[{"_1":2,"_85":-5,"_86":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6699560,"mediaKeyId","3791720-6ea1e4ccd2cd1dd8645dc7f23a22060a","parentId",3791720,"title","Waukesha Board of Review upholds most reassessments, adopts testimony policies and grants multiple waivers; several appeals scheduled","audioSeconds",14697,"startMs",8320,"endMs",14705827,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3791720-6ea1e4ccd2cd1dd8645dc7f23a22060a&start=8&end=14705","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3791720-6ea1e4ccd2cd1dd8645dc7f23a22060a/thumbnail_8320.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6699560/Waukesha-City/Waukesha-County/Wisconsin/Waukesha-Board-of-Review-upholds-most-reassessments-adopts-testimony-policies-and-grants-multiple-waivers-several-appeals-scheduled","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6699560-2d9d3a5ab4fccec3e595156b4b6c9d9d/orig.mp4?Expires=1770443099&Signature=DLE~kQm-eqx9n2Z2bCr9i99NZNrRSuVX80WTv1Q3FHOEeSfB7ng0FQTwITwrhgq0QHd1usMzQmCRG6GmE29TtFImwXzEZaPk5o2kkh4fxb14AcxR2-w8TpqQvf2lFVAE11YtjIegt2mHvCXOD1Do6skCkABB-PvJcH8IBo3F0oqWEjl~zyhuJQRYzlMwgmYAespn1BDFvYXAM8RP3L-Ss7y36OSdTUr5~TjuSYUccYuZGr~kVmFEhIBHxp-T7DC1rzTT8OiPGeTIfDsSPm8ltcUxVd~-kCNZxPA6aIi38YkXHteZWs1bAanZB74noGCw9B9r9HluyFNgAsa9uzqV-g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City of Waukesha, WI","date","2025-06-06T00:00:00Z","article","The Waukesha Board of Review on June 6 adopted procedures for sworn telephone and written testimony, approved the 2025 assessment roll (subject to 62 corrections identified by the assessor) and disposed of a large number of procedural requests and appeals.

The board, which met in Waukesha City Council Chambers, voted to adopt the Board of Review policy on procedures for sworn telephone and sworn written testimony and the policy on waiver of Board of Review hearing requests before taking up the 2025 assessment roll. Chair Christine D'Angelo led the session and conducted roll calls for recorded votes.

Why it matters: The actions finalize how taxpayers may present evidence remotely, set the official assessment roll that drives property tax bills, and resolve timing and hearing logistics for dozens of residential and commercial appeals. Several taxpayers whose objections were accepted were scheduled for later hearing dates; others who failed to meet notice requirements had their appeals denied.

Most important actions and outcomes
- Policy adoption: The board voted to adopt the Board of Review policies governing sworn telephone testimony, sworn written testimony and waivers of the 48‑hour notice requirement.
- Assessment roll: The board accepted the assessor's 2025 assessment roll “subject to the 62 corrections” the assessor flagged during open book work; the board then certified that statutory duties had been performed and moved to allow hearings on objections.
- Waivers and scheduling: The board considered many requests to waive the 48‑hour notice requirement and to reschedule hearings. Some waivers were granted, others denied. Where waivers were granted, the clerk will assign hearings to one of two next session dates the board set (June 17 or June 24). Several taxpayers were directed to file complete objection paperwork before the new hearing date.
- Remote testimony approvals: The board granted multiple requests from out‑of‑state commercial property owners or agents to testify by telephone or submit sworn written statements (examples include filings for Burger King, Lithia Motors, Realty Income, Wyld Family Limited Partnership and LRG, LLC).

What the board heard in evidence: selected contested hearings
- Tracy Foss, 2601 Brookstone Court (residential). Foss sought a lower assessment. She told the board she purchased the house in November 2021 and submitted a March 2025 refinance appraisal. Foss said the assessor’s automated valuation model returned $444,000 and argued the assessor’s figure overstated the value. The assessor’s comparables and adjusted sales analysis were presented by the assessor; the Board of Review found the assessor’s recent sales evidence the most credible and, by roll call vote, upheld the assessor’s valuation and sustained the assessment as presented.

- Gregory Harder, 3027 Tanglewood Drive (residential). Harder said his assessed value had risen sharply under the 2023 and 2025 revaluations and argued the 2025 assessment should be $477,500. The assessor described adjustments made after open‑book review (a reduction from the initial 2025 figure) and explained the land and improvement rates used in the neighborhood. The board reviewed comparable sales and the assessor's adjustments (including a partial reduction to acreage affected by drainage easements) and voted to sustain the assessor’s valuation as revised during the open‑book process.

- Kelly Hazard, 1420 Gabriel Drive Unit 3 (residential, condominium). Hazard submitted a spreadsheet of recent sales in the condominium complex and argued her unit’s condition and local sales supported a lower value than the assessor’s. The assessor presented 2024 sales for the complex and explained the methodology. The board concluded the assessor’s comparable‑sales evidence was the most credible and sustained the assessor’s valuation.

- Mark and Beth Leverenz, 827 Conifer Court (residential). The Leverenzes asked the board to reduce their assessment and pointed to a near‑identical neighboring unit they said was assessed lower; they also questioned whether an electric appliance in a wall was being treated as a separate fireplace amenity. The assessor presented comparable sales and adjustments; the board sustained the assessor’s valuation.

- Dean Richard, 1436 Big Bend Road Unit E (residential, condominium). Richard provided a spreadsheet of condominium sales and argued his unit’s market value was lower than the assessor’s figure. The assessor presented a set of 2024 sales used to set values in the complex. The board concluded the assessor’s evidence supported the assessed value and sustained it.

Other procedural and scheduling matters
- The board handled dozens of walk‑in waiver requests, accepting many (and denying several where it found adequate prior notice or prior opportunity to use open book procedures). The clerk and staff were directed to notify owners of the new hearing dates (June 17 and June 24) and to require completed objection paperwork to be filed for any case rescheduled.
- Menards, Inc. requested a waiver to proceed to circuit court (evidently because related litigation is pending). The board granted that procedural waiver so the item will proceed with the matters already before the circuit court.

What the board did not do
- The board did not change any assessed values on the record unless the assessor had already adjusted them in open book or the board explicitly voted to change them. In contested hearings the board noted it must uphold assessor valuations unless the taxpayer presents sufficient evidence to rebut the presumption of correctness.

Next steps
Taxpayers whose waivers were approved will receive notices of the assigned hearing date (June 17 or June 24). Taxpayers who wish to challenge the Board of Review decisions retain the right to appeal to circuit court; the clerk will provide appeal information with each decision notice.

Votes at a glance (selected items)
- Adopt Board of Review policy on sworn telephone and sworn written testimony: approved (voice/roll call, motion carried).
- Adopt policy on waiver of Board of Review hearing requests: approved (voice/roll call, motion carried).
- Accept assessment roll subject to 62 corrections noted by assessor: approved (motion carried).
- Waiver requests: dozens considered; examples: Amanda Doubleday — waiver approved; Robert Eastman — waiver denied; Christopher Schafer — waiver approved; Barton Bender — waiver approved; several others approved; clerk to notify and require objection forms for rescheduled hearings.
- Requests to testify by telephone or submit sworn written statement (commercial/out‑of‑state owners): multiple approvals (Burger King; Lithia Motors; Realty Income; Wyld Family LP; LRG, LLC; MKJEB LLC; and others).
- Contested hearings where board sustained the assessor’s valuation after testimony: Tracy Foss (2601 Brookstone Court) — assessment sustained; Kelly Hazard (1420 Gabriel Dr., Unit 3) — sustained; Mark & Beth Leverenz (827 Conifer Ct.) — sustained; Gregory Harder (3027 Tanglewood Dr.) — sustained; Dean Richard (1436 Big Bend Rd., Unit E) — sustained.

Who said what (short list of speakers quoted or summarized)
- Chair Christine D'Angelo, Board of Review — presided over votes and moved findings in debated cases.
- Michael Radovich, Assistant City Attorney — provided legal advice (no new laws reported at start of session).
- Eric Spathe, Assessor, City of Waukesha — presented comparable‑sales analyses and explained adjustments made during open book.
- Tracy Foss, property owner (2601 Brookstone Court) — \"I purchased the property, 3 and a half years ago in November of 2021...\" (testimony on appraisal and refinance valuation).
- Gregory Harder, property owner (3027 Tanglewood Drive) — testified to a requested assessed value of $477,500 and described drainage easements and comparable sales used in his worksheet.

Documents and authorities on the record
- City ordinance on confidentiality cited for assessor records: Waukesha City ordinance 3.03, Section 5 (confidentiality of income and expense information) — referenced during procedural confirmations.
- Statute cited for Board of Review authority and motions: Wis. Stat. § 70.47(9)(a) (standard motion language read when the board declined to change assessments and sustained assessor valuations).

Meeting context and public access
- The meeting was recorded and livestreamed; the clerk confirmed Board of Review and Open Meeting notices were published as required. The clerk and assessor's office provided a SharePoint folder link with assessment roll materials and supporting documentation for board members and the public.

Limitations and next steps for readers
- This report summarizes decisions and actions recorded in the board transcript and does not substitute for official minutes or certified decisions to be mailed by the clerk. Taxpayers named in the decisions will receive formal written notices with instructions and appeal rights.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","City of Waukesha, WI - Board of Review on 2025-06-06 9:00 AM - Jun 06, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Waukesha Board of Review on June 6 adopted new procedures for remote sworn testimony, accepted the city’s 2025 assessment roll subject to 62 assessor corrections and resolved dozens of waiver requests and appeals; the board also heard several contested objections and sustained the assessor’s values in each contested case reported here.","taxTitle","Waukesha City, Waukesha County, Wisconsin","taxId",9326,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":44,"_45":79,"_47":80,"_49":50,"_51":81,"_53":82,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":83,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":84,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6700171,"Waukesha Board of Review adopts testimony policies, approves assessment roll with corrections and upholds multiple property assessments",10897,10905827,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3791720-6ea1e4ccd2cd1dd8645dc7f23a22060a&start=8&end=10905","/articles/6700171/Waukesha-City/Waukesha-County/Wisconsin/Waukesha-Board-of-Review-adopts-testimony-policies-approves-assessment-roll-with-corrections-and-upholds-multiple-property-assessments","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6700171-79423f2ba69e8f007476cb966561c591/orig.mp4?Expires=1770443099&Signature=QJwHk7pPxDx6sBKp3EWxslWGK-8z9tTTG-EPUNEIvpDNnKi6spj1zVo0kT2s6gdsekrxcm9KzSaLKsdSSa0ZjVNugg8K384T39QItRCrCrU~thhlzvbJAFYKvt4bolnS4rYxHBZhajk6CPvo1Ol7x61yM8hyzn8m5aEuHILzrhH1AyjpMHahWKN55EbmkoQ-MTggHj6ylob~WLTBPxhIKTZJ92pfrtjRrqzWvR4m5h7HQF8F7PN3yIa7fsJ6p3GqmcGA6hz44Nw3kwKAIpwBftHx4dZZF6ZfGFK9WIzjCSNxeTxMOYQXbk8TsMWRgUT4YJmOpHRRx5XWwiHdr5brgw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Waukesha City Board of Review on June 6 adopted procedures for sworn telephone and sworn written testimony, approved the city's assessment roll subject to 62 corrections and handled dozens of requests to waive the 48-hour notice requirement for objections. The board also heard contested appeals and sustained assessor valuations in several cases.

The actions affect property owners seeking to appeal 2025 reassessments and set the schedule and process for hearings. Assistant City Attorney Michael Radovich told the board there were no new laws the panel needed to note before business began.

Board members first elected a chair and vice chair, then voted to adopt a Board of Review policy for sworn telephone and sworn written testimony and a separate policy to govern waiver requests for hearings. The board then confirmed receipt of the assessment roll and the affidavits filed by assessors and clerks and approved the roll \"subject to the 62 corrections\" the assessor marked during open-book review.

After routine items the board considered requests from property owners who missed the 48-hour notice required to reserve a hearing date. The board granted many waivers and denied others after brief explanations from owners or their representatives. Examples of waivers the board approved include: attorney Brian Branca for 823 Northeast Avenue; Amanda Devalde (3611 Hawthorne Hill Drive); Christopher Schafer (1371 Harris Drive); Barton Bender (2001 Brunner Court); Robert Baughto (2315 River Hill Court); Jacinta Henlein (1917 Madera Street and 501 Randall Street); Carrie Johnson (3023 Cone View Lane); Paul Cook (2005 Brunner Court); Dale Moss (2312 and 2314 North Grandview Boulevard); Harold Maddox (three properties listed); and others. The board denied waivers in some cases, including Robert Eastman (449 Dunbar), Joshua Jacobson (312 Harrison Avenue) and Rick Risto (315 Harrison Avenue). Where petitioners had timely filed objections or filed supporting materials at the clerk's office, the board often rescheduled hearings for an upcoming docket rather than deny review.

The board also considered multiple requests to appear by telephone or to submit sworn written statements; the board approved those requests from several out-of-state owners and management companies, including requests listed for Burger King, Lithia Motors, LRG, Realty Income, Wyld Family Limited Partnership and MKJEB LLC.

The board scheduled follow-up hearing dates and asked petitioners whose waivers were approved to file their full objection paperwork by the end of the day; staff said the next hearing dates would be June 17 or June 24, 2025.

Votes at a glance
- Adopt Board of Review policy on sworn telephone and sworn written testimony: motion made and approved (voice).
- Adopt Board of Review policy for waiver of Board of Review hearing requests: approved (voice).
- Approve assessment roll subject to 62 corrections noted by the assessor: approved (voice).
- Waivers of 48-hour notice: dozens considered; representative approvals: Brian Branca (823 NE Ave) approved; Amanda Devalde (3611 Hawthorne Hill) approved; Christopher Schafer (1371 Harris Dr.) approved; Barton Bender (2001 Brunner Ct.) approved; Robert Eastman (449 Dunbar) denied; Joshua Jacobson (312 Harrison) denied; Rick Risto (315 Harrison) denied; many others approved as recorded.
- Telephone/sworn written requests for out-of-state parties (Burger King, Lithia Motors, Realty Income, Wyld Family LP, MKJEB LLC and others): approved.

Contested appeal outcomes (selected cases heard and decided at this session)
- Tracy Foss, 2601 Brookstone Court (residential): Board voted to uphold the assessor's valuation; assessment stands (roll-call vote in favor of assessor).
- Kelly Hazard, 1420 Gabriel Drive, Unit 3 (residential condo): Board sustained the assessor's valuation; assessment stands.
- Mark and Beth Leverenz, 827 Conifer Court (residential): Board sustained the assessor's valuation of $646,300.
- Gregory Harder, 3027 Tanglewood Drive (residential): after open-book adjustment the assessor's revised valuation of $543,100 (land $95,000; improvements $448,100) was sustained by the board.
- Dean Richard, 1436 Big Bend Road, Unit E (condo): Board sustained the assessor's revised assessment of $155,400.

What the board said and why it matters
Board members repeatedly told petitioners that state law puts the burden of proof on the taxpayer to show the assessor's valuation is incorrect. In multiple hearings the assessor's comparable-sales analysis and the lack of an owner's formal appraisal or comparable-adjusted analysis were the reasons given for sustaining valuations. Assistant City Attorney Michael Radovich told the panel at the start of the session that there were no new laws to report; the board cited Wis. Stat. \u001670.47 (the Board of Review statute) and the Wisconsin Property Assessment Manual as the governing authorities during motions.

Next steps and appeals
Petitioners whose waivers were granted were told to file the remaining objection paperwork immediately; staff said the next Board of Review dates will be June 17 or June 24, 2025. Property owners who disagree with the board's rulings were told they may seek review in circuit court; staff will provide instructions on the appeal process with the written determination notices.

How this was decided
Votes on individual waivers and contested appeals were taken either by voice vote or roll call. For contested appeals the board cited the assessor's comparable-sales evidence and statutory standards; when an owner submitted an appraisal or a detailed comparable-adjusted analysis the board considered that evidence, but in the cases decided at this meeting the board concluded the owners had not presented sufficient evidence to overcome the presumption of correctness given to assessor valuations under state law.

The board recessed and will reconvene for the scheduled follow-up hearing dates; those petitioners will be notified by the clerk's office.","At its June 6 meeting the Waukesha City Board of Review adopted procedures for telephone/written testimony, approved the assessment roll subject to 62 corrections and mostly denied late filing relief; the panel sustained assessor valuations in several contested appeals.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Waukesha Board of Review upholds most reassessments, adopts testimony policies and grants multiple waivers; several appeals scheduled

Waukesha Board of Review adopts testimony policies, approves assessment roll with corrections and upholds multiple property assessments