So when the tax man said our building is now worth $450K, we laughed. Come on. It’s Michigan. Have the tax men been living under a rock? Are they blind?
Our building isn’t worth the lot it’s sitting on. With two dozen other empty buildings for sale or lease on our street alone, we couldn’t sell this place for $1 and a Diet Coke. We recently had an agent come over and give us his opinion. With business drying up, we don’t really need this place. Maybe $200K he says, but I know he was lying through his teeth trying to get the listing. Should anything catastrophic happen, I am already reconciled to the fact that I’ll pack up my clothes, leave our Michigan property to squatters, and never take a single look back.
Lest anyone think that we’re living in the lap of luxury, let me describe the building in question. It’s a 50-year-old story and a half cinder block building with a flat roof (problematic in the winter), maybe 3000 square feet. It’s big enough for an office, a classroom and storage. There have been no major improvements since the carpet went in 11 years ago, and I can’t remember the last time it was painted. (Who can afford it?) The birds have built nests in our vents, and somehow escape into the drop ceiling, where they make their way into the office. If you’ve never been dive-bombed by a sparrow, be thankful; you’re not missing anything.
We lease out a quarter of it to a psychologist whom we never see and who sometimes doesn’t pay rent for months. (Could it be because he has no clients? Ya think?) The “For Lease” sign was on the outside of our building for two years before we snagged that one. The previous tenant neglected to pay rent for six months and then moved out in the dead of night -- and went bankrupt.
The reason we bought the place was not to make money but to avoid paying rent. I know it’s worth less than what we paid for it in 1995, but it has provided a roof over our heads. But to say it’s worth anything at all is simply wishful thinking.
Ah, but the fight to lower the tax bill isn’t as easy as it is for a residence. In response to my husband’s request, the city of Royal Oak forwarded the information to the State of Michigan. It appears that fighting a tax assessment for commercial property goes straight to Department of Labor and Economic Growth (doublespeak for Bureaucratic Clubhouse), where it is handled by the Michigan Tax Tribunal.
Article comments
1 - Ruvy
Joanne,
Shyster? How could you insult the legal profession so? I find it absolutely digusting! You should be ashamed of yourself! Even if you were telling the truth.
Mr. Miller?
2 - Joanne Huspek
Ruvy: Even the attorneys I know and who I'm on good terms with regard the bulk of their profession (as witnessed by our Beltway Boys) as shysters, I mean counselors...
3 - Bliffle
Good article. Nice picture, too.
4 - Ruvy
You mean you couldn't tell I was joking, eh, Joanne? When I first met my wife, she was growling over how she got screwed over by the big name law firm she had hired to sue the MTC for her when she fell on a St. Paul bus and damaged her back.
I sat and sympathized with her over what shysters lawyers are, bought a birthday gift, etc. Later, after we had gotten married, I read the transcript of the discovery proceedings that led to the law firm's advice to her not to sue - that she didn't have a leg to stand on.
She didn't. They did her an immense favor. When I explained why, it took a a while to accept. But most folks tend to feel that all lawyers are shysters - except their lawyer. They then extend those feelings to congressmaggots - with the tragic results we all see.
5 - Marsh Newmark
This is liberalism in action and explains why so many shysters, I mean lawyers are liberals.
6 - Joanne Huspek
Thanks, Bliffle. It's my headshot. I don't really look like that, ask my husband.
I knew you were joking, Ruvy. You seem to have the same warped sense of humor I have. But I can't believe your wife didn't prevail over the MTC.
7 - Ruvy
Joanne,
I can't believe your wife didn't prevail over the MTC.
The reason she couldn't have prevailed was that her own testimony was so uncertain. Her memory was uncertain as the exact order of events, and to whether there was ice on the steps or not, etc., etc. The MTC did make a token settlement of $25,000, so it was not an entire loss. But between the lawyers' cut and the expenses for discovery, my wife saw $12,700 or so. So it was not an entire loss....