Tuesday, June 18th 2013
 

More Area News

Hoffman questions township’s ‘land division for tax purposes’ in ongoing Smith litigation

Print
Written by Amy Mayhew
Friday, January 18 2013

Bob Hoffman speaks during publ...

HOLLY TOWNSHIP, Michigan – Oakland County Commissioner Bob Hoffman spoke out again Wednesday night on behalf of Holly Township residents, Timm and Maria Smith.

The Smiths are currently involved in a lawsuit with Holly Township regarding the ownership of a 10-acre portion of the 20-acre S. Holly Road property the Smiths once entirely owned. A legal land split of the parcel was never performed, and now the Smiths maintain that the mortgage on the 10-acre parcel on which they defaulted in 2008 was fraudulent.

Last month, the township board approved a motion to split the 20-acre parcel into three separate pieces for “tax purposes only,” something Treasurer Mark Freeman said was a way in which township officials could help the Smiths keep the remaining 10-acres they own.  Authorization of the land split, Freeman said, will give the Smiths one final opportunity to make good on their back taxes, penalties and interest, thus preventing it from going into scheduled tax forfeiture on Mar. 1.

Wednesday night’s appearance before the Holly Township Board of Trustees marked the fifth time Hoffman has spoken in support of the Smith family, and accused township officials of attempting a “land grab” of the 20-acre parcel along the Shiawassee River.


Hoffman spoke directly to Freeman, referencing a March, 2012 meeting in which he and Freeman, former Supervisor Jesse Lambert, township attorney, Lisa Hamameh and the Smiths’ attorney, Casper Connolly tried to reach a compromise.

“When I met with you, former Supervisor Lambert, your attorney and the Smiths’ attorney, I specifically asked you what was happening with the taxes because I was concerned that Holly Township planned to gain the property through tax foreclosure,” Hoffman said. “You said not to worry because you had made an agreement with Oakland County and the property would not be foreclosed for back taxes.”

Hoffman challenged Freeman’s promise. “The truth, Mr. Freeman, is you had no agreement,” he said, adding that he had verified the information with Oakland County officials. “You stated in the newspaper that you are only taking this action to split the parcel because you received an affidavit from Oakland County that the property is scheduled for foreclosure in February of 2013.”

Calling Freeman’s portrayal of the facts “misleading,” Hoffman said it was his belief that the only way Oakland County knew that the taxes were delinquent was because Freeman reported them as such.

Hoffman said he met on Jan. 9 with members of the Oakland County Equalization Division, including Director David Hieber, Field Supervisor Ann Grady and Supervisor of Tax Descriptions and Mapping, Brenda Firestine.

“I was told that as of that day, Holly Township hadn’t even applied for the land division at the 1031 S. Holly property,” Hoffman said. Additionally, Hoffman said it was the main consensus among the Oakland County Equalization staff members with whom he met that they had no intention of approving the proposed land split.

“It’s just another attempt to steal their land,” Hoffman said during Wednesday evening’s public comment. “You can’t split the property for taxes only and you continue to violate the Land Division Act.”

Holly Township Treasurer, Mark...


In a written correspondence on Friday, Freeman said no recordings or transcripts were made of March 2012 meeting.  “The township board authorized me and Mr. Lambert to meet with Mr. and Mrs. Smith to make an offer to purchase their remaining interest in (the land) commonly known as 1031 S. Holly Road,” Freeman said.  While neither of the Smiths attended the meeting, Freeman acknowledged Hoffman’s participation. “There was a verbal confidentiality agreement between Mr. Hoffman and myself which I later confirmed in a phone call to Mr. Hoffman after the meeting,” Freeman wrote. “Both Mr. Hoffman and Mr. Smith have broken that agreement.”

In his letter, Freeman acknowledged Hoffman’s role on the Oakland County Board of Commissioners, but questioned his interest in the Smiths’ case.

“He has absolutely no authority over Holly Township government what-so-ever,” he wrote. “Mr. Hoffman has the right to speak during the public comment portion of the township board meetings just like any other citizen,” he added. “His continued efforts to sensationalize this issue are suspect, because only the Appellate Court can decide the issue.”

In speaking with newly elected Supervisor Dale Smith and Trustee Mark Cornwell, Hoffman said he understood that both men believed that the Smiths’ dispute is simply about “a mortgage foreclosure.”

“It is my opinion that you did no investigation, because if you had, you would not have come to that conclusion,” Hoffman said. “All you have done is pass on what you have been told by Ms. Winchester and Mr. Freeman, and that, gentlemen, is not leadership.”

On Dec. 28,  Freeman and Supervisor Dale Smith, both members of the Land Division Committee, met and approved the land division for tax purposes only of the 1031 S. Holly property and forwarded it onto Oakland County Equalization for its approval.  Freeman, however, said he met with Oakland County Treasurer Andy Meisner on Jan. 17 and was informed that the Smiths have signed a payment agreement with Oakland County for delinquent taxes. “This effectively suspends the delinquent tax forfeiture process, so as long as Mr. and Mrs. Smith meet the terms of the agreement,” Freeman said.


Comments   

 
#1 Joe 2013-01-18 20:07
Every time I read this claim of a "fraudulent mortgage", I wonder what this means.

Does this mean that that Smiths were not loaned the money as stated in a mortgage?

...or

Does this mean that the Smiths do not feel they have to pay the loan back based on some type of technicality?

...or something else?

Can anyone explain this?
Report to administrator
 
 
#2 hollyshopper 2013-01-18 22:13
The issue for township residents isn't how the Smiths obtained that mortgage or whether it was fraudulent. That's between them and their bank and whomever has jurisdiction over mortgage fraud.

The issue for us as I see it is the way Freeman went after this 10 acre portion of a 20 acre property then owned by the Smiths and PHH bank, sunk his teeth into it, and won't let go, even at enormous cost to the taxpayers. What gives? It's a losing investment-- get out of it and put our taxes to use in a way that benefits the taxpayers! I don't care who's right or wrong here-- just stop wasting our money!
Report to administrator
 
 
#3 amayhew 2013-01-18 22:38
Joe:
The entire story is explained, history and all in this, the first story that was reported by The Holly Express:

thehollyexpress.com/.../...

Hopefully, this gives you some insight into the details of this ongoing issue.
Report to administrator
 
 
#4 Joe 2013-01-20 04:41
@hollyshopper- I agree that I don't see why the township spends money on this unless there is some benefit to the residents; at this point, I'm not seeing it.

What I don't like though is how this saga seems to always overlook the fact that money was loaned by a bank and not returned. There always seems to be a focus on "the big bad banks and government try to steal property holder's property".

How the Smiths feel they are entitled to property that they were loaned money on and did not repay is beyond me.

As someone who's property value has been damaged by foreclosures and those that do not fulfill the agreement of their mortgage, it's difficult to be have sympathy on this topic.

@Amy- Thanks for the reminder on that article; you'll note I was the only commenter on it. 13 months later I'd probably still make the same recommendation to the Smith family (although much time and money has probably been wasted since then).
Report to administrator
 
 
#5 TheDuke 2013-01-20 09:46
I still have some heartburn with the fact that when the Smiths tried to split the land, the township required them to first put in a private road (estimated at $120,000). Now that the township "owns" part of the property and wants to split it, they are not requiring themselves to put in the private road. So they are holding themselves to far less of a standard than they are the residents that they are supposed to be representing.
Report to administrator
 
 
#6 hollyshopper 2013-01-20 13:18
The thing is, Joe, the foreclosure has nothing to do with the township. What I'm looking at is the inexplicable actions of the township board after the foreclosure had occurred. Have you ever heard of a foreclosure on only part of a parcel? Why would the township knowingly go after a property in such obviously complicated circumstances? Any normal person would know that this was going to get messy, but the treasurer expressed interest in it anyway. I don't like risks like that being taken with my tax money.
Report to administrator
 
 
#7 Mark Freeman 2013-01-22 11:56
It is important to remember that Mr.and Mrs.Smith filed the lawsuit. All legal expenses associated specifically with that lawsuit are covered by Holly Township's insurance carrier. Any peripheral legal expenses associated with that lawsuit are invoiced to Holly Township by its legal council. To my knowledge, Holly Township has never exceeded its annual budget for legal services. PHH Bank quit claimed 10 acres of land located at 1031 S.Holly Rd. to Holly Township on 11/19/09. At that point it became a Holly Township asset,owned by the taxpayers. As Treasurer I have a fiduciary responsiblity to be a good steward of all Township assets, unless a State of Michigan Court of Law instructs me otherwise.
Report to administrator
 
 
#8 Mark Freeman 2013-01-22 12:16
Only the Appellate Court can decide this case. No amount of sensational speculation or attempts to retry this case during Holly Township Board meetings will have any influence on the Appellate Court. So what's the point?It certanily doesn't help Holly's image. Criticism from habitual critics is usually politically motivated.
Report to administrator
 
 
#9 Bgiving 2013-01-24 22:23
Mr Hoffman better concern himself with his own property in downtown Holly , it's time he paid up or someone is going to grab his investment
Report to administrator
 
 
#10 hollyshopper 2013-01-24 22:42
Ha! Don't you love it when politicians get caught doing something unscrupulous and then they blame those that call attention to it for creating bad press? That's an old one, Freeman, but I guess we can't blame you for trying.
Report to administrator
 
 
#11 Mark Freeman 2013-01-25 10:35
I do not respond to people who hide behind alias'. If they are affraid to use their own name or to talk to me face to face, then they have no credibility.
Report to administrator
 

To comment on this article, please register for an account or log-in if you already have an account.

 



Front Page | Community | Sports and Outdoors | Opinion | Education | Holly Express | Site Map
©2013 The Holly Express.
Send feedback to Editor@theHollyExpress.com.
All rights reserved. This material may not be broadcast, published, rewritten or redistributed without prior written permission.