State ex rel. City of Waukesha v. City of Waukesha Bd. of Review
| Decision Date | 18 November 2020 |
| Docket Number | Appeal No. 2019AP1479 |
| Citation | 2020 WI App 77,952 N.W.2d 806,395 Wis.2d 239 |
| Parties | STATE of Wisconsin EX REL. CITY OF WAUKESHA, Petitioner-Respondent, v. CITY OF WAUKESHA BOARD OF REVIEW, Respondent-Appellant, Salem United Methodist Church, Interested Party-Respondent. |
| Court | Wisconsin Court of Appeals |
On behalf of the respondent-appellant, the cause was submitted on the briefs of Eric J. Larson of Municipal Law & Litigation Group, SC, Waukesha.
On behalf of the petitioner-respondent, the cause was submitted on the brief of Brian E. Running, City Attorney, Waukesha.
Before Neubauer, C.J., Gundrum and Davis, JJ.
¶1 The issue is whether the City of Waukesha (City) may appeal from a tax assessment determination by the City of Waukesha Board of Review (Board), which rejected the City assessor's evaluation, by commencing a certiorari action under WIS. STAT. § 70.47(13) (2017-18).1
¶2 After the taxpayer, Salem United Methodist Church (Church) received a favorable decision from the Board, the City sought statutory certiorari review; the circuit court issued the writ; and the Board moved to quash the writ and dismiss the case on the grounds that the City lacked authority to seek certiorari review and, in any event, that the Board satisfied the certiorari standards. The court denied the motion, reasoning that the City had authority to seek review under WIS. STAT. § 70.47(13), and the Board's decision failed to satisfy any of the certiorari standards. We conclude that § 70.47(13) does not authorize the City to commence a certiorari action.2 Because the statute did not empower the City to appeal from the Board's determination, we reverse and remand with directions to the circuit court to quash the writ and dismiss the action.
¶3 In proceedings before the Board, the parties differed as to the valuation of the subject property. Because we determine that the City is not statutorily authorized to appeal the Board's decision, we need not address in detail the merits of the valuation dispute. In 2017, the City assessed the property owned by the Church at $51,900. In 2018, the assessor increased the amount to $642,200, in part due to the Church apparently having received, and later admitting that it accepted, an offer to sell for approximately $1,000,000. The assessor notified the Church of the change, informed it that the open book session would be held the following week, and explained that a Board hearing would be conducted. In response, the Church filed an objection, providing its own amount of $108,655 and the basis therefor. After a hearing at which the assessor testified and provided his analysis, and the Church provided testimony and evidence, the Board ruled in favor of the Church, accepting its valuation, slightly rounding up to $108,700.
¶4 The City subsequently petitioned the circuit court under WIS. STAT. § 70.47(13) to issue a writ of certiorari, asserting the Board failed to afford the assessor's amount the required presumption of correctness, the Church failed to overcome the presumption with sufficient evidence, and the Board's decision was arbitrary and unreasonable. The court issued the writ, ordering the writ's return within thirty days, along with the record of the Board's proceedings, documents, and files.
¶5 The Board moved to quash the writ on grounds, among others, for failure to state a claim for relief that could be granted and for lack of standing, capacity, legal authority to commence such an action, and jurisdiction. It also moved to dismiss on the ground that the Church provided sufficient credible evidence to overcome the presumed correctness of the assessor's valuation, such that the Board acted according to law and not in an arbitrary manner.
¶6 The circuit court denied both motions. It remanded the matter to the Board for further proceedings in conformity with the court's order. The Board appeals.3
¶7 The Board argues that WIS. STAT. § 70.47(13) does not authorize or empower the City to take a certiorari appeal of the Board's determination to the circuit court. To resolve the question, we must undertake statutory interpretation, which is a question of law we review de novo. See Hartford Citizens for Responsible Gov't v. City of Hartford Bd. of Zoning Appeals , 2008 WI App 107, ¶12, 313 Wis. 2d 431, 756 N.W.2d 454.
¶8 When interpreting WIS. STAT. § 70.47(13), the goal is to give effect to the intent of the legislature, which we assume is expressed in the text of the statute. State ex rel. Kalal v. Circuit Ct. for Dane Cnty. , 2004 WI 58, ¶44, 271 Wis. 2d 633, 681 N.W.2d 110. To this end, we give the language of the statute its common, ordinary, and accepted meaning. Id. , ¶45. We interpret statutory language "in the context in which it is used; not in isolation but as part of a whole; in relation to the language of surrounding or closely-related statutes," and we interpret it reasonably to avoid absurd or unreasonable results. Id. , ¶46. We also consider the scope, context, and purpose of the statute insofar as they are ascertainable from the text and structure of the statute itself. Id. , ¶48. If, employing these principles, the meaning of the statute is plain, then we apply that language to the facts at hand. See id. , ¶¶45-50.
¶9 A statute is ambiguous when "it is capable of being understood by reasonably well-informed persons in two or more senses." Id. , ¶47. However, a statute is not rendered ambiguous merely because two parties disagree as to its meaning. Id.
¶10 We must decide whether WIS. STAT. § 70.47(13) authorized the City to appeal the assessment ruling of the Board. We begin therefore with the statute itself, but then also summarize the related statutory scheme regarding objections and appeals of tax assessments. Section 70.47(13) provides in relevant part as follows:4
(13) CERTIORARI . Except as provided in [ WIS. STAT. §] 70.85, appeal from the determination of the board of review shall be by an action for certiorari commenced within 90 days after the taxpayer receives the notice under sub. (12).
¶11 Because the above provision is based on and refers to a number of preceding circumstances, as well as other statutory provisions, we will first provide some background and context of the tax assessment and objection process and then analyze the applicable statutes.
¶12 In general, Wisconsin taxes property using a means of assessment laid out in WIS. STAT. ch. 70. See Metropolitan Assocs. v. City of Milwaukee , 2011 WI 20, ¶6, 332 Wis. 2d 85, 796 N.W.2d 717. Municipalities, such as the City here, comprise the primary units for administering property taxes. See Nankin v. Village of Shorewood , 2001 WI 92, ¶16, 245 Wis. 2d 86, 630 N.W.2d 141. For this purpose, each municipality is designated as a "taxation district," see WIS. STAT. § 70.045, which must have a tax assessor, who can be appointed or elected,5 see WIS. STAT. § 70.05(1) ; Nankin , 245 Wis. 2d 86, ¶16, 630 N.W.2d 141.
¶13 Here, the City's mayor appoints the assessor, whose term is indefinite and whose appointment is subject to confirmation by the common council. See CITY OF WAUKESHA , WIS. , CODE ch. 2.01(2) (Sept. 21, 2015).
¶14 The assessor values all taxable property within the taxation district. See WIS. STAT. §§ 70.05, 70.10, 70.29, 70.32(1) - (2). The assessor must notify in writing an owner of a changed assessment at least fifteen days before the board meeting, including the assessment amount, the time and place of the meeting, and information about how to object. WIS. STAT. § 70.365. Once the assessor has completed the assessment rolls, the municipal clerk publishes a notice to the public of the open book session, at which time the rolls are made available for examination. WIS. STAT. § 70.45. This session also offers a taxpayer an opportunity to speak with the assessor about an adjustment or correction (the assessor must be present for at least two hours while the rolls are open). Id. The assessor is permitted to make changes that are necessary, and materials are provided as to how to appeal an assessment. Id. ¶15 Owners who then wish to dispute the assessment may file an objection with the board of review. See WIS. STAT. §§ 70.07, 70.075, 70.47(7)(a). If, among other things, an intent to object is properly filed at least two days before the first scheduled board meeting and the taxpayer provides its own written estimate of the land value, specifying the information used to calculate that estimate, the board will consider the objection. Sec. 70.47(7), (8). At the hearing, the board will take under oath testimony of any person relative to the assessment; the owner or owner's representative will testify first; the board may examine under oath any person it believes has knowledge of the property's value; the board may compel attendance of witnesses and documents; the hearing shall be recorded; and the assessor shall then provide specific information to the board supporting the assessor's valuation. Sec. 70.47(8).
¶16 "In all proceedings before the board the taxation district shall be a party in interest to secure or sustain an equitable assessment of all the property in the taxation district." WIS. STAT. § 70.47(11). As noted, in this case, the "taxation district" is the City.
¶17 The board will then make a determination as to whether the assessment is correct. WIS. STAT. § 70.47(9)(a). The board shall presume that the assessor's valuation is correct, a presumption only rebutted "by a sufficient showing by the objector" that it is incorrect. Sec. 70.47(8)(i) ; see also Thoma v. Village of Slinger , 2018 WI 45, ¶19, 381 Wis. 2d 311, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. City of Waukesha Bd. of Review
...court's order, concluding "that § 70.47(13) does not authorize the City to commence a certiorari action." State ex rel. City of Waukesha v. City of Waukesha Bd. of Rev., 2020 WI App 77, ¶2, 395 Wis. 2d 239, 952 N.W.2d 806. Accordingly, it determined that the circuit court erred in denying t......