Board of Review — Green Bay, WI
Date: 2019-04-24
Time: 08:30

AGENDA OF THE BOARD OF REVIEW
 WEDNESDAY, APRIL 24, 2019, 8:30 AM
 CITY HALL, ROOM 203


A. Call to Order.
B. Roll Call.
C. Election of the Chairperson and Vice­chairperson.
D. Consideration with possible action on 48 Hour Notice Waiver Policy.
 1. City of Green Bay Board of Review Policy Authorizing Waiver of 48-Hour Notice
 Requirement.
E. Consideration with possible action on Waiver of Hearing Policy.
 1. City of Green Bay Board of Review Procedure for Waiver of Board of Review Hearing
 Requests.
F. Consideration with possible action on Telephone or Written Testimony Policy.
 1. City of Green Bay Board of Review Procedure for Sworn Telephone or Sworn Written
 Testimony Requests.
 Presentation and discussion on procedures governing review process and new
G.
 laws affecting the proceedings.
H. Statement and verification by the City Clerk.
 1. Members have met the mandatory training requirements.
 2. Ordinance governing confidentiality of income and expense information provided to the
 City Assessor.
 3. Percentage of Assessments.
I. Discussion on the Annual Assessment Report.
J. Examination of the Assessment Roll and performance of statutory duties.

Agenda of the Board of Review
April 24, 2019
Page 1
 Consideration with possible action on additional requests received by the City
K.
 Assessor as permitted by law.
 Consideration with possible action on Notices of Intent to File Objections
L.
 received by the Clerk by April 22, 2019 at 8:30 a.m.
 Consideration with possible action on request for waivers of Board of Review
M.
 hearings. (Proceedings to occur at or after 10:35 a.m.)
 Consideration with possible action on requests for waiver of the 48­hour notice
N.
 of intent to file an objection. (Proceedings to occur at or after 10:35 a.m.)
 Consideration with possible action on Notices of Intent to File Objections
O. received by the Clerk on or after April 22, 2019 at 8:30 a.m. (Proceedings to
 occur at or after 10:35 a.m.)
P. Adjournment.




 1) THIS MEETING IS RECORDED: THE VIDEO OF THIS MEETING AND MINUTES ARE AVAILABLE ONLINE
 AT www.greenbaywi.gov
 2) ACCESSIBILITY: Any person wishing to attend who requires special accommodation because of a disability,
 should contact the City Safety Manager at 920-448-3125 at least 48 hours before the scheduled meeting time so
 that arrangements can be made.
 3) QUORUM: Please take notice that members of the Common Council and its subcommittees may attend this
 meeting, resulting in a majority or quorum of that body. No action will be taken by any City of Green Bay
 governmental body at the above-stated meeting other than the Board of Review.




Agenda of the Board of Review
April 24, 2019
Page 1

AGENDA OF THE BOARD OF REVIEW
 WEDNESDAY, APRIL 24, 2019, 8:30 AM
 CITY HALL, ROOM 203


A. Call to Order.
B. Roll Call.
C. Election of the Chairperson and Vice­chairperson.
D. Consideration with possible action on 48 Hour Notice Waiver Policy.
 1. City of Green Bay Board of Review Policy Authorizing Waiver of 48-Hour Notice
 Requirement.
E. Consideration with possible action on Waiver of Hearing Policy.
 1. City of Green Bay Board of Review Procedure for Waiver of Board of Review Hearing
 Requests.
F. Consideration with possible action on Telephone or Written Testimony Policy.
 1. City of Green Bay Board of Review Procedure for Sworn Telephone or Sworn Written
 Testimony Requests.
 Presentation and discussion on procedures governing review process and new
G.
 laws affecting the proceedings.
H. Statement and verification by the City Clerk.
 1. Members have met the mandatory training requirements.
 2. Ordinance governing confidentiality of income and expense information provided to the
 City Assessor.
 3. Percentage of Assessments.
I. Discussion on the Annual Assessment Report.
J. Examination of the Assessment Roll and performance of statutory duties.

Agenda of the Board of Review
April 24, 2019
Page 1
 Consideration with possible action on additional requests received by the City
K.
 Assessor as permitted by law.
 Consideration with possible action on Notices of Intent to File Objections
L.
 received by the Clerk by April 22, 2019 at 8:30 a.m.
 Consideration with possible action on request for waivers of Board of Review
M.
 hearings. (Proceedings to occur at or after 10:35 a.m.)
 Consideration with possible action on requests for waiver of the 48­hour notice
N.
 of intent to file an objection. (Proceedings to occur at or after 10:35 a.m.)
 Consideration with possible action on Notices of Intent to File Objections
O. received by the Clerk on or after April 22, 2019 at 8:30 a.m. (Proceedings to
 occur at or after 10:35 a.m.)
P. Adjournment.




 1) THIS MEETING IS RECORDED: THE VIDEO OF THIS MEETING AND MINUTES ARE AVAILABLE ONLINE
 AT www.greenbaywi.gov
 2) ACCESSIBILITY: Any person wishing to attend who requires special accommodation because of a disability,
 should contact the City Safety Manager at 920-448-3125 at least 48 hours before the scheduled meeting time so
 that arrangements can be made.
 3) QUORUM: Please take notice that members of the Common Council and its subcommittees may attend this
 meeting, resulting in a majority or quorum of that body. No action will be taken by any City of Green Bay
 governmental body at the above-stated meeting other than the Board of Review.




Agenda of the Board of Review
April 24, 2019
Page 1
 Report to the
 Board of Review
 of the City of Green Bay


 MEETING DATE PREPARED BY
 April 24, 2019

AGENDA ITEM # D.1.
City of Green Bay Board of Review Policy Authorizing Waiver of 48-Hour Notice Requirement.

BACKGROUND



RECOMMENDATION



FISCAL IMPACT



ATTACHMENTS
1. 48 Hour Notice Waiver Policy 4.15.19




 100 North Jefferson Street, Green Bay, Wisconsin 54301-5026
 greenbaywi.gov
 City of Green Bay Board of Review
 Policy Authorizing Waiver of 48-Hour Notice Requirement

 WHEREAS, a property owner or the property owner’s representative (hereinafter
“Owner”) must provide the Board of Review clerk with a written or oral notice of intent to file an
objection at least 48 hours before the first scheduled meeting of the Board of Review; and
 WHEREAS, sec. 70.47(3), Wis. Stat. authorizes the Board of Review (“BOR”) to grant a
waiver of the 48-hour notice of an intent to file a written or oral objection if an Owner who does
not meet the notice requirement appears before the board during the first two (2) hours of the
meeting, shows good cause for failure to meet the 48-hour notice requirement, and files a written
objection; and
 WHEREAS, the BOR wishes to establish a policy by which requests for waivers of the 48-
hour notice requirement will be administered.
 NOW THEREFORE, the City of Green Bay Board of Review does hereby adopt as Board
of Review policy the following:
 1. PROCEDURE:
 The Board of Review (BOR) may grant a waiver of the 48-hour notice of intent to file a
written or oral objection if the Owner appears during the first two (2) hours of the first scheduled
meeting of the BOR and provides all of the following to the clerk of the BOR:
 a.) Request to waive the notice of intent to file requirement;
 b.) A written Objection Form

 Any such request must be filed with the clerk of the BOR within two (2) hours of
commencement of the BOR’s first scheduled meeting. For example, if the first meeting of the
BOR commences at 8:03 a.m., the request for waiver must be received no later than 10:03 a.m. or
it will be rejected as untimely.
 If the Owner fails to file the aforementioned requests and documents as required, the BOR
will not consider the request.
 2. CRITERIA:
 The BOR, may consider any or all of the following factors when deciding whether to issue
a finding of good cause to waive the 48 hour notice of intent to file requirement:
 a. The Owner’s stated reason(s) or circumstances that kept the Owner from complying with
 the notice requirement in a timely manner
 b. Fairness to the parties
 c. Any other factors that the BOR deems pertinent in deciding the waiver request
 3. EFFECTIVE DATE:
 This policy shall be effective upon passage.



Passed on the ________day of ______________, 2019 By the Board of Review of the City of
Green Bay

___________________________________
Board of Review Chairperson

Attested by: __________________________________
 Clerk of the Board of Review
 City of Green Bay Board of Review
 Procedure for Waiver of Board of Review Hearing Requests

 WHEREAS, sec. 70.47(8m), Wis. Stat. authorizes the Board of Review (“BOR”) to
consider requests from a taxpayer, the Assessor, or at its own discretion to waive the hearing of an
objection under sec. 70.47(8); and
 WHEREAS, sec. 70.47(8m), Wis. Stat. further states that for purposes of this subsection,
the BOR shall submit the notice of decision under sec. 70.47(12), Wis. Stat. using the amount of
the taxpayer’s assessment as established by the municipal assessor as the finalized amount; and
 WHEREAS, sec. 70.47(8m), Wis. Stat. further states that for purposes of this subsection,
if the BOR waives the hearing, the waiver disallows the taxpayer’s claim on excessive assessment
under sec. 70.37(3), Wis. Stat. and notwithstanding the time period under sec. 70.37(3)(d), the
taxpayer has 60 days from the notice of hearing waiver in which to commence an action under sec.
70.37(3)(d), Wis. Stat.; and
 WHEREAS, the Department of Revenue has determined that the legal requirements of the
Notice to Appear must be satisfied and the Objection Form must be completed and submitted to
the BOR as required by law by the taxpayer before a request for Waiver may be considered.
 WHEREAS, the BOR wishes to establish a policy by which requests for hearing waivers
will be administered.
 NOW THEREFORE, the City of Green Bay Board of Review does hereby adopt as Board
of Review policy the following:
 1. PROCEDURE:
 Before the BOR will consider a request to waive the hearing of an objection, whether the
request comes from a property owner or the property owner’s representative (hereinafter
“Owner”), the Assessor, or at its own discretion, the Owner must first complete and file with the
Clerk of the BOR the following documents:
 a.) A timely Notice of Intent to Appear;
 b.) A timely Objection to Real Property Assessment (PA-115A).

 If the Owner fails to file the aforementioned documents as required, no hearing will be
scheduled on the objection.
 If the Owner files the aforementioned documents as required, the BOR at its own discretion
or upon request from either the Owner or assessor, the BOR shall use the following criteria when
making its decision.
 2. CRITERIA:
 The BOR, may consider any or all of the following factors when deciding whether to waive
the hearing:
 a. The benefits or detriments of the BOR process
 b. The benefits or detriments of having a record for the Court review
 c. Avoidance of unruly, lengthy, burdensome appeals
 d. Ability to cross examine the person providing the testimony
 e. Any other factors that the BOR deems pertinent to deciding whether to waive the hearing.
 3. EFFECTIVE DATE:
 This policy shall be effective upon passage.
Passed on the ________day of ______________, 2019 By the Board of Review of the City of
Green Bay

___________________________________
Board of Review Chairperson

Attested by: __________________________________
 Clerk of the Board of Review
 City of Green Bay Board of Review
 Procedure for Sworn Telephone or Sworn Written Testimony Requests

 WHEREAS, sec. 70.47(8), Wis. Stat. authorizes the Board of Review (“BOR”) to consider
and decide requests from property owners or a property owner’s representative (hereinafter
“Owner”) seeking to either testify under oath by telephone during Board of Review proceedings,
or provide written statements verified under oath for consideration during Board of Review
proceedings; and
 WHEREAS, the Department of Revenue has determined that the legal requirements of the
Notice to Appear must be satisfied and the Objection Form must be completed and submitted to
the Board of Review as required by law by the taxpayer before a Request to Testify by Telephone
or Submit Sworn Written Statement may be submitted; and
 WHEREAS, the BOR wishes to establish a policy addressing how requests to testify under
oath by telephone and/or provide written statements verified under oath will be administered.
 NOW THEREFORE, the City of Green Bay Board of Review does hereby adopt as policy
the following:
 1. PROCEDURE:
 Before the Board of Review will consider a request from an Owner to testify by telephone
or submit a sworn written statement, the Owner must first complete and file with the clerk of the
BOR all of the following documents:
 a) A timely Notice of Intent to Appear;
 b) A timely Objection to Real Property Assessment (PA-115A); and
 c) A fully completed Request to Testify by Telephone or Submit a Sworn Written
 Statement at Board of Review (Form PA-814)

 Such requests must be filed with the clerk of the BOR within the first two (2) hours of the
BOR’s first scheduled meeting. For example, if the first meeting of the BOR commences at 8:03
a.m., the request for waiver must be received no later than 10:03 a.m. or it will be rejected as
untimely.
 If the Owner fails to file the aforementioned documents as required, the BOR will not
consider the request.
 2. CRITERIA:
 The BOR, may consider any or all of the following factors when deciding to grant or deny
the request:
 a. The Owner’s stated reason(s) for the request as indicated on the PA-814
 b. Fairness to the parties
 c. Ability of the Owner to procure in person oral testimony and any due diligence exhibited
 by the Owner in procuring such testimony
 d. Ability of the parties to cross examine the person providing the testimony
 e. The BOR’s technical capacity to honor the request
 c. Any other factors that the BOR deems pertinent in deciding the request
 3. EFFECTIVE DATE:
 This policy shall be effective upon passage.
Passed on the ________day of ______________, 2019 By the Board of Review of the City of
Green Bay

___________________________________
Board of Review Chairperson

Attested by: __________________________________
 Clerk of the Board of Review

MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF REVIEW
 WEDNESDAY, APRIL 24, 2019, 8:30 AM
 CITY HALL, ROOM 203


 A. CALL TO ORDER.
Thomas Aziere called the meeting to order.

 B. ROLL CALL.
Clerk K. Teske took roll call. Richard Laurent, David Hillman, Diane Midthun, Jay Hamann, and
Thomas Aziere were present.

Others Present: Attorney Nick Vande Castle (for the City of Green Bay), Board of Review Clerk
Kris Teske, City Assessor Russ Schwandt, Kristi Norton, Nichole Tesch, Jim Placek, Steve Shepro,
Matthew Johnson, Scott Alvey, and Alex Drews.

 C. ELECTION OF THE CHAIRPERSON AND VICE-CHAIRPERSON.
Motion by R. Laurent, seconded by D. Midthun to nominate Tom Aziere as chairman. Roll Call:
Ayes: J. Hamann, R. Laurent, T. Aziere, D. Midthun, D. Hillman. Noes: None. Motion carried.

Motion by D. Midthun, seconded by R. Laurent to nominate David Hillman as vice chairman. Roll
Call: Ayes: J. Hamann, R. Laurent, T. Aziere, D. Midthun, D. Hillman. Noes: None. Motion carried.

  D. CONSIDERATION WITH POSSIBLE ACTION ON 48 HOUR NOTICE WAIVER
 POLICY.


1. City of Green Bay Board of Review Policy Authorizing Waiver of 48-Hour Notice Requirement.
Motion by J. Hamann, seconded by R. Laurent to approve the policy authorizing waiver of 48-hour
notice requirement. Roll Call: Ayes: J. Hamann, R. Laurent, T. Aziere, D. Midthun, D. Hillman.
Noes: None. Motion carried.



 E. CONSIDERATION WITH POSSIBLE ACTION ON WAIVER OF HEARING
 POLICY.
1. City of Green Bay Board of Review Procedure for Waiver of Board of Review Hearing Requests.
Motion by J. Hamann, seconded by D. Midthun to approve the policy on procedure for waiver of
Board of Review hearing requests. Roll Call: Ayes: J. Hamann, R. Laurent, T. Aziere, D. Midthun, D.
Hillman. Noes: None. Motion carried.



  F. CONSIDERATION WITH POSSIBLE ACTION ON TELEPHONE OR WRITTEN
 TESTIMONY POLICY.


1. City of Green Bay Board of Review Procedure for Sworn Telephone or Sworn Written Testimony
Requests.
Motion by R. Laurent, seconded by D. Hillman to approve the policy on procedure for sworn
telephone or sworn written testimony requests. Roll Call: Ayes: J. Hamann, R. Laurent, T. Aziere,
D. Midthun, D. Hillman. Noes: None. Motion carried.



 G. PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION ON PROCEDURES GOVERNING REVIEW
 PROCESS AND NEW LAWS AFFECTING THE PROCEEDINGS.
N. Vande Castle provided an overview of the role of the Board of Review and their duties.

 H. STATEMENT AND VERIFICATION BY THE CITY CLERK.
K. Teske stated that all the legal requirements under state statute to convene this Board of Review
were met. She certified under §70.46, Wis. Stats., that J. Hamann, R. Laurent, D. Hillman, T. Aziere,
and D. Midthun received the qualified training. The Clerk stated the City has an ordinance for the
confidentiality of income and expense information provided to the assessor under state law (sec.
70.47(7)(af)). An open book session was held on April 10, 2019, in the Assessor’s office and the
Assessor was present. The level of assessment is at 94.36%.

1. Members have met the mandatory training requirements.




2. Ordinance governing confidentiality of income and expense information provided to the City
Assessor.




3. Percentage of Assessments.
 I. DISCUSSION ON THE ANNUAL ASSESSMENT REPORT.
R. Schwandt provided an overview of commercial and residential evaluations.

 J. EXAMINATION OF THE ASSESSMENT ROLL AND PERFORMANCE OF
 STATUTORY DUTIES.
J. Hamann reviewed the assessment roll.

 K. CONSIDERATION WITH POSSIBLE ACTION ON ADDITIONAL REQUESTS
 RECEIVED BY THE CITY ASSESSOR AS PERMITTED BY LAW.
There were no additional requests received by the City Assessor.

L. CONSIDERATION WITH POSSIBLE ACTION ON NOTICES OF INTENT TO FILE
 OBJECTIONS RECEIVED BY THE CLERK BY APRIL 22, 2019 AT 8:30 A.M.
No notices of intent to file objections were filed.

 M. CONSIDERATION WITH POSSIBLE ACTION ON REQUEST FOR WAIVERS OF
 BOARD OF REVIEW HEARINGS. (PROCEEDINGS TO OCCUR AT OR AFTER 10:35
 A.M.)
No request of waivers of Board of Review hearings were filed.

N. CONSIDERATION WITH POSSIBLE ACTION ON REQUESTS FOR WAIVER OF
THE 48-HOUR NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE AN OBJECTION. (PROCEEDINGS TO
 OCCUR AT OR AFTER 10:35 A.M.)
No requests for waiver of the 48-hour notice of intent were filed.

O. CONSIDERATION WITH POSSIBLE ACTION ON NOTICES OF INTENT TO FILE
  OBJECTIONS RECEIVED BY THE CLERK ON OR AFTER APRIL 22, 2019 AT 8:30
 A.M. (PROCEEDINGS TO OCCUR AT OR AFTER 10:35 A.M.)
No notices of intent to file objections were filed.

 P. ADJOURNMENT.
Motion by R. Laurent, seconded by D. Midthun to adjourn at 10:30 a.m. Motion carried.

Respectfully submitted,

Kris A. Teske
Board of Review Clerk

 Verbatim Minutes


Aziere- Okay, everybody, I'd like to call the Board of Review in order, and would the clerk please take the roll
call.
Teske- Laurent.



Laurent- Here.



Teske- Hillman.



Hillman- Here.



Teske- Midthun.



Midthun- Here.



Teske- Hamann.



Hamann- Here.



Teske- Aziere.



Aziere- Here.



Aziere- Okay, let the record note that we have a quorum. Now, up next on the agenda is the election of
chairperson. We have a nomination.



Laurent- I'd nominate Mr. Aziere.
Aziere- Do we have a second?



Midthun- Second.



Aziere- Anyone else? All in favor?



All BOR Members- Aye.



Aziere- Oppose? Okay, now the next is election of chairperson. Somebody like to make a--



Laurent- Vice chair.



Aziere- I'm sorry, vice chair.



Midthun- Uh, Mr. Chairman, I nominate Mr. Hillman.



Aziere- Do we have a second?



Laurent- Yes.



Aziere- All in favor?



All BOR Members- Aye.



Aziere- Any oppose? Okay, good, we have... If you remember last year, we talked about setting a policy for
waiver of 45, you know, the 45-hour waiver. Also, a policy for bypassing the Board of Review, and going direct
to Circuit Court, and then the last one was a waiver to take telephone or written testimony as opposed to
oral testimony before the Board of Review. You each received in your notice the policies that have been
directed by, I assume the City Attorney's Office probably set those up for us, and so maybe we can take each
one at a time, discuss and see if you have any questions, and then vote to accept or reject them. So first of all,
let's take the notice of the 40-hour, if you don't comply with 48-hour requirement of notice prior to this
meeting, they can still appear, and we may have one of these today, we're not sure if they file, follow the
procedures in our policy. So, does anybody have any... Have you reviewed it; does anybody have any
questions?



Hillman- Mr. Chairman, excuse me, before we get started, could we have the City Attorney introduce
themselves so we know who we're talking?



Aziere- Sure.



Hillman- Great.



Vande Castle- Hi, I'm Attorney Nick Vande Castle. I've been working part-time here with the city for the time
being until a full Assistant City Attorney is appointed.



Hillman- Thank you.



Aziere- Okay, anybody have any questions on that one?



Hamann- Okay, that 48 hours: is that exactly what we're doing now? And that's working?



Aziere- Right.



Hamann- And so all we're doing is formalizing what we're doing, in this case?



Aziere- Yes.
Hamann- Okay, thank you.



Aziere- I think we had, no, we didn't have one of those last year but we had... The one thing that I'd like to
point out, couple things to point out that are in. You have to appear within the first two hours of our meeting
so you have to appear within the first two hours. You still have to file the form setting what you believe the
valuation of your property should be, and so those two requirements are still required, and then we can
decide whether to bring out the waiver or not. So does anybody... Let's vote on acceptance of that policy
unless you have any questions.



Hamann- That's good. We accept that policy. Give that it's what we've been doing.



Aziere- Okay, you wanna take the role?



Teske- Okay, but we have a first.



Aziere- Oh, I'm sorry, first and second, okay.



Teske- Okay, Laurent?



Laurent- Aye.



Teske- Hillman?



Hillman- Aye.



Teske- Midthun?
Midthun- Aye.



Teske- Hamann?



Hamann- Aye.



Teske- Aziere?



Aziere- Aye.



Aziere- Okay the next one then is the the waiver to... Bypass the Board of Review and go directly to Circuit
Court. We had one of those last year if you remember, and again, I'll point out that the Objector still has to
comply with the 48-hour requirement, still has to provide his objection form, and then can appear before us.
And we can decide whether to waive it based upon the Objector, the Assessor, or our own determination
after receiving the testimony or reasons why we should do that. In that policy is listed reasons that we can
consider if we decide to waive it. If you remember last year we did that. We had one, we waived the right
directly to Circuit Court. So, anybody have any questions or issues on that?



Hamann- So, this is another one that's basically what we've been doing.



Aziere- Yeah, we did... It's pretty much what we did last year.



Laurent- It's codifying it.



Aziere- Yeah, it's codifying it, yeah.



Hamann- What?
Aziere- It's codifying what we're doing.



Hamann- These lawyers got these big words.



Aziere- We're writing down what we're doing.



Hamann- Can I ask a side question?



Aziere- Sure.



Hamann- What happened to the guy that went to court?



Schwandt- We settled.



Hamann- You settled or he settled?



Schwandt- We settled. Mutually agreeable number.



Hamann- Oh, okay. So it was a negotiated number.



Schwandt- Right.



Hamann- Thank you.



- So basically what this does is simply allow us to bypass the hearing, right?
- It allows, it allows... A person that's objecting to make the motion. The Assessor or ourselves to do that, and
it gives us a basis for doing that.



Hamann- What did it cost 'em to go to court?



Schwandt- They didn't go to court.



Hamann- What?



Schwandt- It was settled before court.



Hamann- Oh, he didn't go to court?



Schwandt- No, this allows the option of bypassing the Board of Review and taking the path directly to court,
so in between the Board of Review, what would've been a Board of Review hearing and court, there's plenty of
time to do any type of negotiation, discovery of new information and so on, which generally is what happens.
Gives us more time to talk with the property owner.



Hamann- 'Cause otherwise it'd get kinda expensive.



Schwandt- Well, exactly. So, in that vein...



- Be prepared.



Schwandt- Well, it's in the best interest of the property owner and the city to go through it in this instance,
and not go to court.
Aziere- Yeah, and last year, if I remember, both you and the Objector were recommending that they go
directly to Circuit Court, correct?



Schwandt- Yeah, it was agreed upon.



Aziere- So, all right. Any other discussion on that? Entertain a motion to--



Hamann- I move that we accept the waiver hearing policy.



Aziere- Do we have a second?



Midthun- Second.



Aziere- Do you want to take the role, please?



Teske- Laurent?



Laurent- Aye.



Teske- Hillman?



Hillman- Aye.



Teske- Midthun?



Midthun- Aye.
Teske- Hamann?



Hamann- Aye.



Aziere- Aziere?



Hamann- Aye.



Aziere- And the last one, then, is the acceptance by the Board of Review to take either written or telephone
evidence as opposed to appearance by the Objector and oral testimony.



- Sworn or written.



Aziere- What's that?



- Sworn written.



Aziere- Sworn, yeah, sworn written. Well, I don't know how you do sworn written.



Laurent- An affidavit.



Aziere- And this is really a new policy. I don't think we've ever had to decide yet. I don't think that's ever
occurred before.



Schwandt- I believe we had actually one in the past couple years where somebody wanted to call in.
Aziere- Okay.



Schwandt- And we denied it because they didn't meet the criteria that you guys thought was reasonable
because they'd just had another hearing in another state.



Aziere- Oh yeah, yeah.



Schwandt- And they didn't wanna take the time to come up here.



Aziere- I remember that. Yeah, 'cause we actually talked to that Objector, or Representative Objector on the
phone, and then we decided not to take it, yeah, okay. So this is really setting a policy for that type of
testimony.



Hillman- I'm not very excited about having that kind of policy, or that kind of--



Laurent- Well, this gives us a basis for denying it.



Hamann- I'm not interested in listening over a telephone, and I'm not interested in written, you know. We're
here to take care of that and if you can't make it here, I'm sorry, I just don't have any sympathy.



Aziere- I can see where there may be some legitimate reason for doing that, and it'll be up to us to decide
whether we agree with the reasoning or not, but at least this gives us a policy. Now, the Objector is still
required to file, to comply with the 48-hour notice, and still required to file their objection to the valuation of
the property. So they have to do that prior to asking for the right to do telephone or written testimony.



Schwandt- I'll give you an example, Jay. And this has happened in the past in another community I was in, I
worked in. People were actually already scheduled to be at the Board of Review, and they were coming back
from a trip, and they had some sort of either a pilot strike or something like that, and their flight was delayed,
and they weren't able to get back in time. So, in that instance, they were allowed to testify over the phone. It
was out of their control, so that's where this would come in handy. If something happened that was out of
their control and they already had made an effort to be there.
Laurent- This just sets a policy and a basis for us to make a decision. The ultimate decision is ours.



Schwandt- You can still decide to say no.



Hamann- You know, I had to laugh in the videos we watched on the training. This poor woman, she wanted to
go out to the daughter's wedding. I liked... That was a nice sequence in there.



- For the City Attorney, please, is there any... Is there any potential downside or liability to Board of Review,
the city, in instances where we would refuse to hear sworn testimony?



Vande Castle- No because it is up to your discretion to allow it or not, and it's a state statute as well.



- Right, it is.



Vande Castle- Correct, so by you just following, in a good faith effort, following the guidelines set out, if you
follow that, then there would be no discretion, or downfall to you as a board as well.



Aziere- Any other discussion? I'll entertain a motion to accept this policy.



Laurent- So moved.



Aziere- Second?



Hillman- Second.



Aziere- Would the clerk call a role?
Teske- Laurent?



Laurent- Aye.



Teske- Hillman?



Hillman- Aye.



Teske- Midthun?



Midthun- Just for clarification, this is just setting a policy, right?



Aziere- Yes.



Midthun- Okay, yes, aye.



Teske- Hamann?



Hamann- Aye.



Teske- Aziere?



Aziere- Aye.
Aziere- Okay, now we would like to have a statement from our clerk.



Vande Castle- So as we, as you know, this is Board of Review and the first, I guess, rule that we should follow
is that... is deem that the Assessor is correct. That is your main overlying, arching theme, is that the Assessor
is correct in his assessment. Unless proven to be not right by evidence, and the burden that must be met is to
prove that he is incorrect in his assessment. Pretty high burden but it can be met. And the procedure is that
each person gets to... The Objector goes first and admits a sworn in and admits their evidence. The Assessor
or you as the board members get to ask them questions. Then next the Assessor gets to provide their
evidence, and they would... Both sides must produce sworn testimony or physical evidence and the type of
evidence that are allowed are any type of evidence that a reasonable person would consider in coming to a
serious consideration or a serious issue.



Aziere- Let me ask you something along that line, 'cause a lot of times this happens. The Objector comes in
with a... They had their property evaluated for whatever reason, mortgage or whatever, and they want to
present that, and that's written testimony, but it really is kind of hearsay written testimony, and we've always
accepted that, I guess. What is your opinion on that?



Vande Castle- I guess it'd be up to your discretion to accept it or not accept it, but mostly it is the sale of a
property is the main parameter that is used, just in a separate assessment could be considered given weight,
but I wouldn't say it would be extremely controlling testimony or evidence. As it is, it's not a sworn testimony,
it's nothing of that nature.



Aziere- Yeah, 'cause normally, number one of course, it's a sale subject property. Number two would be
comparable properties, so, okay.



Vande Castle- I have really nothing further. If there's any other questions from the board members or anyone.



Schwandt- I guess I can make one comment in that same vein. With the appraisal, when we do have people
wanting to submit their appraisal, we do ask that they contact their appraiser, have them come along in, so if
the board does have questions on the appraisal that they can ask the actual appraiser. That is something that
we do



- Okay.



- And identify through them, and make sure that they do know that.
- I assume that that person would be sworn in as well.



Schwante- Right, and that's one of the things we tell them that first and foremost, they gotta understand that
that appraisal was done for purposes other than assessment and review purposes.



Aziere- I guess I didn't know you did that, so that's good.



Schwandt- Yeah. We have to identify that.



Schwandt- We are governed by the same set of rules that they are as far as the universal standards of or
professional appraisal practices, so when they repurpose an appraisal, which isn't really something that's ethical
to do, they should actually be saying, well, "I can answer questions on this appraisal, "but this isn't really what I
should be doing." Honestly, when they have an appraisal that they bring for assessment and review, they should
redo the appraisal, and make it strictly for assessment and review purposes, and it should be done for the
person that's asking for the appraisal, not for the bank who generally is the one that owns the appraisal, 'cause
generally that's what happens is that the appraisal's done for the bank, the person that's gonna be Objector to
the assessment doesn't own that appraisal, so there's two things that are, first off we ask the owner if they've
gotten permission from the bank. Secondly we ask the owner if they are gonna bring the appraiser along to
answer questions. We need to let them know that those are two steps they need to take, otherwise the
questions on the appraisal are pretty much, like you said, hearsay.



Aziere- Well, we've never really given much weight to a bank appraisal for mortgage purposes.



Schwandt- Well, we give them some credit because they do bring up some comparables and stuff, but
understand and that's one thing we look at too and we tell them is that the bank is only there to cover their
position on their loan, and that's what some of these comparable looks, and a lot of comparables aren't even
within our district so we have no idea of what the actual statistics or data involved in those properties are so
we can't answer to those. We'd rather look at our own properties that we use for comparables within our
assessment



Hamann- If the property we're looking at is income generating, you've got another method you use on that
too, don't you? How much money that generates? That's probably better than trying to find a comparable,
because you've gotta find a comparable piece of property that's generating income in the same manner that the
one you've got, and that's damn hard.
Schwandt- Well, it depends. I mean, in this market right now, houses are actually selling a lot quicker than they
have in the past. A lot of the sales are happening within several weeks of the property going to the market and
have multiple offers. I think with income producing properties, yeah, we look at that first and foremost,
because anybody that's buying a income producing property is looking to generate profits, so they're looking at
the bottom line on those and comparing what this property will generate for income for them versus another
property. So that's what we look at. We do an income approach on those properties and come up with a
value on those. And then we use sales and work 'em backwards to come up with a gross run multiplayer and
apply those to other properties that haven't sold to come up with a value on those also.



Hamann- Okay, thank you. And then the third method is?



Schwandt- Cost.



Hamann- Cost, right.



Schwandt- And that's just a basic method that we generally use on new properties, and commercial properties
that are just being built that don't have tenants in them yet, and special purpose buildings. On the new
properties that are being built all around town, we'll use those and that'll give us a basic number. But even
those sometimes, you'll put a cost number on those, and because our model's a little bit older, they will sell for
more than we got 'em costed out to be. So the market dictates whatever it will, and it's one of those things
where we're always trying to catch up, and we'll be doing reevaluation probably down the line. Right now, our
market isn't quite at 100%.



Aziere- Do you get question, just kinda... Do you get many people that won't let you in their house if you try
to get in, if there's one reason to... Like when we put our addition on.



Schwandt- You wouldn't let us in?



Aziere- Well I let the jury in.



Schwandt- Well, it all depends upon circumstance. Most times we won't be allowed into a property is because
the property owner themselves, whether by schedule or location of their primary residence, for example all
those properties that are along Shadow Lane, across from Lambeau, most of the people live out of town. I just
spoke with a gentleman yesterday whose primary residence is in New York state. He had one of the neighbors
let me in to the remodeled property. Now this one where they spent $150,000 remodeling it, and the majority
of that money went to raising the basement two inches so that they could actually put finish down there,
which would include a bathroom and a rec room and a bedroom down there because being built in the '60s, it
didn't have the clearance that they require nowadays in order to have a living area down there. So they
actually had to dig their basement down two inches in order to meet current statutory code requirements. He
called them wondering what, when I had adjusted his assessment upwards, if I had just jacked it up because
they had to dig down an extra two inches. I should've known that was just for the 1,000 square feet in the
bathroom and kitchen remodel they did.



Aziere- What are you doing... You know, that brings up another question. What are you doing about those
poor people that live around the homes that are being bought? I just saw a home the other day, $649,000 on
the market, I think it was. It's got what, two bedrooms and one bath, or some crazy thing, but it's adjacent, you
know, it's one of those homes that somebody's gonna buy, and then all of a sudden they're gonna put an 800,
$900,000 house in there. What about all those poor residents around there?



Schwandt- It depends. So far what we've seen is that that one block of Shadow Lane between Ridge and
Oneida, is the only one that we've actually adjusted, that I've adjusted.



Aziere- Okay.



Schwandt- Just the one backing up to it. I haven't gone on the other side of the street. Although some
property owners have tried to get that price. They haven't really done that. South of Oneida... Or, not south,
actually east of Oneida, there's some that have actually torn down and built... Alex has one in his
neighborhood. They've torn down a house and built something up quite big, but it hasn't really gotten to that
point yet where there are a lot of them doing that. I haven't seen a lot of sales that have justified us doing that,
changing over the majority of the houses, so we haven't done that yet. I don't, yeah, and that's the other thing
is that the market has supported the stuff that we've changed, but I'm not so sure that the market is gonna
support the other properties that we have not changed yet. We have to see that. It took us quite a while to
catch up with that part of that market on Shadow Lane, but I have not seen enough evidence to indicate that
we are gonna go and go whole hog on the other side of the street, and up and down the block there because I
don't see that happening. I mean, I'm not gonna penalize people, the local people, for investors coming in and
buying one or two houses.



Aziere- Well, that's--



Schwandt- It's a little bit of an anomaly. I don't consider that a trend yet; that's more of an anomaly. People
wanna cash in on that. I'm not sure if they have another bad season, that makes three in a row. That's gonna
scare some people off.
Aziere- Any other--



Schwandt- It's actually Kris's turn to talk now, so I've taken most of her time.



Teske- We have met all the legal requirements under State Statute to convene this Board of Review. I have
certified under 70.46% Wisconsin Statutes that Jay Hamann, Thomas Aziere, David Hillman, Diane Midthun,
and Richard Laurent received the qualifying training. The city has an ordinance for confidentiality of income and
expense information provided to the Assessor under State Law Section 7.47, sub 7, sub 8F. Open Book
Session was held on April 10th, 2019, in the Assessor's office, and the Assessor was present. Level of
assessment is at 94.36%. There are zero objections this year. And for record keeping, I would ask that you not
speak over each other, wait your turn, and speak into your microphone. Thank you.



Aziere- Okay.



Aziere- Now we have the Assessor's Report.



Schwandt- Well, we didn't do a discussion. And I guess I could follow up the actual market. I was just talking a
little bit earlier with some of the board members. Green Bay has seen increase in sales that were... We've seen
multiple offers on a lot of the properties that are out there, especially in the range between, say, 100,000 to
upwards of $200,000. Those houses are selling quite rapidly. The market for properties that probably are over,
say, 400 to 600,000, that's a little bit less. And those properties are sitting on the market a little bit longer, but
they still are selling. You will hear possibly some people say, "Oh, the market's not very good for them," but
instead of selling, they'll sit in the market for a year they're sitting in the market for maybe 90 days, which is
normal for a regular house. But they're still selling quite rapidly. So, with lower interest rates that we still have,
and the amount of supply that's out there, it's a seller's market. Our interest rate that we've seen, quoting at
4%, now under 4%, what we see for our ratio at 94.3 is probably gonna be under 90% next year. I'm guessing
around 89%. The clock starts ticking again, so if you wanna hang around long enough, we could probably do
another evaluation, and probably here instead of thinking about eating donuts and not having any hearings, you
could probably be here for a week or so. Really, no takers?



Aziere- What about commercial property?



Schwandt- Commercial property, for the most part we've seen all the normal players are filling up their usual
openings that we've had. There really has only been a few of 'em that have the usual things for office space and
so on. It doesn't seem to be a real problem. We've got one gentleman, I don't know if you remember, the one
Father that's buying up some of the properties to make homeless shelters out of 'em, Father Rico.



- No.



Schwandt- Kris's head snaps around when I said that. He's buying up quite a few properties down the block
here, and has kind of assembled them into a bigger parcel and creating a larger homeless shelter. Properties
they did have, I think he's selling them. They were kind of scattered around, so there's gonna be more of a
concentration of homeless shelters down where they are, down the street here. As we've seen, as far as some
of the new development, it looks like stuff is happening over across the river in Larsen Green, I don't know if
anybody had a chance to see some of the new development going on over there. It's pretty impressive. Some
of the office buildings that's been in the second Larsen building. I know Steve's been through 'em. Pretty neat
what they're doing in there. If anybody's been up to the top of the Titletown building, the newer building, that's
a good vantage point to see what's actually happening up there. The northeast industrial park, I think the
finishing touches were done probably this last year at the Lombardi Cancer Treatment Center. And some of
the additions they did out there on Aurora, so this is probably the last year, that I know of, that we're gonna
have any additions in Aurora. Other than that up there, they've got the... What's the name of that place? That
building up there off of Mason Street?



Norton- Nature's Way?



Schwandt- Nature's Way. There's a big plant they're building out there, at the end of Mason Street. That's one
of the new additions out there, so, a lot of things going on, I think. For the most part we're doing well, and I
think the one thing that we're looking at down in Madison is that they're trying to get rid of that 2% growth
thing so that you can raise your levee regardless of what your growth is in new construction because, you
know, when you get up over $6 billion in value, 2% of $6 billion is a lot of value in order to get up over and
reach a maximum levee potential so we have to be mindful of that also.



Aziere- I'm surprised you don't have... East Town Mall, it seems like every year we have East Town Mall. Is
Shopko part of that or are they separate?



Schwandt- They're separate. We'll probably hear from them next year. But East Town Mall ended up exactly
where we thought it was gonna be, a no-go. They pushed and pushed and pushed, and it ended up pretty much
where I thought it was gonna be. There's nothing going on there. I wasn't sure what they were gonna do, but
the stuff in Cub Foods is really good. I mean, if anybody's seen that, it's pretty impressive what they did there.
Saved it over.
Aziere- Oh really?



Schwandt- I'm not sure what the deal is with East Town.



Schwandt- Marshalls, Ross, PetCo. I mean, it's very nice-looking there. They did a really bang-up job, but just
the whole East Town Mall property needs, like, a new anchor store on the other end of Kohls. Now that
ShopCo's gone, maybe they'll get a Target to move in on the other end or something, which would be a smart
thing for Target. There's no Target over on that side.



Aziere- Well, you got Target down in Bellevue.



Schwandt- Yeah, there's one down there, but there really isn't a lot in that area.



Aziere- Any questions of the Assessor? Okay. Who would like... We have the rolls here--



Schwandt- Two kinds.



Aziere- The rolls are still there. Would somebody like to go over and examine them? Rick, you did it last year,
didn't you? You looked up your own property. Somebody else want to...



Schwandt- If anybody needs their parcel number we do have the computer up here so we can look up parcel
numbers for you.



Aziere- Okay, if you know your parcel number.



Aziere- Somebody should look at 'em.



Schwandt- Make sure my affidavit is attached to the first.
Hamann- Are we supposed to go look?



Norton- What's your address? What's your address so we can give you a personal--



Hamann- 558 Pinehurst.



Schwandt- Oh, I don't know if we want Jay looking up his. He'll be filing a waiver right now



Alvey- 21 dash 8-20, dash R, dash 38



- These are neighborhood.



Hamann- So many damn numbers on that.



Alvey- 21 dash 8-20, dash R, dash 38.



Schwandt- Well, he's got one of the new guys for his appraiser, so.



Aziere- Do you have to generate these every year?



Schwandt- Yes. The donuts or the rolls?



Aziere- The rolls.
Schwandt- Kris does the donuts, I do the rolls. Actually, Nichole and Scott did them. Kristi does the
assessment rolls.



Alvey- 8-20, dash R, dash 38.



Schwandt- Used to be we'd have 'em... The county would put them on actual ledger paper in the big books and
stuff. They don't do that anymore. The county does less and less for the city as time goes on. Well, they still
put the I'm not sure exactly why. We still get the copies of certified server apps, and supply pages. Everything's
on the computer, but we actually have to have a printed roll.



- And the last number set?



Schwandt- Rules have not changed with the technology, as far as the assessment goes. We worked on it. We
changed the assessment manually to try to keep up with the technology but it hasn't... The statutes haven't
changed with the times. Now I'm getting too old to even wanna do that. It's frustrating.



Aziere- Let the record show that Jay did review the rolls, especially on his own property.



Hamann- That's what the video tells you you're supposed to do. I wouldn't want the clerk thinking we were
getting this video and we weren't learning anything.



Teske- Thank you, Jay.



Aziere- Next on the agenda's consideration with possible action on additional request received by the City
Assessor. Do we have any additional requests?



Schwandt- We haven't got anything.



Aziere- Okay. Consideration with possible action on notices of intent to file objections. Received anything
there, Mrs. Clerk?
Teske- Nope, nothing.



Aziere- Consideration with possible action request the waivers for the Board of Review hearings. We don't
have anything on that either, do we?



Teske- So far, so far no.



Aziere- Okay, and then... No other notices to file objections that we--



Teske- Not yet, no.



Aziere- Okay, alritey. Now we just wait.



Schwandt- For an hour and a half.



Aziere- Okay, everybody. It is 10:30. We've been here our two hours. We don't have anybody, no Objectors
have shown up. The Assessor's office does not have any properties that were re-assessed following the close
of book. We don't have any personal properties. That means we have no work left. So I would Would
somebody like to make the motion that we adjourn?



Laurent- Also move.



Aziere- Second?



Midthun- Second.
Aziere- All in favor?



All BOR Members- Aye.



Aziere- Oppose, nay? Okay, good, we'll see you next year.