Michigan

Troy Tech Sf Owner LLC Petitioner Vs. City Of Troy Respondent

Petitioner: Troy Tech Sf Owner LLC
Respondent: City Of Troy

Case overview

Docket number: 26-001658-TT
Status: Ready Sched Prehearing Date Certain
CaseType: ET Property
Division: ET
County: Oakland
Judge: No judge assigned

Docket history

Line #	Subject	Filer	Line Ref	Enter Date/Post Mark	Fee	Related Item
7	Prehearing General Call	Not recorded	Not recorded	09/16/2026	Not recorded	Download
6	Attachments to the Answer were filed	RESP	Not recorded	07/20/2026	Not recorded	Download
5	Petition has been verified	PET	1	08/21/2026	Not recorded	Download
Not recorded	Not recorded	Not recorded	Not recorded	Not recorded	Not recorded	Download
4	Notice of Docket Number ET	Not recorded	Not recorded	08/21/2026	Not recorded	Download
3	Proof of service of petition was received.	Not recorded	Not recorded	07/22/2026	Not recorded	Download
Not recorded	Not recorded	Not recorded	Not recorded	Not recorded	Not recorded	Download
Not recorded	Not recorded	Not recorded	Not recorded	Not recorded	Not recorded	Download
2	Answer was received	RESP	Not recorded	07/14/2026	Not recorded	Download
Not recorded	Not recorded	Not recorded	Not recorded	Not recorded	Not recorded	Download
1	A petition was received.	PET	Not recorded	05/28/2026	$600.00	Download
Not recorded	Not recorded	Not recorded	Not recorded	Not recorded	Not recorded	Download

Documents

Prehearing_General_Call.2026-09-16_10-53-59.pdfRead complete document text →

Read document text excerpt

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 AUGUST 16- 31, 2027 PREHEARING GENERAL CALL AND ORDER OF

PROCEDURE

Troy Tech SF Owner LLC,

Petitioner,

City Of Troy,

Respondent.

MTT Docket No. 26-001658

Please be advised that 26-001658 has been placed on a two-week Prehearing General

Call commencing August 16, 2027. 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. 26-001658

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 April 19, 2027. 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 April 19, 2027. 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

April 19, 2027, 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

August 16, 2027, 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 Disclosure” discovery is limited to the opposing party’s valuation

disclosure, the opposing party’s valuation expert, and the witnesses identified on the

opposing party’s Prehearing Statement.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if this case is not scheduled for a date certain

prehearing conference during the time frame indicated it may be scheduled for a date

certain prehearing conference at any time

Page 3

MTT Docket

Page 4

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.

26-001658.pdfRead complete document text →

Read document text excerpt

Page 1

RECEIVED 

JUL 20 2026 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

TROY TECH SF OWNER, LLC, 

Petitioner, 

MTT Docket: 26-001658 

V 

Parcel ID 88-20-35-276-007 

CITY OF TROY, 

Respondent. 

/ 

JOHN-PAUL WOLFE 

LORI GRIGG BLUHM (P46908) 

FRIEDMAN REAL ESTATE 

JULIE QUINLAN DUFRANE (P59000) 

Representative 

for Petitioner 

TROY CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE 

34975 W. Twelve Mile Road 

Attorneys for Respondent 

Farmington Hills, MI 48331 

500 W. Big Beaver Road 

(248) 848-4154 

Troy, MI 48084 

TaxAppeals@FREG.com 

(248) 524-3320 

BLUHMLG@TROYMI.GOV 

/ 

RESPONDENT'S ANSWER TO PETITION AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 

NOW COMES, Respondent, CITY OF TROY, by and through its attorney, Lori Grigg 

Bluhm, and for its Answer to Petitioner's Petition, states as follows: 

1. 

As to Paragraph 1, Respondent admits the allegation 

2. 

As to Paragraph 2, Respondent admits the allegation. 

3 

As to Paragraph 3, no answer is required. 

4. 

As to Paragraph 4, no answer is required.

Page 2

8. 

As to Paragraph 8, no answer is required. 

9. 

As to Paragraph 9, no answer is required. 

10. 

As to Paragraph 10, Respondent admits the allegation. 

11. 

As to Paragraph 11, Respondent admits the allegation. 

12. 

As to Paragraph 12, Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegation, lacking 

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and 

therefore and leaves Petitioners to the proofs. 

13. 

As to Paragraph 13, Respondent denies that there are any issues concerning the 

valuation, assessment, taxable value, due process, equal protection and/or uniformity. 

14. 

As to Paragraph 14, Respondent admits. 

15. 

As to Paragraph 15, no answer is required. 

16. 

As to Paragraph 16, Respondent admits that the Respondent's true cash value, 

assessed value, and taxable values for the subject property are accurately reflected. 

17. 

As to Paragraph 17, Respondent denies that Petitioner's allegations as to true 

cash value, state equalized value, and taxable value for the subject property are correct, or that 

there is any support for these values. 

18. 

As to Paragraph 18, Respondent admits that Petitioner has properly calculated the 

difference between Petitioner's alleged and Respondent's true cash value, state equalized 

value, and taxable values for the subject property. Respondent denies that Petitioner's alleged 

values are correct and can be supported.

Page 3

20. 

As to Paragraph 20, Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations, since it 

is without sufficient knowledge, and leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 

WHEREFORE, Respondent, CITY OF TROY, requests the Tribunal dismiss the Petition, 

affirm or increase the subject property's assessed and taxable values, subject to county and 

state equalization, and award Respondent its costs and attorney fees. 

Dated: July 14, 2026 

ITY 

OF TROY 

sca 

LORI GRIGG BLUHM (P46908) 

Attorney for Respondent 

500 W. Big Beaver Road 

Troy, MI 48084 

(248) 524-3320 

BLUHMLG@TROYMI.GOV

Page 4

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 

For its further Answer to Petitioners’ Petition, Respondent relies on the following 

Affirmative Defenses: 

1. 

Petitioners fail to allege specific and sufficient facts to set forth a cause of action 

against Respondent and to support its claim for relief. 

Petitioners fail to allege specific and sufficient facts to establish fraud, error of law, 

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

Respondent or its agents. 

Petitioners fail to allege specific and sufficient facts to establish the true cash value, 

assessed value, and taxable value of its property. 

. 

Petitioners fail to allege specific and sufficient facts to support its allegations that the 

property’s taxable value is improper, or failed to conform with the mode and method 

applied in the case of all properties in the City of Troy for 2026. 

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

acts and/or negligence and cannot be allowed to reduce Petitioner's otherwise 

equitable tax burden. 

Respondent has properly and lawfully assessed Petitioner's property and established 

its assessed and taxable value in accordance with statutory and constitutional 

requirements. 

Respondent reserves the right to argue additional Affirmative Defenses during the

Page 5

affirmed or increased, that Petitioners’ Petition be dismissed with prejudice, and that 

Respondent be granted costs and attorney fees so wrongfully sustained. 

Dated: July 14, 2026 

CITY.OF TROY 

Le el 

LORI GRIGG BLUHM (P46908) 

Attorney for Respondent 

500 W. Big Beaver Road 

Troy, MI 48084 

(248) 524-3320 

BLUHMLG@TROYMI.GOV 

Certificate of Service 

| hereby certify that on July 14, 2026, 

| served a copy of this Answer and 

Affirmative Defenses via email to Petitioner's representative John-Paul Wolfe at 

TaxAppeals@FREG.com and to the following via first class mail: 

Chief Clerk, 

Michigan Tax Tribunal; P.O. Box 30232, Lansing, MI

Page 6

(i

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.

1960 Technology - Troy Tech (A) - 2026 Petition - FINAL SIGNED.pdfRead complete document text →

Read document text excerpt

Page 1

Er 

“rg 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

TROY TECH SF OWNER LLC 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Petitioner(s) 

v 

MTT Docket No. 

City of Troy 

i 

Respondent(s) 

ENTIRE TRIBUNAL PROPERTY TAX PETITION 

1. 

Property Parcel No: 88-20-35-276-007 

(If more than one parcel is at issue, attach a completed Multiple Parcel Petition 

Form addressing all other parcels at issue.) 

2. 

The property identified above is X real __personal. 

3. 

If more than one parcel of real property is under appeal, are the properties 

contiguous? ___Yes __ No. 

(If no, separate Petitions are required for each non- 

contiguous parcel.) 

4. 

Are all of the parcels of personal property located on a parcel of real property 

under appeal? ___ Yes ___ No. 

(If no, separate Petitions are required for each 

parcel of personal property not located on a parcel of real property under 

appeal.) 

5. 

If parcels of personal property are under appeal, when were the personal 

property statements filed by parcel number (attach additional page if necessary). 

6. 

The property identified above is classified as COMMERCIAL-IMPROVED 

7. 

If the assessment or assessments at issue were protested, the protest was made 

to Respondent's 

March 

July 

December Board of Review. 

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

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 

Page 2 of 4 

8. 

If a protest was required and no protest was made, list the separate and specific 

facts upon which Petitioner relies to invoke the Tribunal’s authority over the 

assessment or assessments at issue (attach additional page if necessary): 

9. 

If the appeal was not submitted by the deadline for the filing of an appeal for the 

classification or classifications of the properties at issue (i.e., May 31 or July 31 

of the tax year involved), list the separate and specific facts upon which 

Petitioner relies to invoke the Tribunal’s authority over the assessment or 

assessments at issue (attach additional page if necessary): 

10. 

The property or properties at issue are located in Oakland 

County. The 

property or properties’ address is: 

1960 Technology, Troy, MI 48083 

11. 

The assessment or assessments at issue were established by the (applicable 

local governmental unit): 

City of Troy 

12. 

Petitioner's legal residence or principal office address is: 

Friedman Real Estate Management Company 

34975 W Twelve Mile Road 

Farmington Hills, MI 48331 

13. 

This appeal involves issues relating to the (check all that are applicable): 

X 

the property or properties’ true cash and taxable values 

the property or properties’ taxable value only 

If the property or properties’ taxable value is at issue, is there a 

dispute as to the value of an addition or loss? ___ Yes __ No 

X 

uniformity of the property or properties’ assessment 

the property or the properties’ exemption from ad valorem taxation 

under MCL 

14. 

The tax year(s) at issue are: 2026

Page 3

MTT Docket No.

Page 3 of 4

15.

If more than the current tax year is being appealed, list the separate and specific

facts upon which Petitioner relies to invoke the Tribunal’s authority over the prior

tax year or years (attach additional page if necessary):

16.

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

2026

$7,914,740

$3,957,370

17.

Petitioner contends that the values for the property identified above are:

Tax Year

True Cash Value

State Equalized Value

Taxable Value

2026

$900,000

$450,000

18.

The values in dispute for the property identified above are:

Tax Year

True Cash Value

State Equalized Value

Taxable Value

2026

$7,014,740

$3,507,370

19.

Petitioner requests the following relief (attach additional page if necessary):

Petitioner requests that the Tax Tribunal enter an Order reducing the assessed value, state

equalized value and taxable value of Petitioner's Property to the figures set forth in Section

17 of this Petition and requiring Respondent to pay Petitioner any refunds attributable to

such reductions, plus interest and costs.

20.

List the separate and specific facts upon which Petitioner relies to support the

relief requested (attach additional page if necessary):

1960 Technology is currently 57.12% occupied with no major leasing prospects and

the two in-place tenants both have 2027 lease expiration dates. Due to the lack of

large tenants in the market and lack of investor demand, both occupancies and values

for office buildings have continued to decrease.

Page 4

MTT Docket No. 

Page 4 of 4 

ioner's Authorized Representative or, if none, Petitioner: 

ame of Petitioner's Authorized Representative or, if none, Petitioner: 

John-Paul Wolfe, Petitioner's Authorized Representative

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.

EntireTribunalCaseISPetition.pdfRead complete document text →

Read document text excerpt

Page 1

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

DIRECTOR

Entire Tribunal Case Information Sheet - Petitioner

MTT DOCKET NO. 

 

Section 1: Petitioner’s Contact Information

Filer type: 

Organization 

Local Unit of Government

First Name

M.I.

Last Name/Company Name

Troy Tech SF Owner LLC

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

34975 W 12 Mile Road

City or Town

Farmington Hills

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

48331

Telephone Number

248-848-4154

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

taxappeals@freg.com

 

 

Section 2: Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Contact Information

First Name

John Paul

M.I.

Last Name

Wolfe

Firm Name (if any)

Friedman Real Estate

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

34975 W 12 Mile Road

City or Town

Farmington Hills

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

48331

Telephone Number

248-848-4154

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

taxappeals@freg.com

 

Section 3: Issue 

Please designate one: 

Valuation 

 

Section 4: Subject Property Information 

How many parcels are you 

appealing?

1

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

1960 Technology

Troy

Page 2

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

DIRECTOR

Michigan

48083

Taxing Authority (City or Township)

City Of Troy (OAKLAND) 

County

Oakland

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

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

N/A

 

 

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

True Cash and Taxable Values

If “Other”, please explain:

 

 

Section 6: Valuation Information for Each Parcel under Appeal

Parcel Number:

88-20-35-276-007

Classification of Property: Real (check one)

Commercial (check one)

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

3957370

Current Taxable Value as established by the Board of Review:

3957370

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

900000

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

450000

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

Fee Information

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

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

appealed.

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

 

 $100,000.00 and under $250.00

 $100,000.01 to $500,000.00 $400.00

 $Over $500,000.00 $600.00

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

Page 3

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

DIRECTOR

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

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

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

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

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

Petitioner or Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Signature: 

/s/ John Paul Wolfe

Payment Information

Amount: 600

Success: True

Message: ""

Waiver Code:

Transaction Number: 26052887161381

Supporting Waiver Documents:

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

ET_Notice_of_Docket_Number.2026-08-21_06-30-56.pdfRead complete document text →

Read document text excerpt

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

Troy Tech SF Owner LLC,

Petitioner,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

MTT Docket No.: 26-001658

City Of Troy,

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 21, 2026

PROOF OF SERVICE

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

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

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

representatives.