Meijer Inc Petitioner Vs. City Of Lansing Respondent

Page 1

RECEIVED 

AUG 2 4 2026 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS AND RULES 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

MEIJER, INC. 

Petitioner 

v 

MOAHR Docket 26-001231 

Parcel No. 33-01-05-10-101-012 

CITY OF LANSING, 

Respondent 

Jennifer Hendrix, 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 Hendrix, hereby responds 

to the allegations made in Petitioner's Petition as follows: 

1. 

Respondent lacks the information and knowledge necessary to respond to the allegations 

in Paragraph 1. The owner of record is Meijer, Inc, 2929 Walker Ave, NW, Grand Rapids, 

MI 49544-6402. The subject address is 6200 S. Pennsylvania, Lansing, Ingham County 

Michigan 

2. 

Respondent admits the allegations in Paragraph 2. 

3. 

Respondent admits the allegations in Paragraph 3.

Page 2

MTT Docket # 26-001231 

5. 

Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations in Paragraph 5 for reason that they 

do not have sufficient knowledge to for a belief as to the truth of the allegations and 

leaving Petitioner to their strictest proofs. 

6. 

Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations in Paragraph 6 for reason that they 

do not have sufficient knowledge to for a belief as to the truth of the allegations and 

leaving Petitioner to their strictest proofs. 

7. 

Petitioner has not set forth any allegations to warrant a response. 

No March Board of 

Review was filed. 

8. 

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. Further, the subject property did not 

have any “additions” or “losses” for the 2026 tax year and leaving Petitioner to their 

strictest proofs. 

9. 

The 2026 values for the property identified above as established by Respondent’s Board 

of Review are: 

Parcel Number 

True Cash Value 

| Assessed Value 

Taxable Value 

33-01-05-10-101-012 

$11,952,200 

$5,976,100 

$5,401,973 

10. Respondent contends that the 2026 values for the property identified above are: 

Parcel Number 

True Cash Value 

Assessed Value 

Taxable Value 

33-01-05-10-101-012 

$11,952,200 

$5,976,100 

$5,401,973 

11. The 2026 values in dispute for the property identified above are: 

Parcel Number 

True Cash Value | Assessed Value 

| Taxable Value 

33-01-05-10-101-012 

$0 

$0 

$0 

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

Page 3

MTT Docket # 26-001231 

OFFICE OF THE CITY ASSESSOR 

CITY OF LANSING 

. 

Dated: 

¥ 

ii. 

By: 

Jennifer Hendrix, 

MMAO 

City Assessor, City of Lansing 

3d Floor, City Hall 

124 W Michigan Ave 

Lansing, Michigan 48933 

Telephone: (517) 483-4136 

Jennifer.czeiszperger@lansingmi.gov

Page 4

MTT Docket # 26-001231 

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). 

D. 

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. 

E. 

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. 

F. 

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

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

G. 

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 5

MTT Docket # 26-001231 

I. 

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

of assessment different from that utilized in the assessment of other properties in the Respondent’s 

taxing unit, thereby shifting an otherwise equitable tax burden to the City’s remaining taxpayers. 

J. 

Petitioner, in essence, seeks by petition to challenge the process of county and state 

equalization as to which it has no legal standing and cannot maintain a cause of action. 

K. 

. 

Any decrease in the value of Petitioner’s property was a result of its own intentional 

acts and/or negligence and cannot be allowed to reduce Petitioners otherwise equitable tax burden. 

L. 

Respondent 

has 

properly 

and 

lawfully 

assessed 

Petitioner’s 

property 

and 

established its taxable value in accordance with statutory and constitutional requirements. 

M. 

Respondent reserves the right to add affirmative defenses which may become 

known during the course of informal or formal discovery proceedings. 

WHEREFORE, Respondent denies that the Petitioner 

is entitled 

to any relief and 

respectfully requests that the Respondent’s assessed and taxable values for the year under appeal 

be affirmed and the Petitioner’s Petition be dismissed with

Page 6

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.

Page 1

RECEIVED 

way 27 2006 pO 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Meijer, Inc., 

Petitioner, 

[4 

= 

= 

1 

v. 

MTT Docket No. A200 |. 3/ 

[Parcel No(s). 33-01-05-10-101-012] 

Lansing, 

Respondent. 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

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

that on 

</ 21 / 2p, she did serve a copy of Petitioner's Petition, with docket number, upon 

the parties named on the attached list. 

Lisa Joseph

Page 2

BY CERTIFIED UNITED STATES MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED: 

CLERK 

LANSING 

124 W. MICHIGAN AVENUE, 9TH FLOOR 

LANSING, MI 48933-1694 

ASSESSOR 

LANSING 

124 W. MICHIGAN AVENUE, 9TH FLOOR 

LANSING, MI 48933-1694 

AND BY FIRST-CLASS UNITED STATES MAIL: 

CLERK 

INGHAM COUNTY 

341 S. JEFFERSON STREET 

MASON, MI 48854 

DIRECTOR OF EQUALIZATION 

INGHAM COUNTY 

341 S. JEFFERSON STREET 

MASON, MI 48854 

SECRETARY OF SCHOOL BOARD 

LANSING SCHOOL DISTRICT (INGHAM) 

519 W. KALAMAZOO STREET, ADM. BLDG. 

LANSING, MI 48915 

STATE TREASURER 

MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY 

TREASURY BUILDING 

430 W, ALLEGAN ST. 

LANSING, MI 48922 

26-0035

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

26-0035 

75669198.1 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Meijer, Inc., 

Petitioner, 

v. 

MTT Docket No. _______________ 

[Parcel No(s). 33-01-05-10-101-012] 

Lansing, 

Respondent. 

_________________________/ 

PETITION 

Meijer, Inc. (“Petitioner”), through its attorneys, HONIGMAN LLP, says: 

1. 

Petitioner's principal office address is 2929 Walker Ave., NW, Grand Rapids, MI 

49544-9428. Petitioner is a party in interest with respect to property taxes on tax parcel no(s). 33-

01-05-10-101-012 ("Petitioner's Property"), also known as Store No. 324 at 6200 S. Pennsylvania 

located in Ingham County, Michigan. If this petition includes more than one (1) real property tax 

parcel, the tax parcels are contiguous. 

2. 

Respondent, Lansing, assesses and collects property taxes on Petitioner's Property. 

3. 

In 2026, Respondent determined the taxable value of Petitioner's Property to be 

$5,401,973 and assessed Petitioner's Property at $5,976,100, which will result in a state equalized 

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

4. 

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

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

was originally designed to be used for Retail purposes.

Page 2

2 

75669198.1 

5. 

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

value and (d) uniformity. 

6. 

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

relative to the value of a loss. 

7. 

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

board of review protest was filed in March, 2026. 

8. 

The 2026 assessment, including state equalized value and taxable value, imposed 

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

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

(a) 

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

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

(b) 

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

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

applicable statutes; 

(c) 

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

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

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

principles; and, 

(d) 

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

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

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

Page 3

3 

75669198.1 

WHEREFORE, Petitioner requests that the Tax Tribunal enter an Order reducing the 2026 

taxable value of Petitioner's Property from $5,401,973 to $3,550,000, and reducing the 2026 

assessed and state equalized value of Petitioner's Property from $5,976,100 to $3,550,000, and 

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

and costs. 

Dated: ____________________ 

Respectfully submitted, 

HONIGMAN LLP 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

By: _______________________________________ 

Daniel L. Stanley (P57052) 

Jackie J. Cook (P68781) 

222 N. Washington Square 

Suite 400 

Lansing, MI 48933 

(517) 377-0714 

(313) 465-7270 

dstanley@honigman.com

jcook@honigman.com

/s/ Daniel L. Stanley

May 21, 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

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

DIRECTOR

Entire Tribunal Case Information Sheet - Petitioner

MTT DOCKET NO. 

 

Section 1: Petitioner’s Contact Information

Filer type: 

Organization 

Local Unit of Government

First Name

M.I.

Last Name/Company Name

Meijer, Inc.

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

2929 Walker Avenue NW

City or Town

Grand Rapids

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

49544

Telephone Number

5173770714

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

dstanley@honigman.com

 

 

Section 2: Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Contact Information

First Name

Daniel

M.I.

Last Name

Stanley

Firm Name (if any)

Honigman LLP

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

222 N. Washington Sq

Suite 400

City or Town

Lansing

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

48933

Telephone Number

517-337-0714

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

DStanley@Honigman.com

 

Section 3: Issue 

Please designate one: 

Valuation 

 

Section 4: Subject Property Information 

How many parcels are you 

appealing?

1

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

6200 S Pennsylvania

Lansing

Page 2

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

DIRECTOR

Michigan

48911

Taxing Authority (City or Township)

City Of Lansing (INGHAM) 

County

Ingham

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

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

N/A

 

 

Section 5: Check which of the following you are appealing (check all that apply) 

True Cash and Taxable Values

If “Other”, please explain:

 

 

Section 6: Valuation Information for Each Parcel under Appeal

Parcel Number:

33-01-05-10-101-012

Classification of Property: Real (check one)

Commercial (check one)

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

5976100

Current Taxable Value as established by the Board of Review:

5401973

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

6700000

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

3550000

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

Fee Information

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.

If the State Equalized Value or Taxable Value in contention is: Your filing fee is:

 

 $100,000.00 and under $250.00

 $100,000.01 to $500,000.00 $400.00

 $Over $500,000.00 $600.00

* Plus $25.00 for each additional parcel, not to exceed a total filing fee of $2,000.00.

Page 3

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

DIRECTOR

A fee of $250.00 is required for the filing of a Special Assessment Appeal.

A fee of $250.00 is required for the filing of an Equalization Tax Appeal.

A fee of $250.00 is required for the filing of a Non-Property Tax Appeal.

A fee of $150.00 is required for the filing of a Classification Tax Appeal

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

Petitioner or Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Signature: 

/s/ Daniel L. Stanley

Payment Information

Amount: 600

Success: True

Message: ""

Waiver Code:

Transaction Number: 26052186435033

Supporting Waiver Documents:

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

Meijer Inc, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

v

MTT Docket No.: 26-001231

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 29, 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

RECEIVED 

MAY 27 2026 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Meijer, Inc., 

Petitioner, 

a, 

AA 

|e 

J 

v. 

MTT Docket No. + 

wr “CL 

| LoD) 

[Parcel No(s). 33-01-05-10-101-012] 

Lansing, 

Respondent. 

/ 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

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

that on 

</ 2 / Ab, she did serve a copy of Petitioner's Petition, with docket number, upon 

the parties named on the attached list. 

Lisa Joseph 

26-0035 

75669198.1

Page 2

BY CERTIFIED UNITED STATES MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED: 

CLERK 

LANSING 

124 W. MICHIGAN AVENUE, 9TH FLOOR 

LANSING, MI 48933-1694 

ASSESSOR 

LANSING 

124 W. MICHIGAN AVENUE, 9TH FLOOR 

LANSING, MI 48933-1694 

AND BY FIRST-CLASS UNITED STATES MAIL: 

CLERK 

INGHAM COUNTY 

341 S. JEFFERSON STREET 

MASON, MI 48854 

DIRECTOR OF EQUALIZATION 

INGHAM COUNTY 

341 S. JEFFERSON STREET 

MASON, MI 48854 

SECRETARY OF SCHOOL BOARD 

LANSING SCHOOL DISTRICT (INGHAM) 

519 W. KALAMAZOO STREET, ADM. BLDG. 

LANSING, MI 48915 

STATE TREASURER 

MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY 

TREASURY BUILDING 

430 W. ALLEGAN ST. 

LANSING, MI 48922 

26-0035 

75669198.1

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

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

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

Docket Number: 26-001231

Is this case currently pending in the Small Claims Division? No

Party Filing Document 

Petitioner

Files

Document Type: Proof of Service: Petition

Attachment File Name: Meijer v Lansing POS

Fee Information

Filing Fee: $ 0.00

Payment Information

Payment: $ 0.00

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

26-0035 

75669198.1 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Meijer, Inc., 

Petitioner, 

v. 

MTT Docket No. _______________ 

[Parcel No(s). 33-01-05-10-101-012] 

Lansing, 

Respondent. 

_________________________/ 

PETITION 

Meijer, Inc. (“Petitioner”), through its attorneys, HONIGMAN LLP, says: 

1. 

Petitioner's principal office address is 2929 Walker Ave., NW, Grand Rapids, MI 

49544-9428. Petitioner is a party in interest with respect to property taxes on tax parcel no(s). 33-

01-05-10-101-012 ("Petitioner's Property"), also known as Store No. 324 at 6200 S. Pennsylvania 

located in Ingham County, Michigan. If this petition includes more than one (1) real property tax 

parcel, the tax parcels are contiguous. 

2. 

Respondent, Lansing, assesses and collects property taxes on Petitioner's Property. 

3. 

In 2026, Respondent determined the taxable value of Petitioner's Property to be 

$5,401,973 and assessed Petitioner's Property at $5,976,100, which will result in a state equalized 

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

4. 

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

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

was originally designed to be used for Retail purposes.

Page 2

2 

75669198.1 

5. 

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

value and (d) uniformity. 

6. 

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

relative to the value of a loss. 

7. 

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

board of review protest was filed in March, 2026. 

8. 

The 2026 assessment, including state equalized value and taxable value, imposed 

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

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

(a) 

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

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

(b) 

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

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

applicable statutes; 

(c) 

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

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

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

principles; and, 

(d) 

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

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

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

Page 3

3 

75669198.1 

WHEREFORE, Petitioner requests that the Tax Tribunal enter an Order reducing the 2026 

taxable value of Petitioner's Property from $5,401,973 to $3,550,000, and reducing the 2026 

assessed and state equalized value of Petitioner's Property from $5,976,100 to $3,550,000, and 

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

and costs. 

Dated: ____________________ 

Respectfully submitted, 

HONIGMAN LLP 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

By: _______________________________________ 

Daniel L. Stanley (P57052) 

Jackie J. Cook (P68781) 

222 N. Washington Square 

Suite 400 

Lansing, MI 48933 

(517) 377-0714 

(313) 465-7270 

dstanley@honigman.com

jcook@honigman.com

/s/ Daniel L. Stanley

May 21, 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

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

DIRECTOR

Entire Tribunal Case Information Sheet - Petitioner

MTT DOCKET NO. 

 

Section 1: Petitioner’s Contact Information

Filer type: 

Organization 

Local Unit of Government

First Name

M.I.

Last Name/Company Name

Meijer, Inc.

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

2929 Walker Avenue NW

City or Town

Grand Rapids

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

49544

Telephone Number

5173770714

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

dstanley@honigman.com

 

 

Section 2: Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Contact Information

First Name

Daniel

M.I.

Last Name

Stanley

Firm Name (if any)

Honigman LLP

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

222 N. Washington Sq

Suite 400

City or Town

Lansing

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

48933

Telephone Number

517-337-0714

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

DStanley@Honigman.com

 

Section 3: Issue 

Please designate one: 

Valuation 

 

Section 4: Subject Property Information 

How many parcels are you 

appealing?

1

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

6200 S Pennsylvania

Lansing

Page 2

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

DIRECTOR

Michigan

48911

Taxing Authority (City or Township)

City Of Lansing (INGHAM) 

County

Ingham

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

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

N/A

 

 

Section 5: Check which of the following you are appealing (check all that apply) 

True Cash and Taxable Values

If “Other”, please explain:

 

 

Section 6: Valuation Information for Each Parcel under Appeal

Parcel Number:

33-01-05-10-101-012

Classification of Property: Real (check one)

Commercial (check one)

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

5976100

Current Taxable Value as established by the Board of Review:

5401973

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

6700000

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

3550000

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

Fee Information

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.

If the State Equalized Value or Taxable Value in contention is: Your filing fee is:

 

 $100,000.00 and under $250.00

 $100,000.01 to $500,000.00 $400.00

 $Over $500,000.00 $600.00

* Plus $25.00 for each additional parcel, not to exceed a total filing fee of $2,000.00.

Page 3

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

DIRECTOR

A fee of $250.00 is required for the filing of a Special Assessment Appeal.

A fee of $250.00 is required for the filing of an Equalization Tax Appeal.

A fee of $250.00 is required for the filing of a Non-Property Tax Appeal.

A fee of $150.00 is required for the filing of a Classification Tax Appeal

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

Petitioner or Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Signature: 

/s/ Daniel L. Stanley

Payment Information

Amount: 600

Success: True

Message: ""

Waiver Code:

Transaction Number: 26052186435033

Supporting Waiver Documents:

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.