Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Assessments Board Of Review topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Hillsdale Board of Review affirms or adjusts dozens of property assessments; taxable value falls by about $2.79 million

Hillsdale Board of Review · May 1, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Hillsdale Board of Review met March 3–23, 2026 to elect officers, review appeal procedures and hear dozens of taxpayer petitions. The board affirmed many assessments, reduced several to reflect market or functional changes, and reported a net drop in taxable value of roughly $2.79 million.

Chair D. Kerry Laylack called the Hillsdale Board of Review to order at the March organizational meeting and the board elected to keep D. Kerry Laylack as chair and Becki Jaeger as secretary.

The board, with Assessor Kimberly Thomas (MAAO) advising, reviewed appeal procedures (including MCL 211.32 quorum rules and FOIA guidance) and accepted completed training documentation (form 5731). The board then recessed and reconvened for three days of taxpayer hearings on March 9, March 10 and March 23 to consider written and in‑person appeals.

Why it matters: decisions by the Board of Review change assessed and taxable values that feed municipal tax rolls and can affect property tax bills for residents and businesses. The board’s March recap shows a net reduction in the city’s reported values after corrections and reductions.

What the board decided

- Election and procedure: The board retained Kerry as chair and Becki Jaeger as secretary; the assessor displayed the required BOR training form and reminded members this was a non‑audit year. The board reviewed petition handling rules (appointments in 15‑minute blocks recommended; form L‑4035 required for each petitioner).

- Major valuation outcomes: The board recorded dozens of motions to affirm or adjust assessed and true cash values across numerous parcels. Notable outcomes included:

- Keefer House (M‑26‑025): The board set the taxable value tied to an approved abatement at $3,000,000 (motion by Board member Anthony "Tony" Vear, supported by Chair Kerry; motion passed). The minutes state the assessment was determined by the approved abatement amount rather than actual construction costs.

- D & M Hillsdale LLC (M‑26‑054): The board voted to reaffirm assessment and to uncapped the taxable value to $432,600 (motion by Vear, supported by Laylack; passed).

- Devine Investment Properties (M‑26‑028 through M‑26‑031): Several Devine parcels had assessments reduced to reflect current market values; motions to lower true cash value for multiple parcels were recorded and passed as reflected in the BOR summary.

- Charger Property (M‑26‑006): The petition to reduce the assessment was denied; the board voted 2–1 to affirm the assessor’s value (moved by Becki Jaeger, supported by Kerry; Tony voted no).

- Late Form 5076 filings: The board accepted several late Form 5076 exemption filings for specific taxpayers (motions recorded as approved by unanimous vote for those entries noted in the minutes).

Numbers and records: The city’s March Board of Review summary spreadsheet shows corrected parcel‑level entries and a grand recap: the combined corrected totals reduced the city’s reported values by $2,931,700 in State Equalized Value and by $2,792,955 in taxable value (grand totals listed in the BOR recap table).

Process and next steps: The board recessed and reconvened on scheduled days to accommodate in‑person hearings and to finish written petitions. The minutes record motions, movers and supporters for each decision and note that petitioners may submit documentation, appear in person or be represented by written authorization. The board scheduled a future recess for July 21, 2026 as noted in the minutes.

What the minutes do not show: The minutes are a record of motions, votes and clerk’s entries; they contain limited verbatim debate. Where the minutes record a 2–1 vote or a unanimous approval, the article reflects the recorded outcome rather than additional context that was not included in the minutes.

The Board of Review completed its March session with parcel corrections and adjustments entered into the city’s BOR summary and the assessor’s records.