, but not limited to, the joint 

 

 

payment of the refund, the waiver of interest, etc.:

Page 2

2 

4903-4007-2823.1 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that refunds 

shall be made payable jointly to Petitioner named herein and 

its counsel, Foley & Lardner LLP, and sent in care of such 

counsel. Calculations of the refund amount shall also be 

sent to Petitioner’s counsel at the same address. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that all interest 

due hereunder is waived if, and only if, all refunds otherwise 

due are made within 120 days of the date of entry of the 

Consent Judgment. 

 

FOLEY & LARDNER LLP 

 

 

 

CITY OF LANSING ASSESSING DEPT. 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

 

 

 

Representative for Respondent 

 

By: /s/ Jason Conti 

 

 

 

 

By: /s/ Jennifer Czeiszperger 

 

 

 

Jason Conti (P55617) 

 

 

 

 

Jennifer Czeiszperger 

500 Woodward Avenue, Suite 2700 

 

 

124 W. Michigan Avenue, 3rd Floor 

Detroit, Michigan 48226 

 

 

 

Lansing, Michigan 48933 

(313) 234-7177 

 

 

 

 

(517) 483-7624 

 

 

 

Dated: November 5, 2025

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 

Coughlin Partners LLC, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Petitioner, 

 

 

v 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-001746 

 

City of Lansing, 

 

Presiding Judge 

Respondent. 

 

Patricia L. Halm 

 

ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’S MOTION TO AMEND 

 

ORDER CORRECTING DOCKET 

 

ORDER GRANTING JOINT STIPULATION FOR ENTRY OF CONSENT JUDGMENT 

 

CONSENT JUDGMENT 

 

On November 5, 2025, Petitioner filed a Motion to Amend. In the motion, Petitioner 

states that the petition filed on May 29, 2025, correctly identified the subject property as 

consisting of four parcels of property and correctly listed the parcel numbers. However, 

after the petition was filed, Respondent combined the four parcels of property and 

assigned Parcel No. 33-01-01-17-226-292 to this new parcel. Given this, the docket 

needs to be corrected to reflect the new parcel number. In its answer, filed September 

25, 2025, Respondent acknowledges that the parcels have been combined and that 

Respondent assigned Parcel No. 33-01-01-17-226-292 to the combined parcel. 

Therefore, the Tribunal finds that good cause exists to grant Petitioner’s motion and to 

update the subject property’s parcel number. 

 

The Tribunal has reviewed the Stipulation and finds that it comports with the mandates 

of State law.1 As a result, the Tribunal shall enter the parties’ Stipulation. Therefore, 

 

IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion to Amend is GRANTED. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the docket shall be updated to reflect the change in the 

subject property’s parcel number, as indicated herein. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Joint Stipulation for Entry of Consent Judgment 

including all attachments, terms and conditions is GRANTED and ADOPTED, unless 

otherwise indicated. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the officer charged with maintaining the assessment 

rolls for the tax years at issue shall correct or cause the assessment rolls to be 

 

1 See MCL 211.27a.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-001746 

Page 2 of 2 

 

corrected to reflect the property’s true cash and taxable values as provided in this 

Consent Judgment within 20 days of the entry of the Consent Judgment.2 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the officer charged with collecting or refunding the 

affected taxes shall collect taxes and any applicable interest or issue a refund as 

required by the Consent Judgment within 28 days of the entry of the Consent 

Judgment. If a refund is warranted, it shall, unless otherwise indicated, include a 

proportionate share of any property tax administration fees paid and of penalty and 

interest paid on delinquent taxes. The refund shall also, unless otherwise indicated, 

separately indicate the amount of the taxes, fees, penalties, and interest being 

refunded. A sum determined by the Tribunal to have been unlawfully paid shall, unless 

otherwise indicated, bear interest from the date of payment to the date of judgment and 

the judgment shall bear interest to the date of its payment. A sum determined by the 

Tribunal to have been underpaid shall not bear interest for any time period prior to 28 

days after the issuance of this Consent Judgment. Pursuant to MCL 205.737, interest 

shall accrue (i) after December 31, 2020, through June 30, 2022, at the rate of 4.25%, 

(ii) after June 30, 2022, through December 31, 2022, at the rate of 4.27%, (iii) after 

December 31, 2022, through June 30, 2023, at the rate of 5.65%, (iv) after June 30, 

2023, through December 31, 2023, at the rate of 8.25%, (v) after December 31, 2023, 

through June 30, 2024, at the rate of 9.30%, (vi) after June 30, 2024, through December 

31, 2024, at the rate of 9.50%, (vii) after December 31, 2024, through June 30, 2025, at 

the rate of 9.47%, and (viii) after June 30, 2025, through December 31, 2025, at the rate 

of 8.66%. 

 

This Consent Judgment resolves all pending claims in this matter and closes this case. 

 

See docket look up for a copy of stipulation and for any possible refund paragraph. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

By _____________________________ 

Entered: November 10, 2025 

sb 

 

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

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

4918-3370-3287.1 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

COUGHLIN PARTNERS, LLC, 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Petitioner, 

 

 

 

 

MTT Docket No 25-001746-TT 

 

v 

 

CITY OF LANSING, 

 

 

 

Respondent. 

______________________________________________________________________________/ 

 

FOLEY & LARDNER LLP 

 

 

 

CITY OF LANSING ASSESSING DEPT. 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

 

 

 

Representative for Respondent 

By: Jason Conti (P55617) 

 

 

 

By: Jennifer Czeiszperger, MMAO 

500 Woodward Avenue, Suite 2700 

 

 

124 W. Michigan Avenue, 3rd Floor 

Detroit, Michigan 48226 

 

 

 

Lansing, Michigan 48933 

(313) 234-7100 

 

 

 

 

(517) 483-7624 

jconti@foley.com 

 

 

 

 

 

_______________________________________________________________________________/ 

 

UNOPPOSED MOTION TO AMEND THE 

PARCEL ID NUMBER FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY 

 

 

PETITIONER moves to amend the parcel id number for the Subject Property, and states: 

 

1. 

At the time of filing the Petition, Petitioner correctly identified the address and the four 

contiguous parcel numbers that made up the Subject Property, specifically tax parcel nos. 01-01-17-226-

291, 01-01-17-226-021, 01-01-17-226-011, and 01-01-17-226-001. 

 

2. 

Sometime in 2025 Respondent administratively combined those four tax parcel 

identification numbers for the Subject Property into one brand new parcel number, identified as tax parcel 

no. 33-01-01-17-226-292, and issued 2025 assessed and taxable values for this new parcel number 

totaling $549,700 each. 

 

2. 

As a result, Petitioner files this motion to amend in order to reflect that the current correct 

parcel number for the Subject Property is 33-01-01-17-226-292.

Page 2

2 

4918-3370-3287.1 

 

3. 

Respondent stated that it does not oppose this Motion and the relief requested herein. 

 

WHEREFORE, Petitioner requests that this Tribunal enter an order: (i) granting the Motion, (ii) 

amending the Petition, and any amendments thereto, so that the parcel id number for the Subject Property 

is 33-01-01-17-226-292, and (iii) awarding Petitioner any additional relief this Tribunal deems necessary 

and just. 

Respectfully submitted, 

FOLEY & LARDNER LLP 

 

 

 

 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

 

 

 

 

 

By s/ Jason Conti_______ 

 

 

 

 

Jason Conti (P55617) 

 

 

 

500 Woodward Avenue, Suite 2700 

 

 

 

Detroit, Michigan 48226 

 

 

 

 

(313) 234-7100 

 

 

 

 

 

jconti@foley.com 

 

Dated: November 5, 2025 

 

 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

 

The undersigned states that on November 5, 2025, he had a copy of this Motion served on the 

following via email: 

Jennifer Czeisperger 

jennifer.czeiszperger@lansingmi.gov 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

/s/ Jason Conti

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 

Coughlin Partners LLC, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Petitioner, 

 

 

v 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-001746 

 

City of Lansing, 

 

Presiding Judge 

Respondent. 

 

Patricia L. Halm 

 

ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’S MOTION TO AMEND 

 

ORDER CORRECTING DOCKET 

 

ORDER GRANTING JOINT STIPULATION FOR ENTRY OF CONSENT JUDGMENT 

 

CONSENT JUDGMENT 

 

On November 5, 2025, Petitioner filed a Motion to Amend. In the motion, Petitioner 

states that the petition filed on May 29, 2025, correctly identified the subject property as 

consisting of four parcels of property and correctly listed the parcel numbers. However, 

after the petition was filed, Respondent combined the four parcels of property and 

assigned Parcel No. 33-01-01-17-226-292 to this new parcel. Given this, the docket 

needs to be corrected to reflect the new parcel number. In its answer, filed September 

25, 2025, Respondent acknowledges that the parcels have been combined and that 

Respondent assigned Parcel No. 33-01-01-17-226-292 to the combined parcel. 

Therefore, the Tribunal finds that good cause exists to grant Petitioner’s motion and to 

update the subject property’s parcel number. 

 

The Tribunal has reviewed the Stipulation and finds that it comports with the mandates 

of State law.1 As a result, the Tribunal shall enter the parties’ Stipulation. Therefore, 

 

IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion to Amend is GRANTED. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the docket shall be updated to reflect the change in the 

subject property’s parcel number, as indicated herein. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Joint Stipulation for Entry of Consent Judgment 

including all attachments, terms and conditions is GRANTED and ADOPTED, unless 

otherwise indicated. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the officer charged with maintaining the assessment 

rolls for the tax years at issue shall correct or cause the assessment rolls to be 

 

1 See MCL 211.27a.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-001746 

Page 2 of 2 

 

corrected to reflect the property’s true cash and taxable values as provided in this 

Consent Judgment within 20 days of the entry of the Consent Judgment.2 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the officer charged with collecting or refunding the 

affected taxes shall collect taxes and any applicable interest or issue a refund as 

required by the Consent Judgment within 28 days of the entry of the Consent 

Judgment. If a refund is warranted, it shall, unless otherwise indicated, include a 

proportionate share of any property tax administration fees paid and of penalty and 

interest paid on delinquent taxes. The refund shall also, unless otherwise indicated, 

separately indicate the amount of the taxes, fees, penalties, and interest being 

refunded. A sum determined by the Tribunal to have been unlawfully paid shall, unless 

otherwise indicated, bear interest from the date of payment to the date of judgment and 

the judgment shall bear interest to the date of its payment. A sum determined by the 

Tribunal to have been underpaid shall not bear interest for any time period prior to 28 

days after the issuance of this Consent Judgment. Pursuant to MCL 205.737, interest 

shall accrue (i) after December 31, 2020, through June 30, 2022, at the rate of 4.25%, 

(ii) after June 30, 2022, through December 31, 2022, at the rate of 4.27%, (iii) after 

December 31, 2022, through June 30, 2023, at the rate of 5.65%, (iv) after June 30, 

2023, through December 31, 2023, at the rate of 8.25%, (v) after December 31, 2023, 

through June 30, 2024, at the rate of 9.30%, (vi) after June 30, 2024, through December 

31, 2024, at the rate of 9.50%, (vii) after December 31, 2024, through June 30, 2025, at 

the rate of 9.47%, and (viii) after June 30, 2025, through December 31, 2025, at the rate 

of 8.66%. 

 

This Consent Judgment resolves all pending claims in this matter and closes this case. 

 

See docket look up for a copy of stipulation and for any possible refund paragraph. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

By _____________________________ 

Entered: November 10, 2025 

sb 

 

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

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 

SEP 95 2025 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS AND RULES 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Coughlin Partners, LLC 

Petitioner 

v 

MOAHR Docket 25-001746 

Parcel No. 33-01-01-17-226-292 

CITY OF LANSING, 

Respondent 

Jennifer Czeiszperger, MMAO 

City Assessor 

124 W. Michigan Avenue 

3rd Floor, City Hall 

Lansing, MI 48933 

(517) 483-4136 

Jennifer.czeiszperger@lansingmi.gov 

RESPONDENT’S ANSWER TO PETITIONER’S PETITION 

AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 

RESPONDENT, the City of Lansing, through its Assessor, Jennifer Czeiszperger, hereby 

responds to the allegations made in Petitioner’s Petition as follows: 

1. 

Respondent denied the allegations in Paragraph 1, the parcel numbers listed have been 

combined for the 2025 tax year to parcel number 33-01-01-17-226-292. The listed parcel 

numbers are no longer active parcel numbers. 

Further the mailing address on records is 

24500 Northwestern Hwy, Ste 100, Southfield, MI 48075. 

’ 

2. 

Respondent admits the allegations in Paragraph 2.

Page 2

MTT Docket # 25-001746 

10. 

Respondent acknowledges Petitioner’s beliefs as to the issues in this appeal but denies 

that those issues have merit and further denies that Petitioner is entitled to any relief. 

Further, the subject property did not have any “additions” or “losses” for the 2025 tax 

year. 

Respondent acknowledges Petitioner’s beliefs as to the issues in this appeal but denies 

that those issues have merit and further denies that Petitioner is entitled to any relief. 

Further, the subject property did not have any “additions” or “losses” for the 2025 tax 

yeat. 

Respondent denies the allegations in paragraph 7. The Petitioner did not make a March 

Board of Review appeal for the 2025 assessment. This was not required for this property 

classification. 

Respondent denies the allegations in Paragraph 8 for the reason that it is untrue. In further 

answer, the assessed, state equalized and/or taxable values do not exceed permitted 

amounts, do not exceed the percentage of true cash value permitted by law, were correctly 

determined and are based upon correct application of proper principles, and the values and 

Respondent’s mode of assessment are constitutional. 

Respondent contends that the 2025 values for the property identified above are: 

Parcel Number 

True Cash Value 

Assessed Value 

Taxable Value 

33-01-01-17-226-292 | $ 1,099,400 

$549,700 

$549,7008 

The 2025 values in dispute for the property identified above are: 

Parcel Number 

True Cash Value | Assessed Value 

| Taxable Value 

33-01-01-17-226-292 

$0 

$0 

$0 

WHEREFORE, Respondent City of Lansing respectfully requests that this Honorable Tribunal 

dismiss the Petition; affirm Respondent’s assessed and taxable values, subject to county and state 

equalization., and award Respondent its cost and attorney fees.

Page 3

MTT Docket # 25-001746 

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Respondent City of Lansing will rely on the 

following affirmative defenses: 

A. 

Petitioner fails to allege specific and sufficient facts to set forth a cause of action 

against the Respondent and to support Petitioner’s claim for relief. 

B. 

The Tribunal is charged with finding a property’s true cash value to determine the 

property’s lawful assessment. Alhi Development Co v Orion Twp, 110 Mich App 764, 767 (1981). 

C. 

Petitioner has the burden of establishing the property’s true cash value. See MCL 

205.737(3) and Kern v Pontiac Twp, 93 Mich App 612 (1974). 

B. 

Petitioner fails to allege specific and sufficient facts to establish fraud, error of law, 

discrimination, and application of wrong principles or illegality on the part of the Respondent or 

its agents. 

C. 

Petitioner fails to allege the mode and method of assessing the subject property 

failed to conform to the mode and method applied in the case of all properties within the 

Respondent’s taxing unit for the tax year in questions. 

D. 

Petitioner fails to allege specific and sufficient facts needed to establish the true 

cash value, assessed and taxable value for the subject property. 

E. 

Petitioner fails to allege specific and sufficient facts to support its allegations that 

the assessed value of the subject property, as equalized, is at a level other than 50% and it also 

fails to allege specific and sufficient facts to support its allegations that the subject property’s

Page 4

MTT Docket # 25-001746 

G. 

Petitioner asks this Tribunal to grant it illegal preference by application of a method 

of assessment different from that utilized in the assessment of

Page 5

STATE

Page 6

C

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

1 

4903-4007-2823.1 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

COUGHLIN PARTNERS, LLC, 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Petitioner, 

 

 

 

 

MTT Docket No 25-001746-TT 

 

v 

 

CITY OF LANSING, 

 

 

 

Respondent. 

_____________________________________________/ 

 

STIPULATION FOR ENTRY OF CONSENT JUDGMENT 

 

1. 

The case is pending in the X Entire Tribunal OR __ Small Claims Division. 

 

2. 

Property Parcel No: 33-01-01-17-226-292 

 

3. 

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

 

 

Review are: 

Tax Year

Parcel Number

True Cash Value

Assessed Value

Taxable Value

2025 

33-01-01-17-226-

292

$1,099,400 

$549,700 

$549,700 

 

 

4. 

The values for the property identified above as stipulated by the parties for settlement 

 

 

purposes are: 

Tax Year

Parcel Number

True Cash Value

Assessed Value

Taxable Value

2025 

33-01-01-17-226-

292

$550,000 

$275,000 

$275,000 

 

5. 

If stipulation addresses tax years other than the tax year originally appealed or tax years 

 

 

added through motions to amend that have been granted by the Tribunal, list the separate 

 

 

facts upon which the parties rely to invoke the Tribunal’s authority over those tax year or 

 

 

years: 

 

6. 

List separately any special terms or conditions being proposed by the parties that would 

 

 

affect the execution of this Consent Judgment including, but not limited to, the joint 

 

 

payment of the refund, the waiver of interest, etc.:

Page 2

2 

4903-4007-2823.1 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that refunds 

shall be made payable jointly to Petitioner named herein and 

its counsel, Foley & Lardner LLP, and sent in care of such 

counsel. Calculations of the refund amount shall also be 

sent to Petitioner’s counsel at the same address. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that all interest 

due hereunder is waived if, and only if, all refunds otherwise 

due are made within 120 days of the date of entry of the 

Consent Judgment. 

 

FOLEY & LARDNER LLP 

 

 

 

CITY OF LANSING ASSESSING DEPT. 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

 

 

 

Representative for Respondent 

 

By: /s/ Jason Conti 

 

 

 

 

By: /s/ Jennifer Czeiszperger 

 

 

 

Jason Conti (P55617) 

 

 

 

 

Jennifer Czeiszperger 

500 Woodward Avenue, Suite 2700 

 

 

124 W. Michigan Avenue, 3rd Floor 

Detroit, Michigan 48226 

 

 

 

Lansing, Michigan 48933 

(313) 234-7177 

 

 

 

 

(517) 483-7624 

 

 

 

Dated: November 5, 2025

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

4918-3370-3287.1 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

COUGHLIN PARTNERS, LLC, 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Petitioner, 

 

 

 

 

MTT Docket No 25-001746-TT 

 

v 

 

CITY OF LANSING, 

 

 

 

Respondent. 

______________________________________________________________________________/ 

 

FOLEY & LARDNER LLP 

 

 

 

CITY OF LANSING ASSESSING DEPT. 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

 

 

 

Representative for Respondent 

By: Jason Conti (P55617) 

 

 

 

By: Jennifer Czeiszperger, MMAO 

500 Woodward Avenue, Suite 2700 

 

 

124 W. Michigan Avenue, 3rd Floor 

Detroit, Michigan 48226 

 

 

 

Lansing, Michigan 48933 

(313) 234-7100 

 

 

 

 

(517) 483-7624 

jconti@foley.com 

 

 

 

 

 

_______________________________________________________________________________/ 

 

UNOPPOSED MOTION TO AMEND THE 

PARCEL ID NUMBER FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY 

 

 

PETITIONER moves to amend the parcel id number for the Subject Property, and states: 

 

1. 

At the time of filing the Petition, Petitioner correctly identified the address and the four 

contiguous parcel numbers that made up the Subject Property, specifically tax parcel nos. 01-01-17-226-

291, 01-01-17-226-021, 01-01-17-226-011, and 01-01-17-226-001. 

 

2. 

Sometime in 2025 Respondent administratively combined those four tax parcel 

identification numbers for the Subject Property into one brand new parcel number, identified as tax parcel 

no. 33-01-01-17-226-292, and issued 2025 assessed and taxable values for this new parcel number 

totaling $549,700 each. 

 

2. 

As a result, Petitioner files this motion to amend in order to reflect that the current correct 

parcel number for the Subject Property is 33-01-01-17-226-292.

Page 2

2 

4918-3370-3287.1 

 

3. 

Respondent stated that it does not oppose this Motion and the relief requested herein. 

 

WHEREFORE, Petitioner requests that this Tribunal enter an order: (i) granting the Motion, (ii) 

amending the Petition, and any amendments thereto, so that the parcel id number for the Subject Property 

is 33-01-01-17-226-292, and (iii) awarding Petitioner any additional relief this Tribunal deems necessary 

and just. 

Respectfully submitted, 

FOLEY & LARDNER LLP 

 

 

 

 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

 

 

 

 

 

By s/ Jason Conti_______ 

 

 

 

 

Jason Conti (P55617) 

 

 

 

500 Woodward Avenue, Suite 2700 

 

 

 

Detroit, Michigan 48226 

 

 

 

 

(313) 234-7100 

 

 

 

 

 

jconti@foley.com 

 

Dated: November 5, 2025 

 

 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

 

The undersigned states that on November 5, 2025, he had a copy of this Motion served on the 

following via email: 

Jennifer Czeisperger 

jennifer.czeiszperger@lansingmi.gov 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

/s/ Jason Conti

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

4935-7523-1075.1 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

 

COUGHLIN PARTNERS, LLC, 

 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-001746 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Parcel Nos. 

01-01-17-226-291 

 

 

Petitioner, 

 

 

 

 

 

01-01-17-226-021 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

01-01-17-226-011 

v 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

01-01-17-226-001 

 

CITY OF LANSING, 

 

 

 

Respondent. 

 

________________________________________/ 

 

FOLEY & LARDNER LLP 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

By: Jason Conti (P55617) 

500 Woodward Avenue, Suite 2700 

Detroit, Michigan 48226 

(313) 234-7100 

jconti@foley.com 

_____________________________________________/ 

 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

 

On August 26, 2025, I caused to be served, via the methods listed below, a copy of Petitioner’s 

Petition for the 2025 Tax Year, Notice of Docket Number, and this Proof of Service on: 

Ingham County Clerk 

341 S. Jefferson Street 

Mason, Michigan 48854 

 

 via U.S. mail 

Ingham County Equalization 

Director 

P.O. Box 319 

Courthouse 

Mason, Michigan 48854-0319 

 

via U.S. mail

Secretary of the Local 

School Board 

Lansing Public Schools 

519 West Kalamazoo Street 

Lansing, Michigan 48933 

 

via U.S. mail

 

State Treasurer 

Michigan Dep’t of Treasury 

Treasury Building 

430 W. Allegan Street 

Lansing, Michigan 48922 

 

 via U.S. mail 

 

 

 

Lansing City Clerk or 

Township Supervisor/Clerk 

124 W. Michigan Avenue 

9th Floor 

Lansing, Michigan 48933 

 

 via Certified Mail 

 

City of Lansing Assessor 

124 W. Michigan Avenue 

3rd Floor 

Lansing, Michigan 48933 

 

 via Certified Mail

Page 2

2 

4935-7523-1075.1 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FOLEY & LARDNER LLP 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

By: /s/ Jason Conti (P55617) 

 

 

 

 

500 Woodward Avenue, Suite 2700 

 

Detroit, Michigan 48226 

 

(313) 234-7100 

 

jconti@foley.com

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

1 

4902-7256-8902.1 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

 

COUGHLIN PARTNERS, LLC, 

 

 

MTT Docket No. _____________ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Parcel Nos. 01-01-17-226-291 

Petitioner, 

 

 

 

 

 01-01-17-226-021 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 01-01-17-226-011 

V 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 01-01-17-226-001 

 

CITY OF LANSING, 

 

 

 

Respondent. 

________________________________________/ 

 

PETITION FOR THE 2025 TAX YEAR 

 

 

COUGHLIN PARTNERS, LLC (“Petitioner”), through its attorneys, Foley & Lardner LLP, states: 

 

1. 

Petitioner’s principal office address is 24500 Northwestern Hwy., Suite 100, Southfield, 

Michigan 48075. Petitioner is a party in interest with respect to property taxes on contiguous real property 

tax parcel nos. 01-01-17-226-291, 01-01-17-226-021, 01-01-17-226-011, and 01-01-17-226-001 

(collectively, the “Subject Property”), also known as 1019 W Saginaw St, Lansing, Michigan. 

 

2. 

Respondent City of Lansing (“Respondent”) assesses and collects property taxes on the 

Subject Property. 

 

3. 

In 2025, Respondent determined the taxable and assessed values of the Subject Property 

to be as follows (which will result in a state equalized value in the same amount based upon the tentative 

equalization factor): 

Parcel No. 

AV 

TV 

01-01-17-226-291 

$416,700 

$416,700 

01-01-17-226-021 

$5,800 

$5,800 

01-01-17-226-011 

$5,000 

$5,000

Page 2

2 

4902-7256-8902.1 

01-01-17-226-001 

$18,200 

$18,200 

 

 

4. 

The Subject Property is classified as Commercial Real. The Subject Property is presently 

used or available for use for Commercial purposes. Petitioner believes that the Subject Property was 

originally designed to be used for Commercial purposes. 

 

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 the Subject Property, then a 

board of review protest was filed in March, 2025. 

 

8. 

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

Subject 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 the Subject Property that is 

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

Page 3

3 

4902-7256-8902.1 

 

 

(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. 

 

WHEREFORE, Petitioner requests that the Tax Tribunal enter an Order reducing the 2024 taxable 

values and state equalized values of the Subject Property as follows: 

Parcel No. 

AV 

TV 

01-01-17-226-291 

$100,000 

$100,000 

01-01-17-226-021 

$1,000 

$1,000 

01-01-17-226-011 

$1,000 

$1,000 

01-01-17-226-001 

$2,000 

$2,000 

 

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

costs. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Respectfully submitted, 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FOLEY & LARDNER LLP 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

By: /s/ Jason Conti 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jason Conti (P55617) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

500 Woodward Avenue, Suite 2700 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Detroit, Michigan 48226 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(313) 234-7177 

 

 

 

 

 

 

jconti@foley.com 

 

 

Dated: May 29, 2025

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

Coughlin Partners LLC, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

v

MTT Docket No.: 25-001746

City Of Lansing, 

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 23, 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

1 

4902-7256-8902.1 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

 

COUGHLIN PARTNERS, LLC, 

 

 

MTT Docket No. _____________ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Parcel Nos. 01-01-17-226-291 

Petitioner, 

 

 

 

 

 01-01-17-226-021 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 01-01-17-226-011 

V 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 01-01-17-226-001 

 

CITY OF LANSING, 

 

 

 

Respondent. 

________________________________________/ 

 

PETITION FOR THE 2025 TAX YEAR 

 

 

COUGHLIN PARTNERS, LLC (“Petitioner”), through its attorneys, Foley & Lardner LLP, states: 

 

1. 

Petitioner’s principal office address is 24500 Northwestern Hwy., Suite 100, Southfield, 

Michigan 48075. Petitioner is a party in interest with respect to property taxes on contiguous real property 

tax parcel nos. 01-01-17-226-291, 01-01-17-226-021, 01-01-17-226-011, and 01-01-17-226-001 

(collectively, the “Subject Property”), also known as 1019 W Saginaw St, Lansing, Michigan. 

 

2. 

Respondent City of Lansing (“Respondent”) assesses and collects property taxes on the 

Subject Property. 

 

3. 

In 2025, Respondent determined the taxable and assessed values of the Subject Property 

to be as follows (which will result in a state equalized value in the same amount based upon the tentative 

equalization factor): 

Parcel No. 

AV 

TV 

01-01-17-226-291 

$416,700 

$416,700 

01-01-17-226-021 

$5,800 

$5,800 

01-01-17-226-011 

$5,000 

$5,000

Page 2

2 

4902-7256-8902.1 

01-01-17-226-001 

$18,200 

$18,200 

 

 

4. 

The Subject Property is classified as Commercial Real. The Subject Property is presently 

used or available for use for Commercial purposes. Petitioner believes that the Subject Property was 

originally designed to be used for Commercial purposes. 

 

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 the Subject Property, then a 

board of review protest was filed in March, 2025. 

 

8. 

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

Subject 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 the Subject Property that is 

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

Page 3

3 

4902-7256-8902.1 

 

 

(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. 

 

WHEREFORE, Petitioner requests that the Tax Tribunal enter an Order reducing the 2024 taxable 

values and state equalized values of the Subject Property as follows: 

Parcel No. 

AV 

TV 

01-01-17-226-291 

$100,000 

$100,000 

01-01-17-226-021 

$1,000 

$1,000 

01-01-17-226-011 

$1,000 

$1,000 

01-01-17-226-001 

$2,000 

$2,000 

 

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

costs. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Respectfully submitted, 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FOLEY & LARDNER LLP 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

By: /s/ Jason Conti 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jason Conti (P55617) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

500 Woodward Avenue, Suite 2700 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Detroit, Michigan 48226 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(313) 234-7177 

 

 

 

 

 

 

jconti@foley.com 

 

 

Dated: May 29, 2025

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 - Petitioner

MOAHR DOCKET NO. 

Section 1: Petitioner’s Contact Information

Filer type: Organization

First Name/Company Name

M.I.

Last Name

Coughlin Partners, LLC

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

24500 Northwestern Hwy.

Suite 100

City or Town

Southfield

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

48075

Telephone Number

3132347177

Fax Number

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

jconti@foley.com

Section 2: Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Contact Information

First Name

Jason

M.I.

Last Name

Conti

Firm Name (if any)

Foley & Lardner LLP

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

500 Woodward Ave, Ste 2700

City or Town

Detroit

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

48226

Telephone Number

313-234-7177

Fax Number

313-234-2800

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

jconti@foley.com

Section 5: Issue

Please designate one: 

Valuation – Fill out Sections 4, 5, & 6 below

Section 6: Subject Property Information

How many parcels are you 

appealing?4

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

1019 W. Saginaw Street

Lansing

Michigan

Taxing Authority (City or Township)

City Of Lansing (INGHAM)

County

Ingham

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

(*If no, you must file separate appeals for each non-contiguous or non-adjoining parcel.)

Page 2

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

ORLENE HAWKS

DIRECTOR

Section 7: Check which of the following you are appealing (check all that apply)

True Cash and Taxable Values

Section 8: Valuation Information for Each Parcel under Appeal

Parcel Number:

01-01-17-226-291

Classification of Property: Real 

Commercial

Current Assessed Value (also known as State Equalized Value) as established by the Board of Review:

416700

Current Taxable Value as established by the Board of Review:

416700

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

200000

Multiply the True Cash Value by 50% and enter here. This is your contention of Assessed Value (also known as State Equalized Value).

100000

If you belive the Taxable Value differs from your contention of Assessed Value, enter your contention of Taxable Value.

Parcel Number:

01-01-17-226-021

Classification of Property: Real 

Commercial

Current Assessed Value (also known as State Equalized Value) as established by the Board of Review:

5800

Current Taxable Value as established by the Board of Review:

5800

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

2000

Multiply the True Cash Value by 50% and enter here. This is your contention of Assessed Value (also known as State Equalized Value).

1000

If you belive the Taxable Value differs from your contention of Assessed Value, enter your contention of Taxable Value.

Parcel Number:

01-01-17-226-011

Classification of Property: Real 

Commercial

Current Assessed Value (also known as State Equalized Value) as established by the Board of Review:

5000

Current Taxable Value as established by the Board of Review:

5000

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

2000

Multiply the True Cash Value by 50% and enter here. This is your contention of Assessed Value (also known as State Equalized Value).

Page 3

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

ORLENE HAWKS

DIRECTOR

1000

If you belive the Taxable Value differs from your contention of Assessed Value, enter your contention of Taxable Value.

Parcel Number:

01-01-17-226-001

Classification of Property: Real 

Commercial

Current Assessed Value (also known as State Equalized Value) as established by the Board of Review:

18200

Current Taxable Value as established by the Board of Review:

18200

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

4000

Multiply the True Cash Value by 50% and enter here. This is your contention of Assessed Value (also known as State Equalized Value).

2000

If you belive the Taxable Value differs from your contention of Assessed Value, enter your contention of Taxable Value.

Section 9: Assessment Information

Type of Tax Assessment(s):

Assessment Number(s):

Check all that is being appealed: 

Check what action prompted this appeal:

If “other,” please explain:

Section 10: Special Assessment Information

Type of Special Assessment:

Did

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.