Town of Oulu Adjourn Board of Review Town Hall

July 18, 2019 ~ 3:00 p.m. 6:02 p.m.

The July 18, 2019 Adjourned Board of Review was called to order by Sandra Rantala, chairperson at

3:00 p.m. at the town hall. As per WI State Statutes, 70.47(4) a written notice was posted on the outer door of the town hall on July 10, 2019 stating the adjourned board of review will reconvene on July 18, 2019, 3:00 p.m. at the town hall.

 

Roll call:

Members present: Jonathan Hamilton, Klaus Nieder, Sandy Rantala, Diana Reijo, clerk, and assessors

Robert & Perri Campbell.

 

Also, present, Janet Stolz, Copper Hills Hunting Preserve.

 

The purpose of this meeting was to hear the twelve objections filed by Janet Stolz, Copper Hills

Hunting Preserve.

 

Hearings were held on the following parcels:

 

Objection

Number

Property Address Property Tax

Key Number

Classification Property

Assessment

1 74180 Hoover Line Rd,

Iron River, WI

26713 G5 Undeveloped

G6 Productive Forest

10 acres $2,500

30 acres $37,500

2 74180 Hoover Line Rd,

Iron River, WI

26716 G6 Productive Forest 40 acres $46,800
3 74180 Hoover Line Rd,

Iron River, WI

26701 G6 Productive Forest 35 acres $37,300
4 74180 Hoover Line Rd,

Iron River, WI

34280 G6 Productive Forest 10 acres $9,300
5 74180 Hoover Line Rd,

Iron River, WI

34850 G6 Productive Forest 10 acres $8,600
6 74180 Hoover Line Rd,

Iron River, WI

26708 G6 Productive Forest 40 acres $37,000
7 74180 Hoover Line Rd,

Iron River, WI

26709 G5 Undeveloped

G6 Productive Forest

20 acres $900

20 acres $18,000

8 74180 Hoover Line Rd,

Iron River, WI

26710 G5 Undeveloped

G6 Productive Forest

31 acres $9,300

9 acres $5,400

9 74180 Hoover Line Rd,

Iron River, WI

26715 G6 Productive Forest 40 acres $46,800
10 74180 Hoover Line Rd,

Iron River, WI

34851 G6 Productive Forest 10 acres $48,600
11 74180 Hoover Line Rd,

Iron River, WI

26700 G6 Productive Forest 40 acres $24,000
12 74180 Hoover Line Rd,

Iron River, WI

37342 G1 Residential

G1 Residential

 

G5 Undeveloped

G6 Productive Forest

2 acres $2,000

Improvements

$102,100

19.5 acres $4,900

18.5 acres $11,700

 

 

The board of review determinations are as follows:

 

Objection 1: Tax property number:  26713

Motion by Hamilton, seconded by Nieder that tax property number 26713, exercising its judgment and discretion, pursuant to Sec. 70.47(9)(a) of the Wis. Statues the Board of Review, by majority and roll call vote hereby determines: that the Assessor’s valuation is correct; that the Assessor presented

evidence of the fair market value of the subject property using assessment methods which conform to the statutory requirements and which are outlined in the Wisconsin Property Assessment Manual; that the taxpayer did not present sufficient evidence to rebut the presumption of correctness granted by the law to the Assessor; that the Assessor’s valuation is reasonable in light of all the relevant evidence; and sustains the same valuation as set by the Assessor; (in certain cases), the Board of Review further finds that the taxpayer’s testimony is insufficient to show that the assessment of comparable property in the municipality is not uniform and the municipality has demonstrated the uniformity of assessments.

 

Roll call vote:  Yes:  Hamilton, Nieder, Rantala, Reijo. No:  None.  Absent:  None. Abstain: None. Motion carried by roll call vote.

 

Objection 2: Tax property number:  26716

Motion made by Nieder and seconded by Hamilton that, exercising its judgment and discretion, pursuant to Sec. 70.47(9)(a) of the Wis. Statues the Board of Review, by majority and roll call vote hereby determines: that the Assessor’s valuation is correct; that the Assessor presented evidence of

the fair market value of the subject property using assessment methods which conform to the statutory requirements and which are outlined in the Wisconsin Property Assessment Manual; that the taxpayer did not present sufficient evidence to rebut the presumption of correctness granted by the law to the Assessor; that the Assessor’s valuation is reasonable in light of all the relevant evidence; and sustains the same valuation as set by the Assessor; (in certain cases), the Board of Review further finds that the taxpayer’s testimony is insufficient to show that the assessment of comparable property in the municipality is not uniform and the municipality has demonstrated the uniformity of assessments.

 

Roll call vote:  Yes:  Hamilton, Nieder, Rantala, Reijo. No:  None.  Absent:  None. Abstain: None. Motion carried by roll call vote.

 

Objection 3: Tax property number:  26701

Motion by Hamilton, seconded by Nieder that tax property number 26701, exercising its judgment and discretion, pursuant to Sec. 70.47(9)(a) of the Wis. Statues the Board of Review, by majority and roll call vote hereby determines: that the Assessor’s valuation is correct; that the Assessor presented evidence of the fair market value of the subject property using assessment methods which conform to the statutory requirements and which are outlined in the Wisconsin Property Assessment Manual; that the taxpayer did not present sufficient evidence to rebut the presumption of correctness granted by the law to the Assessor; that the Assessor’s valuation is reasonable in light of all the relevant evidence; and sustains the same valuation as set by the Assessor; (in certain cases), the Board of Review further finds that the taxpayer’s testimony is insufficient to show that the assessment of comparable property in the municipality is not uniform and the municipality has demonstrated the uniformity of assessments.

 

Roll call vote:  Yes:  Hamilton, Nieder, Rantala, Reijo. No:  None.  Absent:  None. Abstain: None. Motion carried by roll call vote.

 

Motion made by Nieder and seconded by Hamilton that tax property number 34280, exercising its judgment and discretion, pursuant to Sec. 70.47(9)(a) of the Wis. Statues the Board of Review, by majority and roll call vote hereby determines: that the Assessor’s valuation is correct; that the Assessor presented evidence of the fair market value of the subject property using assessment methods which conform to the statutory requirements and which are outlined in the Wisconsin Property Assessment Manual; that the taxpayer did not present sufficient evidence to rebut the presumption of correctness granted by the law to the Assessor; that the Assessor’s valuation is reasonable in light of all the relevant evidence; and sustains the same valuation as set by the Assessor; (in certain cases), the Board of Review further finds that the taxpayer’s testimony is insufficient to show that the assessment of comparable property in the municipality is not uniform and the municipality has demonstrated the uniformity of assessments.

 

Roll call vote:  Yes:  Hamilton, Nieder, Rantala, Reijo. No:  None.  Absent:  None. Abstain: None. Motion carried by roll call vote.

 

Objection 5: Tax property number:  34850

Motion by Hamilton, seconded by Nieder that tax property number 34850, exercising its judgment and discretion, pursuant to Sec. 70.47(9)(a) of the Wis. Statues the Board of Review, by majority and roll call vote hereby determines: that the Assessor’s valuation is correct; that the Assessor presented evidence of the fair market value of the subject property using assessment methods which conform to the statutory requirements and which are outlined in the Wisconsin Property Assessment Manual; that the taxpayer did not present sufficient evidence to rebut the presumption of correctness granted by the law to the Assessor; that the Assessor’s valuation is reasonable in light of all the relevant evidence; and sustains the same valuation as set by the Assessor; (in certain cases), the Board of Review further finds that the taxpayer’s testimony is insufficient to show that the assessment of comparable property in the municipality is not uniform and the municipality has demonstrated the uniformity of assessments.

 

Roll call vote:  Yes:  Hamilton, Nieder, Rantala, Reijo. No:  None.  Absent:  None. Abstain: None. Motion carried by roll call vote.

 

Objection 6: Tax property number:  26708

Motion made by Nieder and seconded by Hamilton that tax property number 26708, exercising its judgment and discretion, pursuant to Sec. 70.47(9)(a) of the Wis. Statues the Board of Review, by majority and roll call vote hereby determines: that the Assessor’s valuation is correct; that the Assessor presented evidence of the fair market value of the subject property using assessment methods which conform to the statutory requirements and which are outlined in the Wisconsin Property Assessment Manual; that the taxpayer did not present sufficient evidence to rebut the presumption of correctness granted by the law to the Assessor; that the Assessor’s valuation is reasonable in light of all the relevant evidence; and sustains the same valuation as set by the Assessor; (in certain cases), the Board of Review further finds that the taxpayer’s testimony is insufficient to show that the assessment of comparable property in the municipality is not uniform and the municipality has demonstrated the uniformity of assessments.

 

Motion by Hamilton, seconded by Nieder that tax property number 26709, exercising its judgment and discretion, pursuant to Sec. 70.47(9)(a) of the Wis. Statues the Board of Review, by majority and roll call vote hereby determines: that the Assessor’s valuation is correct; that the Assessor presented evidence of the fair market value of the subject property using assessment methods which conform to the statutory requirements and which are outlined in the Wisconsin Property Assessment Manual; that the taxpayer did not present sufficient evidence to rebut the presumption of correctness granted by the law to the Assessor; that the Assessor’s valuation is reasonable in light of all the relevant evidence; and sustains the same valuation as set by the Assessor; (in certain cases), the Board of Review further finds that the taxpayer’s testimony is insufficient to show that the assessment of comparable property in the municipality is not uniform and the municipality has demonstrated the uniformity of assessments.

 

Roll call vote:  Yes:  Hamilton, Nieder, Rantala, Reijo. No:  None.  Absent:  None. Abstain: None. Motion carried by roll call vote.

 

Objection 8: Tax property number:  26710

Motion made by Nieder and seconded by Hamilton that tax property number 26710, exercising its judgment and discretion, pursuant to Sec. 70.47(9)(a) of the Wis. Statues the Board of Review, by majority and roll call vote hereby determines: that the Assessor’s valuation is correct; that the Assessor presented evidence of the fair market value of the subject property using assessment methods which conform to the statutory requirements and which are outlined in the Wisconsin Property Assessment Manual; that the taxpayer did not present sufficient evidence to rebut the presumption of correctness granted by the law to the Assessor; that the Assessor’s valuation is

reasonable in light of all the relevant evidence; and sustains the same valuation as set by the Assessor; (in certain cases), the Board of Review further finds that the taxpayer’s testimony is insufficient to show that the assessment of comparable property in the municipality is not uniform and the municipality has demonstrated the uniformity of assessments.

 

Roll call vote:  Yes:  Hamilton, Nieder, Rantala, Reijo. No:  None.  Absent:  None. Abstain: None. Motion carried by roll call vote.

 

Objection 9: Tax property number:  26715

Motion by Hamilton, seconded by Nieder that tax property number 26715, exercising its judgment and discretion, pursuant to Sec. 70.47(9)(a) of the Wis. Statues the Board of Review, by majority and roll call vote hereby determines: that the Assessor’s valuation is correct; that the Assessor presented evidence of the fair market value of the subject property using assessment methods which conform to the statutory requirements and which are outlined in the Wisconsin Property Assessment Manual; that the taxpayer did not present sufficient evidence to rebut the presumption of correctness granted by the law to the Assessor; that the Assessor’s valuation is reasonable in light of all the relevant evidence; and sustains the same valuation as set by the Assessor; (in certain cases), the Board of Review further finds that the taxpayer’s testimony is insufficient to show that the assessment of comparable property in the municipality is not uniform and the municipality has demonstrated the uniformity of assessments.

Motion made by Nieder and seconded by Hamilton that tax property number 34851, exercising its judgment and discretion, pursuant to Sec. 70.47(9)(a) of the Wis. Statues the Board of Review, by majority and roll call vote hereby determines: that the Assessor’s valuation is correct; that the Assessor presented evidence of the fair market value of the subject property using assessment methods which conform to the statutory requirements and which are outlined in the Wisconsin Property Assessment Manual; that the taxpayer did not present sufficient evidence to rebut the presumption of correctness granted by the law to the Assessor; that the Assessor’s valuation is reasonable in light of all the relevant evidence; and sustains the same valuation as set by the Assessor; (in certain cases), the Board of Review further finds that the taxpayer’s testimony is insufficient to show that the assessment of comparable property in the municipality is not uniform and the municipality has demonstrated the uniformity of assessments.

Roll call vote:  Yes:  Hamilton, Nieder, Rantala, Reijo. No:  None.  Absent:  None. Abstain: None. Motion carried by roll call vote.

 

Objection 11: Tax property number:  26700

Motion by Hamilton, seconded by Nieder that tax property number 26700, exercising its judgment and discretion, pursuant to Sec. 70.47(9)(a) of the Wis. Statues the Board of Review, by majority and roll call vote hereby determines: that the Assessor’s valuation is correct; that the Assessor presented evidence of the fair market value of the subject property using assessment methods which conform to the statutory requirements and which are outlined in the Wisconsin Property Assessment Manual; that the taxpayer did not present sufficient evidence to rebut the presumption of correctness granted by the law to the Assessor; that the Assessor’s valuation is reasonable in light of all the relevant evidence; and sustains the same valuation as set by the Assessor; (in certain cases), the Board of Review further finds that the taxpayer’s testimony is insufficient to show that the assessment of comparable property in the municipality is not uniform and the municipality has demonstrated the uniformity of assessments.

 

Roll call vote:  Yes:  Hamilton, Nieder, Rantala, Reijo. No:  None.  Absent:  None. Abstain: None. Motion carried by roll call vote.

 

Objection 12: Tax property number:  37342

Motion made by Nieder and seconded by Hamilton that tax property number 37342, exercising its judgment and discretion, pursuant to Sec. 70.47(9)(a) of the Wis. Statues the Board of Review, by majority and roll call vote hereby determines: that the Assessor’s valuation is correct; that the Assessor presented evidence of the fair market value of the subject property using assessment methods which conform to the statutory requirements and which are outlined in the Wisconsin

Property Assessment Manual; that the taxpayer did not present sufficient evidence to rebut the

presumption of correctness granted by the law to the Assessor; that the Assessor’s valuation is reasonable in light of all the relevant evidence; and sustains the same valuation as set by the Assessor; (in certain cases), the Board of Review further finds that the taxpayer’s testimony is insufficient to show that the assessment of comparable property in the municipality is not uniform and the municipality has demonstrated the uniformity of assessments.

Motion by Rantala, second by Hamilton to adjourn the board of review and reconvene on Monday, July 22, 2019, 7:00 a.m. at the Oulu Town Hall.  Notice posted on outer door of the town hall.

Meeting adjourned at 6:02 p.m. Diana Reijo, Clerk APPROVED: