The Huntington National Bank, Petitioner Vs. City Of Traverse City, 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 

The Huntington National Bank, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Petitioner, 

 

 

v 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-002091 

 

City of Traverse City, 

 

Presiding Judge 

Respondent. 

 

Patricia L. Halm 

 

ORDER GRANTING JOINT STIPULATION FOR ENTRY OF CONSENT JUDGMENT 

 

CONSENT JUDGMENT 

 

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 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 

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

1 See MCL 211.27a. 

2 See MCL 205.755.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-002091 

Page 2 of 2 

 

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

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

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

8.66%, and (ix) after December 31, 2025, through June 30, 2026, at a rate of 8.48%. 

 

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

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

By: /s/ Patricia L. Halm 

Entered: March 27, 2026 

sb 

 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

 

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

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

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

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

The Huntington National Bank, 

 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-002091-TT 

 

 

Petitioner, 

 

 

 

 

Parcel No(s). 28-51-654-002-00 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

28-51-654-001-00 

v 

 

City of Traverse City, 

 

 

Respondent. 

______________________________/ 

 

Michelle (Mikki) M. Silvey (P69494) 

Alex Morse 

DuCharme, McMillen & Associates, Inc. 

Representatives for Petitioner 

9229 Delegates Row, Suite 375 

Indianapolis, IN 46240 

(917) 488-7825 (mobile) 

(317) 689-6467 (office) 

msilvey@dmainc.com 

amorse@dmainc.com 

 

Stephanie Simon Morita (P53864) 

 

Jeremy J. Romer (P77287) 

Matthew C. Wayne (P80542) 

Rosati, Schultz, Joppich & Amtsbuechler, PC 

Attorneys for Respondent 

27555 Executive Drive 

Suite 250 

Farmington Hills, MI 48331-3550 

(248) 489-4100 

smorita@rsjalaw.com 

jromer@ rsjalaw.com 

mwayne@ rsjalaw.com 

 

______________________________/ 

 

 

STIPULATION FOR ENTRY OF CONSENT JUDGMENT IN THE FULL TRIBUNAL 

 

1. This case is pending in the Entire Tribunal. 

2. The subject property is located in Grand Traverse County. 

3. The values for the property at issue in this appeal as established by Respondent’s 

Board of Review are: 

 

Tax 

Year 

Parcel(s) 

True Cash 

Value 

Assessed 

Value 

Taxable 

Value 

2025 

28-51-654-002-00 

$1,486,200 

$743,100 

$380,532 

2025 

28-51-654-001-00 

$431,200 

$215,600 

$178,302

Page 2

Page 2 of 2 

MTT Docket No. 25-002091 

Stipulation for Entry of Consent Judgment 

PINS: 28-51-654-002-00/28-51-654-001-00 

4. The values for the property at issue in this appeal as agreed upon by the parties for

settlement purposes are:

Tax 

Year 

Parcel(s) 

True Cash 

Value 

Assessed 

Value 

Taxable 

Value 

2025 

28-51-654-002-00

$743,900 

$371,950 

$371,950 

2025 

28-51-654-001-00

$431,200 

$215,600 

$178,302 

5. This stipulation addresses the 2025 tax year only.

6. Refunds (as warranted) should be made payable to “The Huntington National Bank”

and mailed to the attention of:

The Huntington National Bank

c/o Mikki Silvey

9229 Delegates Row, Suite 375

Indianapolis, IN 46240

7. Petitioner hereby waives interest attributable to the reduction for all taxing

authorities. The taxing entities have 60 days from the date of entry of the Consent

Judgment to pay any refunds due.

Respectfully submitted, 

______________________________ 

Michelle (Mikki) M. Silvey (P69494) 

DuCharme, McMillen & Associates, Inc. 

Representatives for Petitioner 

______________________________ 

Jeremy J. Romer (P77287) 

Rosati, Schultz, Joppich & Amtsbuechler, PC 

Attorneys for Respondent 

March 24, 2026 

March 26, 2026 

/s/ Jeremy J. Romer (w/permission-MS)

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 

 

The Huntington National Bank, 

 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-002091-TT 

 

 

Petitioner, 

 

 

 

 

Parcel No(s). 28-51-654-002-00 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

28-51-654-001-00 

v 

 

City of Traverse City, 

 

 

Respondent. 

______________________________/ 

 

Michelle (Mikki) M. Silvey (P69494) 

Alex Morse 

DuCharme, McMillen & Associates, Inc. 

Representatives for Petitioner 

9229 Delegates Row, Suite 375 

Indianapolis, IN 46240 

(917) 488-7825 (mobile) 

(317) 689-6467 (office) 

msilvey@dmainc.com 

amorse@dmainc.com 

 

Stephanie Simon Morita (P53864) 

 

Jeremy J. Romer (P77287) 

Matthew C. Wayne (P80542) 

Rosati, Schultz, Joppich & Amtsbuechler, PC 

Attorneys for Respondent 

27555 Executive Drive 

Suite 250 

Farmington Hills, MI 48331-3550 

(248) 489-4100 

smorita@rsjalaw.com 

jromer@ rsjalaw.com 

mwayne@ rsjalaw.com 

 

______________________________/ 

 

 

STIPULATION FOR ENTRY OF CONSENT JUDGMENT IN THE FULL TRIBUNAL 

 

1. This case is pending in the Entire Tribunal. 

2. The subject property is located in Grand Traverse County. 

3. The values for the property at issue in this appeal as established by Respondent’s 

Board of Review are: 

 

Tax 

Year 

Parcel(s) 

True Cash 

Value 

Assessed 

Value 

Taxable 

Value 

2025 

28-51-654-002-00 

$1,486,200 

$743,100 

$380,532 

2025 

28-51-654-001-00 

$431,200 

$215,600 

$178,302

Page 2

Page 2 of 2 

MTT Docket No. 25-002091 

Stipulation for Entry of Consent Judgment 

PINS: 28-51-654-002-00/28-51-654-001-00 

4. The values for the property at issue in this appeal as agreed upon by the parties for

settlement purposes are:

Tax 

Year 

Parcel(s) 

True Cash 

Value 

Assessed 

Value 

Taxable 

Value 

2025 

28-51-654-002-00

$743,900 

$371,950 

$371,950 

2025 

28-51-654-001-00

$431,200 

$215,600 

$178,302 

5. This stipulation addresses the 2025 tax year only.

6. Refunds (as warranted) should be made payable to “The Huntington National Bank”

and mailed to the attention of:

The Huntington National Bank

c/o Mikki Silvey

9229 Delegates Row, Suite 375

Indianapolis, IN 46240

7. Petitioner hereby waives interest attributable to the reduction for all taxing

authorities. The taxing entities have 60 days from the date of entry of the Consent

Judgment to pay any refunds due.

Respectfully submitted, 

______________________________ 

Michelle (Mikki) M. Silvey (P69494) 

DuCharme, McMillen & Associates, Inc. 

Representatives for Petitioner 

______________________________ 

Jeremy J. Romer (P77287) 

Rosati, Schultz, Joppich & Amtsbuechler, PC 

Attorneys for Respondent 

March 24, 2026 

March 26, 2026 

/s/ Jeremy J. Romer (w/permission-MS)

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 AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

 

THE HUNTINGTON NATIONAL BANK 

 

 

Petitioner, 

 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-002091 

v. 

 

CITY OF TRAVERSE CITY, 

 

 

Respondent. 

 

DuCHARME, McMILLEN & 

 ASSOCIATES, INC. 

Michelle (Mikki) M. Silvey (P69494) 

Alex Morse 

Representatives for Petitioner 

9229 Delegates Row, Suite 375 

Indianapolis, IN 46240 

(317) 596-3260, ext. 2404 

msilvey@dmainc.com 

ROSATI, SCHULTZ, JOPPICH 

 & AMTSBUECHLER, P.C. 

Stephanie Simon Morita (P53864) 

Jeremy J. Romer (P77287) 

Matthew C. Wayne (P80542) 

Attorneys for Respondent 

27555 Executive Drive 

Suite 250 

Farmington Hills, MI 48331-3550 

(248) 489-4100 

smorita@rsjalaw.com 

mwayne@rsjalaw.com 

jromer@rsjalaw.com 

 

SUBSTITUTION OF COUNSEL 

TO: 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that JEREMY J. ROMER, of ROSATI, SCHULTZ, 

JOPPICH & AMTSBUECHLER, P.C. has this day been substituted in the above-captioned 

cause in the place and stead of STEPHANIE SIMON MORITA of ROSATI, SCHULTZ, 

JOPPICH & AMTSBUECHLER, P.C. as representative for Respondent, CITY OF 

TRAVERSE CITY, in the above cause. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Respectfully submitted, 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

/s/ Jeremy J. Romer 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

JEREMY J. ROMER (P77287) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Attorney for Respondent, City of Traverse City 

Dated: February 6, 2026

Page 2

2 

 

CONSENT 

TO: 

CLERK OF THE COURT 

 

I hereby consent that JEREMY J. ROMER be substituted in my place and stead as 

representative for Respondent, CITY OF TRAVERSE CITY, in the above cause. 

Respectfully submitted, 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ROSATI, SCHULTZ, JOPPICH 

& AMTSBUECHLER, P.C. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

/s/ Stephanie Simon Morita 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

STEPHANIE SIMON MORITA (P53864) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Attorney for Respondent 

 

 

 

 

 

 

27555 Executive Drive, Suite 250 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Farmington Hills, MI 48331 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(248) 489-4100 

 

 

 

 

 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

 

The undersigned certified that a copy of the foregoing instrument was served 

upon all parties to the above cause to each of the attorneys and/or 

representatives of record herein by email on February 6, 2026. 

 

 

/s/ Dawn Hallman 

 

 

Dawn Hallman

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

NOTICE OF DECEMBER 16 - 30, 2026 PREHEARING GENERAL CALL AND 

ORDER OF PROCEDURE

The Huntington National Bank,

Petitioner,

v

 

 

City Of Traverse City,

Respondent.

 MTT Docket No. 25-002091

Please be advised that 25-002091 has been placed on a two-week Prehearing General 

Call commencing December 16, 2026. Unless ordered otherwise, parties will be 

notified at least 28 days before they are scheduled to appear. Scheduling will not 

necessarily occur in the order in which the cases are listed below.

Parties are required to submit a valuation disclosure or written notification that no 

valuation disclosure is required by the dates indicated herein. A “valuation disclosure” 

is defined as documentary or other tangible evidence in a property tax proceeding that a 

party relies upon in support of the party’s contention as to the true cash value of the 

subject property or any portion thereof and contains the party’s value conclusion and 

data, valuation methodology, analysis or reasoning. See TTR 203 and TTR 241.

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

public records and will appear for public viewing on the Tribunal’s Tax Docket 

Lookup. If a user wishes to file a document for consideration by the Tribunal and 

prevent its publication on the Tax Docket Lookup, the user MUST file a Motion for 

Protective Order under MCR 2.302(C)(8). If a Protective Order is issued, documents 

covered by the order will not be published. Documents filed prior to the issuance of a 

Protective Order will be published.

In accordance with MCR 1.109(D)(9) and TTR 209, the responsibility for excluding or 

redacting personal identifying information (PII) from all documents filed with or offered to 

the Tribunal rests solely with the parties and their attorneys. The Tribunal is not 

responsible for or required to review, redact, or screen documents at the time of filing 

for PII whether filed electronically or on paper. A party, representative, or interested 

person (i.e. third party not part of an appeal) may request that the Tribunal redact PII 

contained in a previously filed document by submitting a Request for Redactions. The 

Request for Redactions form is available on the Entire Tribunal and Small Claims pages 

of the Tribunal’s website. 

Please refer to the Tribunal’s FAQs and Glossary of Terms pages on the Tribunal’s 

website for more information.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-002091

Page 2 of 3

IT IS ORDERED that the parties shall:

a. If no valuation disclosure is required, notify the Tribunal and the opposing parties 

in writing within 21 days of entry of this order that no valuation disclosure is being 

filed. The notice shall indicate the reason or reasons why no valuation disclosure 

is required (i.e., exemption claim, etc.).

b. If a valuation disclosure is required, file and exchange their valuation disclosures 

by August 19, 2026. Valuation disclosures will not be admitted into evidence 

unless disclosed and furnished in accordance with this order (even though 

admissible) except upon a finding of good cause by the Tribunal.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall file and exchange their Prehearing 

Statements by August 19, 2026. Witnesses, with the exception of rebuttal witnesses, 

will not be allowed to testify unless disclosed in the Prehearing Statement and the 

Prehearing Statement is furnished in accordance with this order except upon a finding 

of good cause by the Tribunal. Failure to file the Prehearing Statement may result in 

holding a party or parties in default. See TTR 237. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that “Pre-Valuation Disclosure” discovery is CLOSED on 

August 19, 2026, which means all discovery has been requested, all Motions to Compel 

have been filed, and all requested or ordered discovery has been exchanged by that 

date. Discovery relative to the valuation disclosure prepared for purposes of litigating 

this case or the valuation expert that prepared that valuation disclosure is not permitted 

during “Pre-Valuation Disclosure” discovery.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that “Post-Valuation Disclosure” discovery is CLOSED on 

December 16, 2026, which means all discovery has been requested, all Motions to 

Compel have been filed, and all requested or ordered discovery has been exchanged 

by that date. “Post-Valuation

Page 3

M

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 AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

 

THE HUNTINGTON NATIONAL BANK 

 

 

Petitioner, 

 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-002091 

v. 

 

CITY OF TRAVERSE CITY, 

 

 

Respondent. 

 

DuCHARME, McMILLEN & 

 ASSOCIATES, INC. 

Michelle (Mikki) M. Silvey (P69494) 

Alex Morse 

Representatives for Petitioner 

9229 Delegates Row, Suite 375 

Indianapolis, IN 46240 

(317) 596-3260, ext. 2404 

msilvey@dmainc.com 

ROSATI, SCHULTZ, JOPPICH 

 & AMTSBUECHLER, P.C. 

Stephanie Simon Morita (P53864) 

Matthew C. Wayne (P80542) 

Attorneys for Respondent 

27555 Executive Drive 

Suite 250 

Farmington Hills, MI 48331-3550 

(248) 489-4100 

smorita@rsjalaw.com 

mwayne@rsjalaw.com 

 

 

Respondent's Amended Answer to Petition 

 

 

 

NOW COMES Respondent, City of Traverse City, by and through its Attorneys, 

ROSATI, SCHULTZ, JOPPICH & AMTSBUECHLER, P.C. and for its Amended Answer to 

Petitioner's Petition, states as follows: 

1. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 1 of the Petition, Respondent 

admits the same. 

2. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 2 of the Petition, Respondent 

admits the same. 

3. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 3 of the Petition, Respondent 

admits the same.

Page 2

2 

 

4. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 4 of the Petition, Respondent 

neither admits nor denies the same for the reason Respondent is without sufficient 

knowledge to form a belief as to the truth thereof and therefore leaves Petitioner to its strict 

proofs. 

5. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 5 of the Petition, Respondent 

admits the same. 

6. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 6 of the Petition, Respondent 

admits the same. 

7. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 7 of the Petition, Respondent 

denies the same as untrue and because the property is located within Grand Traverse 

County. 

8. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 8 of the Petition, Respondent 

admits the same. 

9. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 9 of the Petition, Respondent 

admits the same. 

10. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 10 of the Petition, Respondent 

neither admits nor denies the same for the reason Respondent is without sufficient 

knowledge to form a belief as to the truth thereof and therefore leaves Petitioner to its strict 

proofs. 

11. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 11 of the Petition, Respondent 

neither admits nor denies the same for the reason Respondent is without sufficient 

knowledge to form a belief as to the truth thereof and therefore leaves Petitioner to its strict 

proofs. 

12. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 12 of the Petition, Respondent 

admits the same.

Page 3

3 

 

13. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 13 of the Petition, Respondent 

admits the same. 

14. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 14 of the Petition, Respondent 

neither admits nor denies the same for the reason Respondent is without sufficient 

knowledge to form a belief as to the truth thereof and therefore leaves Petitioner to its strict 

proofs. 

15. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 15 of the Petition, Respondent 

neither admits nor denies the same for the reason Respondent is without sufficient 

knowledge to form a belief as to the truth thereof and therefore leaves Petitioner to its strict 

proofs. 

16. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 16 and its subparts of the 

Petition, Respondent denies the same as untrue. 

17. 

Respondent further states the ratio of the average level of assessment in 

relation to true cash value in the assessment district is 50%, and the equalization factor was 

uniformly applied in the assessment district for the year in question. 

Response to Multiple Parcel Petition Form 1 of 1 

1. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 1 and its subparts, Respondent 

admits the same. 

2. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 2 and its subparts, Respondent 

admits the same. 

3. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 3 and its subparts, Respondent 

neither admits nor denies the same for the reason Respondent is without sufficient 

knowledge to form a belief as to the truth thereof and therefore leaves Petitioner to its strict 

proofs.

Page 4

4 

 

4. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 4 and its subparts, Respondent 

neither admits nor denies the same for the reason Respondent is without sufficient 

knowledge to form a belief as to the truth thereof and therefore leaves Petitioner to its strict 

proofs. 

WHEREFORE, Respondent, City of Traverse City, denies that

Page 5

5

Page 6

6 

 

B.

Page 7

7

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 AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

 

THE HUNTINGTON NATIONAL BANK 

 

 

Petitioner, 

 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-002091 

v. 

 

CITY OF TRAVERSE CITY, 

 

 

Respondent. 

 

DuCHARME, McMILLEN & 

 ASSOCIATES, INC. 

Michelle (Mikki) M. Silvey (P69494) 

Alex Morse 

Representatives for Petitioner 

9229 Delegates Row, Suite 375 

Indianapolis, IN 46240 

(317) 596-3260, ext. 2404 

msilvey@dmainc.com 

ROSATI, SCHULTZ, JOPPICH 

 & AMTSBUECHLER, P.C. 

Stephanie Simon Morita (P53864) 

Matthew C. Wayne (P80542) 

Attorneys for Respondent 

27555 Executive Drive 

Suite 250 

Farmington Hills, MI 48331-3550 

(248) 489-4100 

smorita@rsjalaw.com 

mwayne@rsjalaw.com 

 

 

Respondent's Answer to Petition 

 

 

 

NOW COMES Respondent, City of Traverse City, by and through its Attorneys, 

ROSATI, SCHULTZ, JOPPICH & AMTSBUECHLER, P.C. and for its Answer to Petitioner's 

Petition, states as follows: 

1. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 1 of the Petition, Respondent 

admits the same. 

2. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 2 of the Petition, Respondent 

admits the same. 

3. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 3 of the Petition, Respondent 

admits the same.

Page 2

2 

 

4. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 4 of the Petition, Respondent 

neither admits nor denies the same for the reason Respondent is without sufficient 

knowledge to form a belief as to the truth thereof and therefore leaves Petitioner to its strict 

proofs. 

5. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 5 of the Petition, Respondent 

admits the same. 

6. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 6 of the Petition, Respondent 

admits the same. 

7. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 7 of the Petition, Respondent 

denies the same as untrue and because the property is located within Grand Traverse 

County. 

8. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 8 of the Petition, Respondent 

admits the same. 

9. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 9 of the Petition, Respondent 

admits the same. 

10. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 10 of the Petition, Respondent 

neither admits nor denies the same for the reason Respondent is without sufficient 

knowledge to form a belief as to the truth thereof and therefore leaves Petitioner to its strict 

proofs. 

11. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 11 of the Petition, Respondent 

neither admits nor denies the same for the reason Respondent is without sufficient 

knowledge to form a belief as to the truth thereof and therefore leaves Petitioner to its strict 

proofs. 

12. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 12 of the Petition, Respondent 

admits the same.

Page 3

3 

 

13. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 13 of the Petition, Respondent 

admits the same. 

14. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 14 of the Petition, Respondent 

neither admits nor denies the same for the reason Respondent is without sufficient 

knowledge to form a belief as to the truth thereof and therefore leaves Petitioner to its strict 

proofs. 

15. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 15 of the Petition, Respondent 

neither admits nor denies the same for the reason Respondent is without sufficient 

knowledge to form a belief as to the truth thereof and therefore leaves Petitioner to its strict 

proofs. 

16. 

As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 16 and its subparts of the 

Petition, Respondent denies the same as untrue. 

17. 

Respondent further states the ratio of the average level of assessment in 

relation to true cash value in the assessment district is 50%, and the equalization factor was 

uniformly applied in the assessment district for the year in question. 

WHEREFORE, Respondent, City of Traverse City, denies that Petitioner is entitled 

to the relief it seeks and respectfully requests that the Respondent's assessment and taxable 

value of the subject property be affirmed or increased, that Petitioner's Petition be dismissed 

with prejudice and that Respondent be granted costs and attorney fees so wrongfully 

sustained.

Page 4

4 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Respectfully submitted, 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ROSATI, SCHULTZ, JOPPICH 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 & AMTSBUECHLER, P.C. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

/s/ Stephanie Simon Morita 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

STEPHANIE SIMON MORITA (P53864) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Attorney for Respondent 

 

 

 

 

 

 

27555 Executive Drive, Suite 250 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Farmington Hills, MI 48331 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(248) 489-4100 

 

Dated: October 3, 2025 

 

 

Affirmative Defenses 

 

For its further Answer to Petitioner's Petition and by way of its Affirmative Defenses,

Page 5

5

Page 6

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

ORLENE HAWKS

DIRECTOR

Entire Tribunal Case Information Sheet - Respondent

MOAHR DOCKET NO. 25-002091

Section 1: Respondent’s Contact Information

Filer Type: Local Unit of Government

City Of Traverse City (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

Stephanie

M.I.

Simon

Last Name

Morita

Firm Name (if any)

Rosati, Schultz, Joppich & Amtsbuechler, P.C. 

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

27555 Executive Drive

Suite 250

City or Town

Farmington Hills

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

48331

Telephone Number

248-489-4100

Fax Number

248-489-1726

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

smorita@rsjalaw.com

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

Respondent or Authorized Attorney/Representative’s Signature: 

Stephanie S. Morita

/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 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

The Huntington National Bank. 

Petitioner, 

MTT DOCKET NO. 25-002091-TT 

City of Traverse City, 

Respondent. 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

Michelle (Mikki) M. Silvey, being first duly sworn, deposes and says that on the 16% day of 

September 2025 she served a copy of the Petition upon the following persons by placing 

same in an envelope properly addressed to each via USPS first class thereon: 

Bonnie Scheele 

Traverse City School District 

Grand Traverse County Clerk 

Josey Ballenger, School Board Secretary 

400 Boardman Ave., Ste. 101 

1009 S. Oak Street 

Traverse City, MI 49684 

Traverse City, MI 49684 

James D. Baker 

Michigan State Treasurer 

Grand Traverse County Equalization Director 

Department of Treasury 

400 Boardman Ave., Ste. 103 

. 

Treasury Building 

Traverse City, MI 49684 

430 West Allegan 

Lansing, MI 48922 

j 

Ss 

Mice (© 

‘o) 

Michelle (Mikki) M. Silvey (P69494) 

Authorized Agent

Page 2

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

The Huntington National Bank. 

Petitioner, 

MTT DOCKET NO. 25-002091-TT 

City of Traverse City, 

Respondent. 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

Michelle (Mikki) M. Silvey, being first duly sworn, deposes and says that on the 16" day of 

September 2025 she served a copy of the Petition upon the following persons by placing 

same in an envelope properly addressed to each via certified mail thereon: 

Amy Robbins 

City of Traverse City Assessor 

400 Boardman Avenue 

Traverse City, MI 49684 

Sarah Lutz 

City of Traverse City Clerk 

400 Boardman Avenue 

Traverse City, MI 49684 

Mice (0 eo) 

Michelle (Mikki) M. Silvey (P69494) 

Authorized Agent

Page 3

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

The Huntington National Bank 

; 

MTT Docket No. 25-002091 

TT 

Petitioner, 

v 

City of Traverse City 

Respondent. 

Michelle (Mikki) M. Silvey (P69494) 

Alex Morse 

DuCharme, McMillen & Associates, 

Inc. Representatives for Petitioner 

9229 Delegates Row, Suite 375 

Indianapolis, IN 46240 

(317) 689-6467-ofc 

(917) 488-7825-mobile 

msilvey@dmainc.com 

amorse@dmainc.com 

ENTIRE TRIBUNAL PROPERTY TAX PETITION —- MULTIPLE PARCEL PETITION 

1. 

Property Parcel No.: 28-51-654-002-00 

2. 

The property identified above is 

_real 

. 

3. 

More than one parcel of real property is included in the subject of this appeal and the 

parcels are contiguous.

Page 4

MTT Docket No. 25-002091 

 -TT 

Page 2 of 5 

4. 

10. 

11. 

12. 

13. 

14. 

Petitioner owns and/or otherwise holds an interest in the parcels of property that are the 

subject of this appeal. 

The property identified above is classified as _ 201 Commercial-Improved 

The assessment(s) at issue were not protested to Respondent’s March, July, or December 

Board of Review as a protest was not required. 

. 

The property or properties at issue are in 

_Grand Trav County. 

The property identified above’s address is: 

427 W Front Street, Traverse City, MI 49684 

The assessment(s) at issue were established by the: City of Traverse City 

Petitioner’s legal residence or principal office address is: 

5555 Cleveland Ave., Columbus, OH 43231 

This appeal involves issues relating to the property or properties’ true cash and taxable 

values and uniformity. 

The tax year at issue is: 2025. 

The values for the property identified above as established by Respondent’s 2025 Board 

of Review are: 

Tax 

True Cash 

Assessed 

Taxable 

Year 

Value 

Value 

Value 

2025 

$1,486,200 

$743,100 

$380,532 

Petitioner contends the values for tax year 2025 are no more than the following: 

Tax 

True Cash 

State Equalized 

Taxable 

Year 

Value 

Value 

Value 

2025 

$610,000 

$305,000 

$305,000

Page 5

MTT Docket No. 25-002091 

Page 3 of 5 

-TT 

15. The values in contention for tax year 2025 are: 

Tax 

True Cash 

State Equalized 

Taxable 

Year 

Value 

Value 

Value 

2025 

$876,200 

$438,100 

$75,532 

16. The 2025 assessments imposed on the subject property and the taxes to be levied and 

collected are invalid because: 

(a) The assessment, including state equalized and/or taxable value, exceeds the amount 

permitted by the Michigan Constitution and applicable statutes; 

(b) The assessment, including state equalized and/or taxable value, is at a higher 

percentage of true cash value than permissible under the Michigan Constitution and 

applicable statutes; 

(c) The assessment is based on the misapplication of valuation principles, and 

(d) The assessment otherwise violates Petitioner’s rights. 

WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests this honorable Tribunal hear this case 

and enter an order reducing the 2025 true cash, state equalized and taxable values and direct

Page 6

MTT Docket

Page 7

M

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 

MTT Docket No. 2-____BBB__-TT 

_________________________B__BB___, 

Petitioner, 

v 

_______________________B___B_B___, 

Respondent. 

______________________________/ 

Michelle (Mikki) M. Silvey (P69494) 

$OH[0RUVH

DuCharme, McMillen & Associates, 

Inc. Representatives for Petitioner 

9229 Delegates Row, Suite 375 

Indianapolis, IN 46240 

(317)RIF

(917)488-7825PRELOH

msilvey@dmainc.com

DPRUVH#GPDLQFFRP

______________________________/ 

ENTIRE TRIBUNAL PROPERTY TAX PETITION – MULTIPLE PARCEL PETITION 

1. Property Parcel No.: _________________________

2. The property identified above is ________.

3. More than one parcel of real property is included in the subject of this appeal and the

parcels are contiguous.

The Huntington National Bank 

City of Traverse City 

28-51-654-002-00 

 real

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25- 

-TT 

Page 2 of 5 

4. 

Petitioner owns and/or otherwise holds an interest in the parcels of property that are the 

10. 

11. 

12. 

13. 

subject of this appeal. 

The property identified above is classified as 

201 Commercial-Improved 

The assessment(s) at issue were not protested to Respondent’s March, July, or December 

Board of Review as a protest was not required. 

The property or properties at issue are in 

_Grand Trav County. 

The property identified above’s address is: 

427 

W Front Street, Traverse City, MI 49684 

The assessment(s) at issue were established by the: City of Traverse City 

Petitioner’s legal residence or principal office address is: 

5555 Cleveland Ave., Columbus, OH 43231 

This appeal involves issues relating to the property or properties’ true cash and taxable 

values and uniformity. 

The tax year at issue is: 2025. 

The values for the property identified above as established by Respondent’s 2025 Board 

of Review are: 

Tax 

True Cash 

Assessed 

Taxable 

Year 

Value 

Value 

Value 

2025 

$1,486,200 

$743,100 

$380,532 

14. Petitioner contends the values for tax year 2025 are no more than the following: 

Tax 

True Cash 

State Equalized 

Taxable 

Year 

Value 

Value 

Value 

2025 

$610,000 

$305,000 

$305,000

Page 3

MTT Docket No. 2-___BBB___-TT 

Page 3 of 5 

15. The values in contention for tax year 202 are:

Tax 

Year

True Cash 

Value

State Equalized 

Value

Taxable 

Value

202

 The 202 assessments imposed on the subject property and the taxes to be levied and

collected are invalid because:

D The assessment, including state equalized and/or taxable value, exceeds the amount

permitted by the Michigan Constitution and applicable statutes;

E The assessment, including state equalized and/or taxable value, is at a higher

percentage of true cash value than permissible under the Michigan Constitution and

applicable statutes;

F The assessment is based on the misapplication of valuation principles, and

G The assessment otherwise violates Petitioner’s rights.

WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests this honorable Tribunal hear this case 

and enter an order reducing the 202 true cash, state equalized and taxable values and direct 

Respondent to refund to Petitioner any excess taxes, fees, and penalties paid, plus interest and

costs, and all other relief to which it is entitled under Michigan law and as is appropriate under 

the circumstances.

Respectfully submitted, 

DuCharme, McMillen & Associates, Inc. 

Dated: May ___, 202

By: 

______________________________ 

Michelle (Mikki) M. Silvey (P69494) 

Petitioner’s Representative

$876,200 

$438,100 

$75,532 

31

Page 4

MTT Docket No. 2-___BBB___-TT 

MTT Docket No. 2-__BBB____-TT 

Page 4 of 5 

______________________________, 

Petitioner, 

v 

______________________________, 

Respondent. 

ENTIRE TRIBUNAL PROPERTY TAX PETITION 

MULTIPLE PARCEL PETITION FORM 1 OF 1 

1. The classification of the property or properties identified herein as established by

Respondent’s Board of Review is:

Tax 

Year 

Parcel Number 

Real/Personal 

Classification 

202 

2. The values for the property or properties identified herein as established by Respondent’s

Board of Review are:

Tax 

Year 

Parcel Number 

True Cash 

Value 

Assessed Value 

Taxable Value 

202 

The Huntington National Bank 

City of Traverse City 

28-51-654-001-00 

Real

202 Commercial-Vacant 

 

28-51-654-001-00 

$431,200 

$215,600 

$178,302

Page 5

MTT Docket No. 2-__BBB____-TT 

Page 5 of 5 

3. Petitioner contends the values for the property or properties identified herein are:

Tax 

Year 

Parcel Number 

True Cash 

Value 

State Equalized 

Value 

Taxable Value 

202 

4. The values in dispute for the property or properties identified herein are:

Tax

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

The Huntington National Bank, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

v

MTT Docket No.: 25-002091

City Of Traverse City, 

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: August 11, 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

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

MTT Docket No. 2-____BBB__-TT 

_________________________B__BB___, 

Petitioner, 

v 

_______________________B___B_B___, 

Respondent. 

______________________________/ 

Michelle (Mikki) M. Silvey (P69494) 

$OH[0RUVH

DuCharme, McMillen & Associates, 

Inc. Representatives for Petitioner 

9229 Delegates Row, Suite 375 

Indianapolis, IN 46240 

(317)RIF

(917)488-7825PRELOH

msilvey@dmainc.com

DPRUVH#GPDLQFFRP

______________________________/ 

ENTIRE TRIBUNAL PROPERTY TAX PETITION – MULTIPLE PARCEL PETITION 

1. Property Parcel No.: _________________________

2. The property identified above is ________.

3. More than one parcel of real property is included in the subject of this appeal and the

parcels are contiguous.

The Huntington National Bank 

City of Traverse City 

28-51-654-002-00 

 real

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25- 

-TT 

Page 2 of 5 

4. 

Petitioner owns and/or otherwise holds an interest in the parcels of property that are the 

10. 

11. 

12. 

13. 

subject of this appeal. 

The property identified above is classified as 

201 Commercial-Improved 

The assessment(s) at issue were not protested to Respondent’s March, July, or December 

Board of Review as a protest was not required. 

The property or properties at issue are in 

_Grand Trav County. 

The property identified above’s address is: 

427 

W Front Street, Traverse City, MI 49684 

The assessment(s) at issue were established by the: City of Traverse City 

Petitioner’s legal residence or principal office address is: 

5555 Cleveland Ave., Columbus, OH 43231 

This appeal involves issues relating to the property or properties’ true cash and taxable 

values and uniformity. 

The tax year at issue is: 2025. 

The values for the property identified above as established by Respondent’s 2025 Board 

of Review are: 

Tax 

True Cash 

Assessed 

Taxable 

Year 

Value 

Value 

Value 

2025 

$1,486,200 

$743,100 

$380,532 

14. Petitioner contends the values for tax year 2025 are no more than the following: 

Tax 

True Cash 

State Equalized 

Taxable 

Year 

Value 

Value 

Value 

2025 

$610,000 

$305,000 

$305,000

Page 3

MTT Docket No. 2-___BBB___-TT 

Page 3 of 5 

15. The values in contention for tax year 202 are:

Tax 

Year

True Cash 

Value

State Equalized 

Value

Taxable 

Value

202

 The 202 assessments imposed on the subject property and the taxes to be levied and

collected are invalid because:

D The assessment, including state equalized and/or taxable value, exceeds the amount

permitted by the Michigan Constitution and applicable statutes;

E The assessment, including state equalized and/or taxable value, is at a higher

percentage of true cash value than permissible under the Michigan Constitution and

applicable statutes;

F The assessment is based on the misapplication of valuation principles, and

G The assessment otherwise violates Petitioner’s rights.

WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests this honorable Tribunal hear this case 

and enter an order reducing the 202 true cash, state equalized and taxable values and direct 

Respondent to refund to Petitioner any excess taxes, fees, and penalties paid, plus interest and

costs, and all other relief to which it is entitled under Michigan law and as is appropriate under 

the circumstances.

Respectfully submitted, 

DuCharme, McMillen & Associates, Inc. 

Dated: May ___, 202

By: 

______________________________ 

Michelle (Mikki) M. Silvey (P69494) 

Petitioner’s Representative

$876,200 

$438,100 

$75,532 

31

Page 4

MTT Docket No. 2-___BBB___-TT 

MTT Docket No. 2-__BBB____-TT 

Page 4 of 5 

______________________________, 

Petitioner, 

v 

______________________________, 

Respondent. 

ENTIRE TRIBUNAL PROPERTY TAX PETITION 

MULTIPLE PARCEL PETITION FORM 1 OF 1 

1. The classification of the property or properties identified herein as established by

Respondent’s Board of Review is:

Tax 

Year 

Parcel Number 

Real/Personal 

Classification 

202 

2. The values for the property or properties identified herein as established by Respondent’s

Board of Review are:

Tax 

Year 

Parcel Number 

True Cash 

Value 

Assessed Value 

Taxable Value 

202 

The Huntington National Bank 

City of Traverse City 

28-51-654-001-00 

Real

202 Commercial-Vacant 

 

28-51-654-001-00 

$431,200 

$215,600 

$178,302

Page 5

MTT Docket No. 2-__BBB____-TT 

Page 5 of 5 

3. Petitioner contends the values for the property or properties identified herein are:

Tax 

Year 

Parcel Number 

True Cash 

Value 

State Equalized 

Value 

Taxable Value 

202 

4. The values in dispute for the property or properties identified herein are:

Tax

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

Page 1

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

ORLENE HAWKS

DIRECTOR

Entire Tribunal Case Information Sheet - Petitioner

MOAHR DOCKET NO. 

Section 1: Petitioner’s Contact Information

Filer type: Organization

First Name/Company Name

M.I.

Last Name

The Huntington National Bank

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

5555 Cleveland Ave.

City or Town

Columbus

State

Ohio

ZIP Code

43231

Telephone Number

917-488-7825

Fax Number

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

msilvey@dmainc.com

Section 2: Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Contact Information

First Name

Michelle (Mikki)

M.I.

M

Last Name

Silvey

Firm Name (if any)

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

9229 Delegates Row, Ste 375

City or Town

Indianapolis

State

Indiana

ZIP Code

46240

Telephone Number

317-596-3260

Fax Number

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

msilvey@dmainc.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?2

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

427 W Front Street

Traverse City

Michigan

49684

Taxing Authority (City or Township)

City Of Traverse City (GRAND TRAVERSE)

County

Grand Traverse

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

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

Page 2

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

ORLENE HAWKS

DIRECTOR

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

True Cash and Taxable Values

Section 8: Valuation Information for Each Parcel under Appeal

Parcel Number:

28-51-654-002-00

Classification of Property: Real 

Commercial

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

743100

Current Taxable Value as established by the Board of Review:

380532

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

610000

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

305000

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

Parcel Number:

28-51-654-001-00

Classification of Property: Real 

Commercial

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

215600

Current Taxable Value as established by the Board of Review:

178302

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

200000

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

100000

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

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:

Page 3

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

ORLENE HAWKS

DIRECTOR

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? 

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

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.