Steven M And Caroline A Angel, Petitioner Vs. Township Of Peninsula, 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 

Steven M and Caroline A Angel, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Petitioners, 

 

 

v 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-001654 

 

Peninsula Township, 

 

Presiding Judge 

Respondent. 

 

Marcus L. Abood 

 

ORDER SETTING ASIDE RESPONDENT’S DEFAULT 

 

ORDER GRANTING JOINT STIPULATION FOR ENTRY OF CONSENT JUDGMENT 

 

CONSENT JUDGMENT 

 

On September 19, 2025, the parties filed a Joint Stipulation for Entry of Consent 

Judgment (Stipulation) agreeing to revise the subject property’s TCV, SEV and TV for 

the 2025 tax year. 

 

The Tribunal has considered the Stipulation and finds that on September 4, 2025, 

Respondent was placed in default for failing to file an answer to the petition. On 

September 19, 2025, Respondent filed an answer and cured the default. 

 

Although the parties have agreed to settle this case, the Tribunal cannot process the 

parties’ Stipulation while Respondent is in default. See MCR 2.603(A)(3). The Tribunal 

shall accept the parties’ intentions with the Stipulation. In light of Respondent’s filed 

answer and the parties’ willingness to settle this case, the Tribunal finds good cause to 

set aside Respondent’s default. 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 Respondent’s default is SET ASIDE. 

 

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 

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 

 

1 See MCL 211.27a. 

2 See MCL 205.755.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-001654 

Page 2 of 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, 2013, through June 30, 2016, at the rate of 4.25%, 

(ii) after June 30, 2016, through December 31, 2016, at the rate of 4.40%, (iii) after 

December 31, 2016, through June 30, 2017, at the rate of 4.50%, (iv) after June 30, 

2017, through December 31, 2017, at the rate of 4.70%, (v) after December 31, 2017, 

through June 30, 2018, at the rate of 5.15%, (vi) after June 30, 2018, through December 

31, 2018, at the rate of 5.41%, (vii) after December 31, 2018, through June 30, 2019, at 

the rate of 5.9%, (viii) after June 30, 2019, through December 31, 2019, at the rate of 

6.39%, (ix) after December 31, 2019, through June 30, 2020, at the rate of 6.40%, (x) 

after June 30 2020, through December 31, 2020, at the rate of 5.63%, (xi) after 

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

2022, through December 31, 2022, at the rate of 4.27%, (xiii) after December 31, 2022, 

through June 30, 2023, at the rate of 5.65%, (xiv) after June 30, 2023, through 

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

30, 2024, at the rate of 9.30%, (xvi) after June 30, 2024, through December 31, 2024, at 

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

9.47%, and (xviii) after

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

62070404.1 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

 

STEVEN M. AND CAROLINE A. ANGEL, 

 

 

Petitioner, 

 

v 

MTT Docket No. 25-001654 

 

PENINSULA TWP., 

 

 

Respondent. 

_____________________________/ 

 

STIPULATION FOR ENTRY OF CONSENT JUDGMENT 

 

1. 

The parcel is located in Grand Traverse County. 

 

2. 

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

 

3. 

Property Parcel No: 11-609-008-00. 

 

4. 

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

Review are: 

Tax 

Year 

True Cash 

Value 

Assessed 

Value 

Taxable 

Value 

2025

$3,155,200

$1,577,600

$1,544,224

 

 

5. 

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

purposes are: 

Tax 

Year 

True Cash 

Value 

State Equalized 

Value 

Taxable 

Value 

2025

$2,783,700

$1,391,850

$1,391,850

 

 

6. 

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 (attach additional page if necessary): 

 

 

7. 

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

MTT Docket No. 25-001654 

Stipulation for Entry of Consent Judgment 

 

 

 

2 

62070404.1 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that refunds shall be 

made payable jointly to Petitioner named herein and its counsel, 

Honigman LLP, and sent to Stewart L. Mandell, Honigman LLP, 660 

Woodward, Suite 2290, Detroit, MI 48226. Calculations of the refund 

amount shall also be sent to Petitioner’s counsel at the same address. 

 

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

due are paid within 60 days of the entry of the consent judgment, however, 

otherwise interest shall be paid as provided in the Tax Tribunal Act, 

including MCL 205.737. 

 

 

 

 

HONIGMAN LLP

Attorneys for Petitioner

Attorneys for Respondent

 

 

By: _______________________________ 

By: _/s/ Ross K. Bower____________ 

Daniel L. Stanley (P57052) 

222 North Washington Square 

Suite 400 

Lansing, MI 48933-1800 

(517) 377-0714 

dstanley@honigman.com 

Ross K. Bower II 

Samantha R. Reetrz (P86523) 

Fahey Schultz Burzych Rhodes, PLC 

4151 Okemos Road 

Okemos, MI 48864 

(517) 381-3190 

rbower@fsbrlaw.com 

sreetz@fsbrlaw.com

 

Dated: _____________________ 

 

Dated: September 18, 2025 

 

 

 

 

 

/s/ Daniel L. Stanley

September 19, 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 

Steven M and Caroline A Angel, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Petitioners, 

 

 

v 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-001654 

 

Peninsula Township, 

 

Presiding Judge 

Respondent. 

 

Marcus L. Abood 

 

ORDER SETTING ASIDE RESPONDENT’S DEFAULT 

 

ORDER GRANTING JOINT STIPULATION FOR ENTRY OF CONSENT JUDGMENT 

 

CONSENT JUDGMENT 

 

On September 19, 2025, the parties filed a Joint Stipulation for Entry of Consent 

Judgment (Stipulation) agreeing to revise the subject property’s TCV, SEV and TV for 

the 2025 tax year. 

 

The Tribunal has considered the Stipulation and finds that on September 4, 2025, 

Respondent was placed in default for failing to file an answer to the petition. On 

September 19, 2025, Respondent filed an answer and cured the default. 

 

Although the parties have agreed to settle this case, the Tribunal cannot process the 

parties’ Stipulation while Respondent is in default. See MCR 2.603(A)(3). The Tribunal 

shall accept the parties’ intentions with the Stipulation. In light of Respondent’s filed 

answer and the parties’ willingness to settle this case, the Tribunal finds good cause to 

set aside Respondent’s default. 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 Respondent’s default is SET ASIDE. 

 

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 

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 

 

1 See MCL 211.27a. 

2 See MCL 205.755.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-001654 

Page 2 of 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, 2013, through June 30, 2016, at the rate of 4.25%, 

(ii) after June 30, 2016, through December 31, 2016, at the rate of 4.40%, (iii) after 

December 31, 2016, through June 30, 2017, at the rate of 4.50%, (iv) after June 30, 

2017, through December 31, 2017, at the rate of 4.70%, (v) after December 31, 2017, 

through June 30, 2018, at the rate of 5.15%, (vi) after June 30, 2018, through December 

31, 2018, at the rate of 5.41%, (vii) after December 31, 2018, through June 30, 2019, at 

the rate of 5.9%, (viii) after June 30, 2019, through December 31, 2019, at the rate of 

6.39%, (ix) after December 31, 2019, through June 30, 2020, at the rate of 6.40%, (x) 

after June 30 2020, through December 31, 2020, at the rate of 5.63%, (xi) after 

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

2022, through December 31, 2022, at the rate of 4.27%, (xiii) after December 31, 2022, 

through June 30, 2023, at the rate of 5.65%, (xiv) after June 30, 2023, through 

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

30, 2024, at the rate of 9.30%, (xvi) after June 30, 2024, through December 31, 2024, at 

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

9.47%, and (xviii) after

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

62070404.1 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

 

STEVEN M. AND CAROLINE A. ANGEL, 

 

 

Petitioner, 

 

v 

MTT Docket No. 25-001654 

 

PENINSULA TWP., 

 

 

Respondent. 

_____________________________/ 

 

STIPULATION FOR ENTRY OF CONSENT JUDGMENT 

 

1. 

The parcel is located in Grand Traverse County. 

 

2. 

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

 

3. 

Property Parcel No: 11-609-008-00. 

 

4. 

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

Review are: 

Tax 

Year 

True Cash 

Value 

Assessed 

Value 

Taxable 

Value 

2025

$3,155,200

$1,577,600

$1,544,224

 

 

5. 

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

purposes are: 

Tax 

Year 

True Cash 

Value 

State Equalized 

Value 

Taxable 

Value 

2025

$2,783,700

$1,391,850

$1,391,850

 

 

6. 

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 (attach additional page if necessary): 

 

 

7. 

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

MTT Docket No. 25-001654 

Stipulation for Entry of Consent Judgment 

 

 

 

2 

62070404.1 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that refunds shall be 

made payable jointly to Petitioner named herein and its counsel, 

Honigman LLP, and sent to Stewart L. Mandell, Honigman LLP, 660 

Woodward, Suite 2290, Detroit, MI 48226. Calculations of the refund 

amount shall also be sent to Petitioner’s counsel at the same address. 

 

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

due are paid within 60 days of the entry of the consent judgment, however, 

otherwise interest shall be paid as provided in the Tax Tribunal Act, 

including MCL 205.737. 

 

 

 

 

HONIGMAN LLP

Attorneys for Petitioner

Attorneys for Respondent

 

 

By: _______________________________ 

By: _/s/ Ross K. Bower____________ 

Daniel L. Stanley (P57052) 

222 North Washington Square 

Suite 400 

Lansing, MI 48933-1800 

(517) 377-0714 

dstanley@honigman.com 

Ross K. Bower II 

Samantha R. Reetrz (P86523) 

Fahey Schultz Burzych Rhodes, PLC 

4151 Okemos Road 

Okemos, MI 48864 

(517) 381-3190 

rbower@fsbrlaw.com 

sreetz@fsbrlaw.com

 

Dated: _____________________ 

 

Dated: September 18, 2025 

 

 

 

 

 

/s/ Daniel L. Stanley

September 19, 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

1 

 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

_______________________________________ 

 

STEVEN M. and CAROLINE A. ANGEL, 

 

 

 

 

Petitioner, 

 

v 

 

PENINSULA TOWNSHIP, 

 

 

 

 

Respondent. 

MTT Docket No. 25-001654 

 

Parcel No. 2811-609-008-00 

 

 

 

______________________________________/ 

 

Daniel L. Stanley (P57052) 

Honigman LLP 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

222 North Washington Square 

Suite 400 

Lansing, MI 48933 

Tel: (517) 377-0714 

dstanley@honigman.com 

Ross K. Bower II (P70574) 

Samantha R. Reetz (P86523) 

Fahey Schultz Burzych Rhodes PLC 

Attorneys for Respondent 

4151 Okemos Road 

Okemos, MI 48864 

Tel: (517) 381-0100 

Fax: (517) 381-5051 

rbower@fsbrlaw.com 

sreetz@fsbrlaw.com 

______________________________________/ 

 

RESPONDENT’S ANSWER TO PETITION 

 

Respondent, Peninsula Township, by and through its counsel, FAHEY SCHULTZ 

BURZYCH RHODES PLC, hereby answers Petitioners’ Entire Tribunal Property Tax Petition as 

follows: 

1. 

Petitioners’ principal address is 759 Hyslip Avenue, Westfield, NJ 07090. 

Petitioner is a party in interest with respect to property taxes on tax parcel no(s). 11-609-008-00 

(“Petitioner's Property”), at 15706 Shoreline Ct. located in Grand Traverse County, Michigan. If 

this petition includes more than one (1) real property tax parcel, the tax parcels are contiguous. 

ANSWER: Respondent states that it is without sufficient knowledge or information

Page 2

2 

 

upon which to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations, which are therefore deemed 

denied, leaving the Petitioner to its proofs. 

2. 

Respondent, Peninsula Twp., assesses and collects property taxes on Petitioner’s 

Property. 

ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegation contained in the above paragraph. 

3. 

In 2025, Respondent determined the taxable value of Petitioners’ Property to be 

$1,544,334 and assessed Petitioners’ Property at $1,577,600 which results in a state equalized 

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

ANSWER: Respondent admits the taxable value is $1,544,334 of Petitioner’s 

Property for the 2025 tax year. However, the assessed value of the Petitioner’s Property is 

$1,605,000 for the 2025 tax year. 

4. 

Petitioners’ Property is classified as Residential Real. Petitioners’ Property is 

presently used or available for use for residential purposes. Petitioners believe that Petitioners’ 

Property was originally designed to be used for residential purposes. 

ANSWER: Respondent admits only that the property is classified as Residential Real. 

As to the remainder of the allegations contained in the above paragraph, Respondent states 

that it is without sufficient knowledge or information upon which to form a belief as to the 

truth of the allegations, which are therefore denied, leaving Petitioner to its proofs. 

5. 

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

value, and (d) uniformity. 

ANSWER: Respondent states that the legal conclusions require no answer, and to the 

extent that an answer may be required, neither admits nor denies the allegations contained 

in the above paragraph and leaves Petitioner to its proofs.

Page 3

3 

 

6. 

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

relative to the value of a loss. 

ANSWER: Respondent denies the allegation contained in the above paragraph. 

7. 

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

board of review protest was filed in March 2025. 

ANSWER: Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations contained in the 

above paragraph and leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 

8. 

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

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

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

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

exceeds the amount permitted by the Michigan Constitution and applicable 

statutes; 

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

higher percentages of true cash value than permissible under the Michigan 

Constitution and applicable statutes; 

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

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

of Petitioner's Property that is taxable under Michigan law, and are based 

upon the application of wrong principles; and, 

d. The assessment, including state

Page 4

4

Page 5

STATE

Page 6

2

Page 7

3

Page 8

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

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

ORLENE HAWKS

DIRECTOR

Entire Tribunal Case Information Sheet - Respondent

MOAHR DOCKET NO. 25-001654

Section 1: Respondent’s Contact Information

Filer Type: Local Unit of Government

Township Of Peninsula (GRAND TRAVERSE)

Local Unit of Government/First Name

M.I.

Last Name

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

City or Town

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

Telephone Number

Fax Number

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

Section 2: Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Contact Information

First Name

Ross

M.I.

K

Last Name

Bower

Firm Name (if any)

Fahey Schultz Burzych Rhodes PLC

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

4151 Okemos Road

City or Town

Okemos

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

48864

Telephone Number

517-381-0100

Fax Number

517-381-5051

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

jstaffeld@fsbrlaw.com

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

Respondent or Authorized Attorney/Representative’s Signature: 

Ross K. Bower II 

/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

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

_______________________________________ 

 

STEVEN M. and CAROLINE A. ANGEL, 

 

 

 

 

Petitioner, 

 

v 

 

PENINSULA TOWNSHIP, 

 

 

 

 

Respondent. 

MTT Docket No. 25-001654 

 

Parcel No. 2811-609-008-00 

 

 

 

______________________________________/ 

 

Daniel L. Stanley (P57052) 

Honigman LLP 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

222 North Washington Square 

Suite 400 

Lansing, MI 48933 

Tel: (517) 377-0714 

dstanley@honigman.com 

 

Ross K. Bower II (P70574) 

Samantha R. Reetz (P86523) 

Fahey Schultz Burzych Rhodes PLC 

Attorneys for Respondent 

4151 Okemos Road 

Okemos, MI 48864 

Tel: (517) 381-0100 

Fax: (517) 381-5051 

rbower@fsbrlaw.com 

sreetz@fsbrlaw.com 

_______________________________________/ 

 

APPEARANCE 

 

FAHEY SCHULTZ BURZYCH RHODES PLC, hereby enters its Appearance on behalf 

of Respondent, PENINSULA TOWNSHIP, in the above-entitled matter. 

 

 

 

 

 

Dated: September 17, 2025 

Respectfully submitted, 

 

Fahey Schultz Burzych Rhodes PLC 

Attorneys for Respondent 

 

 

By: __________________________________ 

 Ross K. Bower II (P70574) 

 Samantha R. Reetz (P86523) 

 4151 Okemos Road 

 Okemos, MI 48864 

 (517) 381-0100

Page 2

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

_______________________________________ 

 

STEVEN M. and CAROLINE A. ANGEL, 

 

 

 

 

Petitioner, 

 

v 

 

PENINSULA TOWNSHIP, 

 

 

 

 

Respondent. 

MTT Docket No. 25-001654 

 

Parcel No. 2811-609-008-00 

 

 

 

______________________________________/ 

 

Daniel L. Stanley (P57052) 

Honigman LLP 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

222 North Washington Square 

Suite 400 

Lansing, MI 48933 

Tel: (517) 377-0714 

dstanley@honigman.com 

 

Ross K. Bower II (P70574) 

Samantha R. Reetz (P86523) 

Fahey Schultz Burzych Rhodes PLC 

Attorneys for Respondent 

4151 Okemos Road 

Okemos, MI 48864 

Tel: (517) 381-0100 

Fax: (517) 381-5051 

rbower@fsbrlaw.com 

sreetz@fsbrlaw.com 

_______________________________________/ 

 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

Jamy A. Staffeld states that on September 17, 2025 she served a copy of Appearance and 

this Proof of Service, upon the following via first class mail: 

 

 

Daniel L. Stanley 

Honigman LLP 

222 North Washington Square 

Suite 400 

Lansing, MI 48933 

 

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

 

belief. 

/s/ Jamy A Staffeld 

 

Jamy A. Staffeld

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

Steven M and Caroline A Angel,

Petitioner, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 ENTIRE TRIBUNAL

v

 

MTT Docket No. 25-001654

Township Of Peninsula,

Respondent.

ORDER OF DEFAULT

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

Respondent has failed to file an answer. As such, Respondent must file and serve an 

answer to the petition and file proof demonstrating service of the answer within 14 days 

of the entry of this order. See TTR 235 and 227. Tribunal rules and information on 

Entire Tribunal answers can be found on our website at www.michigan.gov/taxtrib.

Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that Respondent 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.i 

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:_______________________________

Entered: September 4, 2025

Patricia L. Halm, Tribunal Chair

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

i “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.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-001654

Page 2 of 6

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 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

Steven M and Caroline A Angel,

Petitioner, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 ENTIRE TRIBUNAL

v

 

MTT Docket No. 25-001654

Township Of Peninsula,

Respondent.

ORDER OF DEFAULT

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

Respondent has failed to file an answer. As such, Respondent must file and serve an 

answer to the petition and file proof demonstrating service of the answer within 14 days 

of the entry of this order. See TTR 235 and 227. Tribunal rules and information on 

Entire Tribunal answers can be found on our website at www.michigan.gov/taxtrib.

Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that Respondent 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.ii 

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:_______________________________

Entered: September 4, 2025

Patricia L. Halm, Tribunal Chair

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

ii “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

Page 4

MTT

Page 5

ST

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 Vue 

JUN 05 2025 

oA 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Steven M. and Caroline A. Angel, 

Petitioner, 

\2 

MTT Docket No. 

A =] 

Ze) 2 5 

[Parcel No(s). 11-609-008-00] 

Peninsula Twp., 

Respondent. 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

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

that on 

$< 2 

7 

[ > <. she did serve a copy of Petitioner's Petition, with docket number, upon 

the parties named on the attached list. 

Js Far Opacph 

Lisa Joseph

Page 2

BY CERTIFIED UNITED STATES MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED: 

CLERK 

PENINSULA TWP. 

13235 CENTER RD. 

TRAVERSE CITY, MI 49686-8560 

ASSESSOR 

PENINSULA TWP. 

13235 CENTER RD. 

TRAVERSE CITY, MI 49686-8560 

AND BY FIRST-CLASS UNITED STATES MAIL: 

CLERK 

GRAND TRAVERSE COUNTY 

400 BOARDMAN AVENUE 

TRAVERSE CITY, MI 49684-2542 

DIRECTOR OF EQUALIZATION 

GRAND TRAVERSE COUNTY 

400 BOARDMAN AVENUE 

TRAVERSE CITY, MI 49684-2542 

SECRETARY OF SCHOOL BOARD 

TRAVERSE CITY AREA PUBLIC SCHOOLS 

412 WEBSTER STREET 

TRAVERSE CITY, MI 49686-2669 

STATE TREASURER 

MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY 

TREASURY BUILDING 

430 W. ALLEGAN ST. 

LANSING, MI 48922 

25-0077

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

25-0077 

60668397.1 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Steven M. and Caroline A. Angel, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

MTT Docket No. _______________ 

 

[Parcel No(s). 2811-609-008-00] 

Peninsula Twp., 

Respondent. 

_________________________/ 

PETITION 

Steven M. and Caroline A. Angel (“Petitioner”), through its attorneys, HONIGMAN LLP, 

says: 

1. 

Petitioner's principal office address is 759 Hyslip Avenue, Westfield, NJ 07090. 

Petitioner is a party in interest with respect to property taxes on tax parcel no(s). 2811-609-008-00 

("Petitioner's Property"), at 15706 Shoreline Ct. located in Grand Traverse County, Michigan. If 

this petition includes more than one (1) real property tax parcel, the tax parcels are contiguous. 

2. 

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

Property. 

3. 

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

$1,544,334 and assessed Petitioner's Property at $1,577,600, 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 Residential Real. Petitioner's Property is 

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

Property was originally designed to be used for residential purposes.

Page 2

2 

60668397.1 

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, 2025. 

8. 

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

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

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

(a) 

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

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

(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 

60668397.1 

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

taxable value of Petitioner's Property from $1,544,224 to $1,150,000, and reducing the 2025 

assessed and state equalized value of Petitioner's Property from $1,577,600 to $1,150,000, 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) 

222 North Washington Square 

Suite 400 

Lansing, MI 48933-1800 

(517) 377-0714 

dstanley@honigman.com 

 

 

/s/ Daniel L. Stanley

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

Steven M and Caroline A Angel, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

v

MTT Docket No.: 25-001654

Township Of Peninsula, 

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 18, 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

25-0077 

60668397.1 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Steven M. and Caroline A. Angel, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

MTT Docket No. _______________ 

 

[Parcel No(s). 2811-609-008-00] 

Peninsula Twp., 

Respondent. 

_________________________/ 

PETITION 

Steven M. and Caroline A. Angel (“Petitioner”), through its attorneys, HONIGMAN LLP, 

says: 

1. 

Petitioner's principal office address is 759 Hyslip Avenue, Westfield, NJ 07090. 

Petitioner is a party in interest with respect to property taxes on tax parcel no(s). 2811-609-008-00 

("Petitioner's Property"), at 15706 Shoreline Ct. located in Grand Traverse County, Michigan. If 

this petition includes more than one (1) real property tax parcel, the tax parcels are contiguous. 

2. 

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

Property. 

3. 

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

$1,544,334 and assessed Petitioner's Property at $1,577,600, 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 Residential Real. Petitioner's Property is 

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

Property was originally designed to be used for residential purposes.

Page 2

2 

60668397.1 

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, 2025. 

8. 

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

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

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

(a) 

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

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

(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 

60668397.1 

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

taxable value of Petitioner's Property from $1,544,224 to $1,150,000, and reducing the 2025 

assessed and state equalized value of Petitioner's Property from $1,577,600 to $1,150,000, 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) 

222 North Washington Square 

Suite 400 

Lansing, MI 48933-1800 

(517) 377-0714 

dstanley@honigman.com 

 

 

/s/ Daniel L. Stanley

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: Individual

First Name/Company Name

Honigman LLP

M.I.

Last Name

Steven M. and Caroline A. Angel

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

759 Hyslip

City or Town

Westfield

State

New Jersey

ZIP Code

07090

Telephone Number

2485668300

Fax Number

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

ljoseph@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

517-377-0714

Fax Number

517-364-9514

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

DStanley@Honigman.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?1

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

Michigan

Taxing Authority (City or Township)

Township Of Peninsula (GRAND TRAVERSE)

County

Grand Traverse

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.)

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:

2811-609-008-00

Classification of Property: Real 

Residential

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

1577600

Current Taxable Value as established by the Board of Review:

1544224

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

2300000

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

1150000

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 you protest the special assessment at the hearing held to confirm the special assessment roll? 

If Yes, what was the date of the hearing held to confirm the special assessment roll?

If No, please explain:

Section 11: Classification Information

Parcel Number:

Current Classification of Property as established by Board of Review: 

What do you believe is the property’s classification?

Page 3

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

ORLENE HAWKS

DIRECTOR

If improved property, how is the property currently being used?

If improved property, for what use was the property designed?

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.

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

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.