Mark A Herroscheck Petitioner V Township Of Plainfield 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 

Mark A Herroscheck, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Petitioner, 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

 

 

 

v 

 

MTT Docket No. 26-002682 

 

Plainfield Township, 

 

Presiding Judge 

Respondent. 

 

Patricia L. Halm 

 

ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’S FEE WAIVER REQUEST 

 

On July 15, 2026, Petitioner filed a fee waiver request with the Tribunal. The request 

indicates that fees should be waived for the above-captioned case because Petitioner 

receives benefits through Medicaid. 

 

The Tribunal has considered the request and the case file and finds that Petitioner has 

shown good cause to grant the request. 

 

Therefore, 

 

IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner’s Fee Waiver Request is GRANTED. 

 

 

 

Entered: September 29, 2026 

 

 

By: /s/ Patricia L. Halm 

kac 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

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

Mark A Herroscheck,

Petitioner, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v

 

MTT Docket No. 26-002682

Township Of Plainfield,

Respondent.

ORDER OF DEFAULT

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

Petitioner did not submit a copy of the notice giving rise to the appeal (i.e., notice of 

action taken by Board of Review, uncapping notice, PRE denial notice, final assessment 

notice, etc.), as required by TTR 279. As such, Petitioner must submit the notice within 

14 days of the entry of this order. 

Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner is HELD IN DEFAULT.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the defaulted party shall cure the default, as indicated 

above, within 14 days of the entry of this order.1 

Failure to comply with this order will result in the defaulted party being required to file a 

motion to set aside the default (with appropriate filing fee).

By: /s/ Patricia L. Halm

Entered: September 25, 2026

1 “A submission by mail is considered filed on the date indicated by the United States Postal Service 

postmark on the envelope containing the submission. A submission without a postmark or with an illegible 

postmark is considered filed on the date the submission is received by the tribunal. A submission by 

commercial delivery service is considered filed on the date the submission is given to the commercial 

service for delivery to the tribunal as indicated by the receipt date on the package containing the 

submission. A submission by personal service is considered filed on the date the submission is received. 

A submission through the tribunal’s e-filing system by 11:59 p.m. on a business day is considered filed on 

that business day. A submission by email to the email address designated by the tribunal by 11:59 p.m. 

on a business day is considered filed on that business day. A submission on a Saturday, a Sunday, or a 

holiday is considered filed on the following business day, as provided by section 35a of the tax tribunal 

act, MCL 205.735a.” TTR 225(5).

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 26-002682

Page 2 of 2

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

Mark A Herroscheck,

Petitioner, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v

 

MTT Docket No. 26-002682

Township Of Plainfield,

Respondent.

ORDER OF DEFAULT

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

Petitioner did not submit a copy of the notice giving rise to the appeal (i.e., notice of 

action taken by Board of Review, uncapping notice, PRE denial notice, final assessment 

notice, etc.), as required by TTR 279. As such, Petitioner must submit the notice within 

14 days of the entry of this order. 

Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner is HELD IN DEFAULT.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the defaulted party shall cure the default, as indicated 

above, within 14 days of the entry of this order.2 

Failure to comply with this order will result in the defaulted party being required to file a 

motion to set aside the default (with appropriate filing fee).

By: /s/ Patricia L. Halm

Entered: September 25, 2026

2 “A submission by mail is considered filed on the date indicated by the United States Postal Service 

postmark on the envelope containing the submission. A submission without a postmark or with an illegible 

postmark is considered filed on the date the submission is received by the tribunal. A submission by 

commercial delivery service is considered filed on the date the submission is given to the commercial 

service for delivery to the tribunal as indicated by the receipt date on the package containing the 

submission. A submission by personal service is considered filed on the date the submission is received. 

A submission through the tribunal’s e-filing system by 11:59 p.m. on a business day is considered filed on 

that business day. A submission by email to the email address designated by the tribunal by 11:59 p.m. 

on a business day is considered filed on that business day. A submission on a Saturday, a Sunday, or a 

holiday is considered filed on the following business day, as provided by section 35a of the tax tribunal 

act, MCL 205.735a.” TTR 225(5).

Page 4

MTT Docket No. 26-002682

Page 2 of 2

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

Mark Herroscheck 

4318 Marr Ave. 

Warren Mi 48091 

 

Michigan State Property Tax Review Board 

RE: 7077 Chain Lake Dr., Plainfield Twp 48761 

 

Please note return mailing address is noted above 

 

7/01/2026 

 

Dear Sirs, 

 

I am writing this regarding my protest to the recent reassessment (SEV) to the above noted property that I 

recently purchased. 

 

To start, I understand the removal of caps and so forth, but an increase around 150%, is a bit hard to swallow. 

I purchased the property in the fall of 2005 for $190.000 which was a fair (but on the high side) for this 

property (originally listed at about $250,000). Not to mention, this level of taxation will consume a significant 

portion of the social security income (pending), placing a huge financial burden on me (and my wife) and 

severely limit my ability to repair and improve the property. Your assessment has an SEV set for this property 

of $150,200. According to all the property tax people I have talked to, SEV represents about 50% of the “cash 

value” for a property. Therefore, this property is being taxed as having a “cash value” of over $300,000. 

 

I might agree with this value if the house and property were in pristine condition, up to date and able to be 

lived in year round. This is far from the case. I purchased this property as a “fixer-upper” to tinker with during 

my retirement and needs a lot of work. It is our intention to move in permanently once it was capable of 

being lived in year round. 

 

What follows is a list of items this property needs as I know of as of this date. Sample pictures provided as 

available. First, please note that the house was built around 1919 and most likely the oldest in the area. 

There is no heating system in the house other than an old wood stove that must be removed or replaced. This 

stove also is preventing me from being able to affordably insure the house. 

 The chimney is not capped and needs to be cleaned 

and properly capped to ensure proper ventilation for any type 

of heating system. 

 There is no proper hook-up and piping for gas/propane 

installed, except for a very old copper gas line and regulator 

lying on the ground that has been disconnected/disabled for 

decades. (picture not available) 

 Much work has to be done to the electrical in the house 

o Light fixtures need to put proper boxes-currently only hooked up to unboxed wires coming out 

of the ceiling There are exposed wires that need to be put in 

conduit for safety/code (picture not available) 

 The (4) very small upstairs rooms and some are only partly finished.

Page 2

 There is foundation issue on the lake side of the house in the center causing a 1-2 inch drop in the 

floor, this needs to be jacked up and re-supported (not a cheap or easy fix). (picture not available) 

 

 The house needs gutters (mostly nonexistent). The only 

gutter is not even properly installed, laying on a bench. 

 The upper decking (as is the ground deck underneath and 

forward) is in poor condition and needing much repair. 

o The safety railing is very weak and needs replacing 

o The decking is very old and some boards need 

immediate replacement 

o The posts holding the deck up are not properly 

secured to the decking, nor to the ground. Most are 

weathered, cracked/split and/or warped. All need 

proper replacing for safety. 

 

 The plumbing is old and in need of updating. Also, the 

well water has a lot of dissolved minerals which should be 

filtered or softened. 

 The cedar siding needs cleaning and refinishing 

 A number of the soffits and fascia boards are rotted and 

needing replacement 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 The house over 100 years old and nearing the end of its’ useful life. 

Currently, the upper floor is held up with multiple suspension cables to prevent 

sagging and potential collapse. These same cables hold the structural integrity of 

the house by preventing it from bowing out like a pumpkin. 

 

 

 

The doors and windows are old wooden type, 

outdated, leaking, inefficient and some windows 

broken/cracked. The door shown on the right below is 

warped and needs replacing in order to close properly.

Page 3

 This property has very little “beach” (sand) and the lake bed is mucky and weedy, which is not 

conducive for swimming type activities. Many other properties around the lake do have nice beach 

fronts, especially the larger homes. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Over and above the items listed above, affecting the property value is the “Comps” (comparables). Shown in 

the sample pictures below are a number of the Houses within ½ mile of mine. As you can see, there are a 

variety of houses ranging from old mobile trailers, old small “shack” houses, newer small houses and also large 

homes with large lots. Many of the more modern structures have gas or electric heat, air conditioning and 

some even have good size out buildings including garages and work rooms. I have a simple very old 10 x 10 

garden shed only. 

 

The larger houses, especially those on large lots, have the full modern amenities as mentioned above, are 

much newer and in a number of cases, have multiple large out buildings (over and above small tool and 

garden sheds), multiple bathrooms, modern HVAC systems, etc. As far as “comparables” go, there is not really 

anything in the area that compares in size, age, condition, and “amenity status” to mine. 

 

All these factors affect the property value. What should also should be considered is the limited services 

provided for through taxes. This area is outside of urban areas, therefore have little or no services like public 

trash removal, regular police patrols/presence, sewer systems, etc.; in fact even reliable cellular/internet 

service is very limited. 

 

In conclusion, I do not mind paying my fair share with an SEV based on the actual value of the property. 

However, the current assessment is far more than the actual value, which I feel is at an absolute maximum, 

the $190,000 (SEV of $95,000) I purchased it

Page 4

a

Page 5

>

Page 6

=

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

1 of 3

PROPERTY TAX APPEAL PETITION FORM

VALUATION / UNCAPPING APPEAL

MTT DOCKET NO. 

Petitioner’s Contact Information:

Filer Type:

Individual

Local Unit of Government:

First Name

Mark

M.I.

A

Last Name

Herroscheck

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

4318 Marr Ave.

City or Town

Warren

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

48091

Telephone Number

5867228675

E-mail Address

MarkHerroscheck@gmail.com

Subject Property Information:

How many parcels are you appealing?

1

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

*If no, you must file separate appeals for each parcel

N/A 

Property Address (No., Street)

7077 Chain Lake Dr.

City or Town

South Branch

County

Iosco

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

48761

Taxing Authority (City or Township)

Township Of Plainfield (IOSCO)

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

True Cash and Taxable Values

 

Please Explain the Reason for this Appeal:

Page 2

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

DIRECTOR

2 of 3

Feel evaluation of SEV/Cash value too high. Details attached

Jurisdictional Issues:

Did you protest the assessment at a Board of Review? Yes

If Yes, check which Board of Review you attended: March

If No, please check the applicable reason(s):

Year(s) Under Appeal:

2026

 

Valuation Information for Each Parcel under Appeal:

Parcel Number:

073-c30-999-001-00

Classification of Property: Real (check one)

Residential (check one)

Current Assessed Value as established by the Board of Review:

300400

Current Taxable Value as established by the Board of Review:

150200

What do you believe is the fair market value?

190000

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

95000

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

95000

 

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

Petitioner’s Signature: 

/s/ Mark A. Herroscheck

Page 3

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

DIRECTOR

3 of 3

Attorney or Authorized Agent’s Signature:

/s/ 

Fee Information:

If you do not have a Principal Residence Exemption of at least 50% at the time of the filing of this petition, you are required to pay a filing fee for 

the filing of this appeal.

The filing fee is based on the greater of State Equalized Value or Taxable Value in contention. If you are appealing more than one parcel, the parcel 

with the highest State Equalized Value or Taxable Value in contention will be used to determine your filing fee, plus $25.00 will be added for each 

additional parcel being appealed.

Property tax appeal: Residential** Non-Residential

SEV or TV in contention*

 

 Filing fee*** Filing Fee**

$100,000 or less...........................................................................................$ 125.00 $250.00

$100,000.01 to $500,000.00.........................................................................$ 200.00 N/A

More than $500,000…..................................................................................$ 300.00 N/A

Does the subject property have a principal residence exemption of at least 50% as of the date of the filing of this petition?

No

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

Mark A Herroscheck,

Petitioner,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v 

MTT Docket No. 26-002682

Township Of Plainfield,

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: September 25, 2026

PROOF OF SERVICE

I certify that a copy of the foregoing was sent on the entry date indicated above to the 

parties or their attorneys or authorized representatives, if any, utilizing either the mailing 

or email addresses on file, as provided by those parties, attorneys, or authorized 

representatives.

By: Tribunal Clerk

Page 2

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA

DIRECTOR

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL · 611 W. OTTAWA ST., LANSING, MI 48933 · 517-335-9760

PO BOX 30232, LANSING, MI 48909 · Other Carriers: 2407 N. GRAND RIVER AVE., LANSING, MI 48906

Mark A Herroscheck,

Petitioner,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v 

MTT Docket No. 26-002682

Township Of Plainfield,

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: September 25, 2026

PROOF OF SERVICE

I certify that a copy of the foregoing was sent on the entry date indicated above to the 

parties or their attorneys or authorized representatives, if any, utilizing either the mailing 

or email addresses on file, as provided by those parties, attorneys, or authorized 

representatives.

By: Tribunal Clerk

These are text excerpts, not the complete document. Text recognition and reading order can contain errors. Check the PDF for complete wording, formatting, and context.

Page 1

_________________________ 

_____________________________________ 

________________________ 

v 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

DIRECTOR 

LANSING 

Petitioner(s) 

MTT Docket No. _____________ 

_________________________ 

Request Date: _________________ 

Respondent(s) 

FEE WAIVER REQUEST 

Instructions: Complete this form and file it with the Tribunal. 

I request a waiver of filing fees for the following reason (check only one of 1, 2, or 3): 

1. ☐ I receive the following type(s) of public assistance because of indigence:

☐Food Assistance Program through the State of Michigan (known as FAP or SNAP)

☐Medicaid (including Healthy Michigan, CHIP, and ESO)

☐Family Independence Program through State of Michigan (known as FIP or TANF)

☐Women, Infants, and Children benefits (WIC)

☐Supplemental Security Income through the federal government (SSI)

☐Other means-tested public assistance ____________________________

2. ☐ I am represented by a legal services program, or I receive assistance from a law

school clinic because of indigence. The name of the legal services program or law

school clinic is: ___________________________________

3. ☐ I am unable to pay the fees and I did not check item 1 or 2.

My gross household income is $______ every ___________ (week/two

weeks/month/year)

The number of people in my household is ________.

My source of income is _____________________________

List assets and their worth, such as bank accounts. If you need more space, attach a

separate sheet: ______________________________________________________

List obligations and how much you pay, such as rent or other debts. If you need more

space, attach a separate sheet: _________________________________________

I declare under the penalties of perjury that this request has been examined by me and that 

its contents are true to the best of my information, knowledge, and belief. 

Signature 

Date 

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 

Mark A. & Loujeana R. Herroscheck

7/13/2026





Mark A. Herroscheck, Loujouna R. Herroscheck

7/13/2026

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

Mark Herroscheck 

4318 Marr Ave. 

Warren Mi 48091 

 

Michigan State Property Tax Review Board 

RE: 7077 Chain Lake Dr., Plainfield Twp 48761 

 

Please note return mailing address is noted above 

 

7/01/2026 

 

Dear Sirs, 

 

I am writing this regarding my protest to the recent reassessment (SEV) to the above noted property that I 

recently purchased. 

 

To start, I understand the removal of caps and so forth, but an increase around 150%, is a bit hard to swallow. 

I purchased the property in the fall of 2005 for $190.000 which was a fair (but on the high side) for this 

property (originally listed at about $250,000). Not to mention, this level of taxation will consume a significant 

portion of the social security income (pending), placing a huge financial burden on me (and my wife) and 

severely limit my ability to repair and improve the property. Your assessment has an SEV set for this property 

of $150,200. According to all the property tax people I have talked to, SEV represents about 50% of the “cash 

value” for a property. Therefore, this property is being taxed as having a “cash value” of over $300,000. 

 

I might agree with this value if the house and property were in pristine condition, up to date and able to be 

lived in year round. This is far from the case. I purchased this property as a “fixer-upper” to tinker with during 

my retirement and needs a lot of work. It is our intention to move in permanently once it was capable of 

being lived in year round. 

 

What follows is a list of items this property needs as I know of as of this date. Sample pictures provided as 

available. First, please note that the house was built around 1919 and most likely the oldest in the area. 

There is no heating system in the house other than an old wood stove that must be removed or replaced. This 

stove also is preventing me from being able to affordably insure the house. 

 The chimney is not capped and needs to be cleaned 

and properly capped to ensure proper ventilation for any type 

of heating system. 

 There is no proper hook-up and piping for gas/propane 

installed, except for a very old copper gas line and regulator 

lying on the ground that has been disconnected/disabled for 

decades. (picture not available) 

 Much work has to be done to the electrical in the house 

o Light fixtures need to put proper boxes-currently only hooked up to unboxed wires coming out 

of the ceiling There are exposed wires that need to be put in 

conduit for safety/code (picture not available) 

 The (4) very small upstairs rooms and some are only partly finished.

Page 2

 There is foundation issue on the lake side of the house in the center causing a 1-2 inch drop in the 

floor, this needs to be jacked up and re-supported (not a cheap or easy fix). (picture not available) 

 

 The house needs gutters (mostly nonexistent). The only 

gutter is not even properly installed, laying on a bench. 

 The upper decking (as is the ground deck underneath and 

forward) is in poor condition and needing much repair. 

o The safety railing is very weak and needs replacing 

o The decking is very old and some boards need 

immediate replacement 

o The posts holding the deck up are not properly 

secured to the decking, nor to the ground. Most are 

weathered, cracked/split and/or warped. All need 

proper replacing for safety. 

 

 The plumbing is old and in need of updating. Also, the 

well water has a lot of dissolved minerals which should be 

filtered or softened. 

 The cedar siding needs cleaning and refinishing 

 A number of the soffits and fascia boards are rotted and 

needing replacement 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 The house over 100 years old and nearing the end of its’ useful life. 

Currently, the upper floor is held up with multiple suspension cables to prevent 

sagging and potential collapse. These same cables hold the structural integrity of 

the house by preventing it from bowing out like a pumpkin. 

 

 

 

The doors and windows are old wooden type, 

outdated, leaking, inefficient and some windows 

broken/cracked. The door shown on the right below is 

warped and needs replacing in order to close properly.

Page 3

 This property has very little “beach” (sand) and the lake bed is mucky and weedy, which is not 

conducive for swimming type activities. Many other properties around the lake do have nice beach 

fronts, especially the larger homes. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Over and above the items listed above, affecting the property value is the “Comps” (comparables). Shown in 

the sample pictures below are a number of the Houses within ½ mile of mine. As you can see, there are a 

variety of houses ranging from old mobile trailers, old small “shack” houses, newer small houses and also large 

homes with large lots. Many of the more modern structures have gas or electric heat, air conditioning and 

some even have good size out buildings including garages and work rooms. I have a simple very old 10 x 10 

garden shed only. 

 

The larger houses, especially those on large lots, have the full modern amenities as mentioned above, are 

much newer and in a number of cases, have multiple large out buildings (over and above small tool and 

garden sheds), multiple bathrooms, modern HVAC systems, etc. As far as “comparables” go, there is not really 

anything in the area that compares in size, age, condition, and “amenity status” to mine. 

 

All these factors affect the property value. What should also should be considered is the limited services 

provided for through taxes. This area is outside of urban areas, therefore have little or no services like public 

trash removal, regular police patrols/presence, sewer systems, etc.; in fact even reliable cellular/internet 

service is very limited. 

 

In conclusion, I do not mind paying my fair share with an SEV based on the actual value of the property. 

However, the current assessment is far more than the actual value, which I feel is at an absolute maximum, 

the $190,000 (SEV of $95,000) I purchased it

Page 4

a

Page 5

>

Page 6

=

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

1 of 3

PROPERTY TAX APPEAL PETITION FORM

VALUATION / UNCAPPING APPEAL

MTT DOCKET NO. 

Petitioner’s Contact Information:

Filer Type:

Individual

Local Unit of Government:

First Name

Mark

M.I.

A

Last Name

Herroscheck

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

4318 Marr Ave.

City or Town

Warren

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

48091

Telephone Number

5867228675

E-mail Address

MarkHerroscheck@gmail.com

Subject Property Information:

How many parcels are you appealing?

1

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

*If no, you must file separate appeals for each parcel

N/A 

Property Address (No., Street)

7077 Chain Lake Dr.

City or Town

South Branch

County

Iosco

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

48761

Taxing Authority (City or Township)

Township Of Plainfield (IOSCO)

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

True Cash and Taxable Values

 

Please Explain the Reason for this Appeal:

Page 2

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

DIRECTOR

2 of 3

Feel evaluation of SEV/Cash value too high. Details attached

Jurisdictional Issues:

Did you protest the assessment at a Board of Review? Yes

If Yes, check which Board of Review you attended: March

If No, please check the applicable reason(s):

Year(s) Under Appeal:

2026

 

Valuation Information for Each Parcel under Appeal:

Parcel Number:

073-c30-999-001-00

Classification of Property: Real (check one)

Residential (check one)

Current Assessed Value as established by the Board of Review:

300400

Current Taxable Value as established by the Board of Review:

150200

What do you believe is the fair market value?

190000

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

95000

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

95000

 

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

Petitioner’s Signature: 

/s/ Mark A. Herroscheck

Page 3

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

DIRECTOR

3 of 3

Attorney or Authorized Agent’s Signature:

/s/ 

Fee Information:

If you do not have a Principal Residence Exemption of at least 50% at the time of the filing of this petition, you are required to pay a filing fee for 

the filing of this appeal.

The filing fee is based on the greater of State Equalized Value or Taxable Value in contention. If you are appealing more than one parcel, the parcel 

with the highest State Equalized Value or Taxable Value in contention will be used to determine your filing fee, plus $25.00 will be added for each 

additional parcel being appealed.

Property tax appeal: Residential** Non-Residential

SEV or TV in contention*

 

 Filing fee*** Filing Fee**

$100,000 or less...........................................................................................$ 125.00 $250.00

$100,000.01 to $500,000.00.........................................................................$ 200.00 N/A

More than $500,000…..................................................................................$ 300.00 N/A

Does the subject property have a principal residence exemption of at least 50% as of the date of the filing of this petition?

No

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.