Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 209.2 (2026)

State board of equalization; annual meeting; purpose; conducting business at public meeting; notice of meeting.

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION

Act 44 of 1911

209.2 State board of equalization; annual meeting; purpose; conducting business at public meeting; notice of meeting.

Sec. 2.

(1) The state board of equalization shall meet annually in the city of Lansing on the second Monday in May for the purpose of equalizing the assessments on all taxable property in this state, except that property assessed under laws enacted pursuant to sections 4 and 5 of article 10 of the state constitution of 1963.

(2) The business which the state board of equalization may perform shall be conducted at a public meeting of the board held in compliance with Act No. 267 of the Public Acts of 1976, being sections 15.261 to 15.275 of the Michigan Compiled Laws. Public notice of the time, date, and place of the meeting shall be given in the manner required by Act No. 267 of the Public Acts of 1976.

History: 1911, Act 44, Imd. Eff. Apr. 5, 1911 ;-- CL 1915, 161 ;-- Am. 1919, Act 330, Imd. Eff. May 13, 1919 ;-- CL 1929, 3697 ;-- CL 1948, 209.2 ;-- Am. 1949, Act 287, Eff. Sept. 23, 1949 ;-- Am. 1955, Act 18, Imd. Eff. Mar. 29, 1955 ;-- Am. 1957, Act 30, Imd. Eff. Apr. 26, 1957 ;-- Am. 1977, Act 160, Imd. Eff. Nov. 8, 1977

PopularName Notes:

State Board of Equalization Act

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 1976–1982 · leading case: Emmet Cnty. v. State Tax Comm'n, 244 N.W.2d 909 (Mich. 1976).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Emmet Cnty. v. State Tax Comm'n, 244 N.W.2d 909 (Mich. 1976). · cites it 4× “(c) MCLA 209.2; MSA 7.602 orders the State Board of Equalization to convene on the second Monday in May to equalize assessments.”

Johnson v. State, 317 N.W.2d 652 (Mich. Ct. App. 1982). “The class of persons represented by plaintiffs are those whose property valuations were increased by use of a neighborhood obsolescence factor, or equalization factor, allegedly in excess of 1.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.