- Local every day in
Letter to the Editor: Open Meetings Act
Two residents of the Grosse Pointes share their appreciation with the Michigan Tax Commission for prompting changes in Grosse Pointe Park's Board of Review practices.
Thank you State Tax Commission
A year ago, May 9, 2011, we spoke to the city council in Grosse Pointe Park about the violations of the Open Meetings Act and the Property Tax Act by the March 2011 Board of Review. We got vehement denials from the city attorney. We got silence and inaction from the city council.
Given the intransigence of the city officials, we reluctantly reported the violations to Lansing.
The State Tax Commission, appointed by the governor, is responsible for the administration of Michigan’s property tax system. The Commission and its staff issue rules and regulations, and are responsible for training and supervision of the assessors, county equalization departments, and the Boards of Review.
Letters we received from the State Tax Commission detail the promises the Park has made to the State in order to settle our complaint and correct these violations:
- The city attorney advised the Board of Review in writing of their obligations under the Open Meetings Act.
- The city attorney advised the Board to move their meetings out of a conference room and into the courtroom for members of the public to attend the meetings.
- The STC has reminded the city to follow the provisions of both the Open Meetings Act and the Property Tax Act as to the publication of meeting notices.
- The city manager has requested that the assessor prepare minutes in the required detail.
- The city council adopted a resolution to legitimize its long time practice of allowing petitions by letter rather than personal appearance.
- The city attorney advised the STC that the members of the Board have taken the oath of office.
The recent March 2012 meetings were in the courtroom, a big improvement. We will inform STC of the ongoing problems with the oath of office and publication of meeting dates.
We write this letter to express our appreciation to the State Tax Commission for its efforts on behalf of the schools, library, the parks, and the public safety departments that rely upon the fair and proper administration of the property tax system for funding.
The Open Meetings Act is everyone’s best protection against political favoritism that injures our institutions.
Robert Payne, Grosse Pointe Park
Charles Leahy, Grosse Pointe Shores
Thanks. We'll email you the next time we update this story.
Lisa Pinkos Howle
9:10 pm on Wednesday, April 25, 2012
Mr. Leahy’s efforts were instrumental in opening these meetings in Grosse Pointe Woods. During my recent tax appeals before the board of review, I pleaded my case and was dismissed with the usual “we’ll send you a letter.” I insisted upon being present during deliberations. I waited and waited until they were ready “deliberate” on my appeal. I had two properties with two professional appraisals. As I waited, one of the members of the board of review ran to fetch the City Treasurer/Comptroller to remove me. That didn’t happen. Instead I stayed and as a result was able to understand how our Board of Review is instructed to operate. The “decision” is made based on a whether the City Assessor includes certain comparable sales, the average square foot value is calculated and multiplied by the subject property’s square footage. This is remedial and there is no recognition of adjustments. You could have one bathroom or ten, 2 acres of land or one, problems with your home or none. It doesn’t matter because it’s beyond the scope of their instruction. I was actually told to “be quiet Lisa” when I tried to help a confused member of the panel to read the appraisals. These folks are appointed by the Mayor and favoritism is the norm. I know. I saw it firsthand. I was DENIED on the spot. Open meetings are good for all. Thanks to Mr. Leahy. I will be appealing to the Michigan Tax Tribunal.
charles
7:16 am on Thursday, April 26, 2012
Lisa - I don't know the specifics of your case, but commend you for staying in the room after the Board tried to dismiss you. By hearing the reasons for the Board denying you, you will be able to make the right decision about appealing to the TaxTribunal. If you appeal, you will make a more informed argument and better help the tribunal make its decision.
Confronting authority in the way that you did can be uncomfortable for you as a citizen, but it is critical to fairness in government decisions.
The other unfairness that results from closed meetings is what I observed in Grosse Pointe Park in March 2011. I refused to leave the room. I witnessed a private audience for a City Councilman and a former City Councilman, who were then granted a reduction in SEV from $417,800 to $150,000 for a 12,000 square foot commercial building. This 65% reduction lowered the annual tax bill from $22,702 to $9,285. This was by far the largest reduction granted in the Park. Can you believe that the Wayne County treasurer had foreclosed on this building just months earlier because the prior owner could not pay his $22,000 tax bill. These new owners buy the building at foreclosure for $265,000, and immediately get a closed Board meeting and have the taxes chopped to $9,200.
Does anyone think that's right?
And think about this. Who will pay for our schools and library and public safety if the tax base slips away via private deliberations of the Board of Review?
Charles Leahy
Chris K
8:00 am on Thursday, April 26, 2012
And think about this. Who will pay for our schools and library and public safety if the tax base slips away via private deliberations of the Board of Review?
The answer is residents. Who are repeatedly told that a tax increase will cost less than in 2007, or the preceding year because property values are not as high, or because it is what we "value" as a community.
Taxpayers need to look critically at how the institutions they are supporting with their tax dollars are being managed rather than voting for tax increases based upon threats to the loss of services and our "values" which are never adequately explained.
Gloria
8:05 am on Thursday, April 26, 2012
Outstanding work Robert and Charles! I just hope the Grosse Pointe residents truly appreciate your efforts! I went to the GPW tax board of review to appeal my SEV and Taxable Value. They dismissed me and stated a letter would be sent with their results by June 1st. They should inform residents that they can stay for the deliberations or wait for the letter on June 1st. While I hope they will reconsider their unfair assessment of my property I will most certainly never allow them to excuse me again - I WILL STAY for their deliberation with a video camera in hand!
Pete Waldmeir, GP Woods
2:29 pm on Tuesday, May 1, 2012
Lisa, Chris, Gloria and Charles - I'm amazed at how the four of you have stood up to these politically-appointed drones who are directed (I'mSure) by the various cities' administrations to turn down every appeal and kick the decisions upstairs to the county board of appeals. They figure that residents who don't understand the way the system operates will be too dumb to ask questions and demand their rights. You know what you ought to start asking? How many of your high-salaried city administrators live or pay taxes in your city? The number in Grosse Pointe Woods is zero, zilch, nada! The high-paid city administrator, city clerk, city treasurer/comptroller, city attoryn(ies) and - get this - the city assessor ALL live somewhere else. And so do about 90 per cent of the city employees. YOU pay taxes and THEY treat you like scum.