Middleton Westbrook Property Owner LLC v. Village of Menomonee Falls Board of Review

COURT OF APPEALS
DECISION NOTICE
DATED AND FILED This opinion is subject to further editing. If
published, the official version will appear in
the bound volume of the Official Reports.
August 6, 2025
A party may file with the Supreme Court a
Samuel A. Christensen petition to review an adverse decision by the
Clerk of Court of Appeals Court of Appeals. See WIS. STAT. § 808.10 and
RULE 809.62.

Appeal No. 2024AP2046 Cir. Ct. No. 2023CV1776

STATE OF WISCONSIN IN COURT OF APPEALS
DISTRICT II

MIDDLETON WESTBROOK PROPERTY OWNER LLC AND ENERPAC TOOL
GROUP, CORP.,

PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS,

V.

VILLAGE OF MENOMONEE FALLS BOARD OF REVIEW,

DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

APPEAL from an order of the circuit court for Waukesha County:
BRAD SCHIMEL, Judge. Reversed.

Before Neubauer, P.J., Gundrum, and Lazar, JJ.

Per curiam opinions may not be cited in any court of this state as precedent

or authority, except for the limited purposes specified in WIS. STAT. RULE 809.23(3).
No. 2024AP2046

¶1 PER CURIAM. The Village of Menomonee Falls Board of Review
appeals an order granting Middleton Westbrook Property Owner LLC and Enerpac
Tool Group, Corp.’s (collectively, Middleton) petition for writ of certiorari.
Middleton petitioned for certiorari review after the Board refused to consider
Middleton’s objection to its 2023 property assessment on the basis that Middleton
failed to timely provide the assessor with requested income and expense information
as required by WIS. STAT. § 70.47(7)(af) (2023-24).1 The circuit court ordered the
Board to reconvene and to consider Middleton’s 2023 objection. The Board appeals
the court’s order. We reverse the order of the circuit court and affirm the Board’s
decision.

¶2 Middleton owns a parcel of real property in the Village that it leases
to a commercial tenant. On March 10, 2023, the Village sent Middleton a letter
informing it that the Village was revaluing all property in the Village for the
January 1, 2023 assessment year. The letter advised Middleton that “[a]s an owner
or manager of income producing property, you are aware of the impact that
economic factors have on property values.” The letter asked Middleton to complete
and return enclosed income and expense data forms “pertaining to the rental and
operating of the building.” The letter warned that “[a]n owner may lose the right to
appeal to the Board of Review without providing the Assessor’s Office with the
requested information.” Middleton did not respond to the Village’s request.

¶3 By notice dated June 14, 2023, the Village advised the public, in part,
that if any taxpayer wanted to object to its 2023 assessment, the Village’s board of
review would meet on July 27, 2023. The notice warned, “Please be advised of the
following requirements to appear before the board of review and procedural

1
All references to the Wisconsin Statutes are to the 2023-24 version.

2
No. 2024AP2046

requirements if appearing before the Board of Review.” As relevant, the notice
stated:

No person may appear before the Board of Review, testify
to the Board of Review by telephone, or object to a valuation
if that valuation was made by the assessor or the objector
using the income method of valuation, unless no later than 7
days before the first meeting of the board, the person
supplies the assessor with all the information about income
and expenses that the assessor requests, as specified in the
Assessor’s Manual under [WIS. STAT. §] 73.03(2a)[.]

¶4 On July 24, 2023, three days before the Board’s meeting, Middleton
objected to its 2023 assessment and provided the Board with a single-property
appraisal of the property that valued the property using, in part, an income approach.
In response, the Board advised Middleton that “your objection will not be scheduled
for a hearing.” The Board explained that the Wisconsin statutes provided, in part:

No person may appear before the board of review, testify to
the board by telephone or object to a valuation; if that
valuation was made by the assessor or the objector using the
income method; unless no later than 7 days before the first
meeting of the board of review the person supplies to the
assessor all of the information about income and expenses,
as specified in the manual under [WIS. STAT. §] 73.03(2a),
that the assessor requests.

WIS. STAT. § 70.47(7)(af). The Board further advised:

The Village assessor utilized the income method to
determine the valuation of your property and sent the
enclosed letter on March 10 requesting income and expense
information. The letter states that a property owner may lose
the right to appeal to the Board of Review if the requested
information is not provided. In addition, first-class notices
dated April 26 and June 14 were published containing the
language in WIS. STAT. § 70.47(af) [sic] above.

Because you did not provide the income and expense
information as requested by the Village Assessor prior to the
close of business on July 17, 2023, WIS. STAT. § 70.47(af)
[sic] prohibits you from appearing before the Board of

3
No. 2024AP2046

Review to testify and object to the value of the subject
property.

¶5 In response, Middleton petitioned the circuit court for certiorari
review, and the court ultimately ordered the Board to reconvene and consider
Middleton’s 2023 objection. The Board now appeals.

¶6 “On appeal of a circuit court certiorari decision, we review the
decision of the local governmental body, not the decision of the circuit court.”
Miller v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Vill. of Lyndon Station, 2022 WI App 51, ¶18,
404 Wis. 2d 539, 980 N.W.2d 295. Our inquiry is limited

to the record before the board and addresses only whether
the board’s actions were: (1) within its jurisdiction;
(2) according to law; (3) arbitrary, oppressive, or
unreasonable and represented its will and not its judgment;
and (4) supported by evidence such that the board might
reasonably make the order or determination in question.

State ex rel. City of Waukesha v. City of Waukesha Bd. of Rev., 2021 WI 89, ¶19,
399 Wis. 2d 696, 967 N.W.2d 460.

¶7 WISCONSIN STAT. § 70.47(7)(af) plainly and unambiguously provides
that no person may appear before the board or object to a valuation:

if that valuation was made by the assessor or the objector
using the income method; unless no later than 7 days before
the first meeting of the board of review the person supplies
to the assessor all of the information about income and
expenses, as specified in the manual under [WIS. STAT.
§] 73.03(2a),[2] that the assessor requests.

2
WISCONSIN STAT. § 73.03(2a) requires the department of revenue to prepare and publish
an assessment manual that “shall discuss and illustrate accepted assessment methods, techniques
and practices.” Assessors, in turn, are required to value real property “in the manner specified in
the Wisconsin property assessment manual … from actual view or from the best information that
the assessor can practicably obtain, at the full value which could ordinarily be obtained therefor at
private sale.” WIS. STAT. § 70.32(1).

4
No. 2024AP2046

¶8 Here, the Village’s March 10, 2023 letter put Middleton on notice that
it was going to be relying on an income valuation method to derive Middleton’s
2023 property assessment. The letter referred to Middleton as an owner of “income
producing property” and told Middleton it needed the data it was requesting “to
assist in arriving at fair and equitable values for the 2023 assessment year.” The
letter stated the assessor was requesting “information pertaining to the rental and
operation of the building” and included a fill-in form for Middleton to provide
information related to its building’s income and expenses. The letter also warned
that “[a]n owner may lose the right to appeal to the Board of Review without
providing the Assessor’s Office with the requested information. Please see State
Statute [WIS. STAT. §] 70.47(af) [sic].” (Emphasis omitted.)

¶9 Based on the Record, if Middleton wanted to object to its 2023
property assessment, it was required to provide the Village assessor with its
requested income and expense information at least seven days before the Board’s
hearing. See WIS. STAT. § 70.47(7)(af). Given the March 10 letter, we reject
Middleton’s argument that it was never on notice that the Village was using an
income valuation method to assess its property, and therefore did not know it needed
to timely provide the Village with the requested income and expense information.3
Because Middleton failed to provide the Village with its requested information, the
Board properly refused to consider Middleton’s objection.

3
Middleton argues that it was improper for the Village to assess its property using an
income valuation method and should have instead relied on comparable sales. This issue is not
before this court. Had Middleton properly objected to its assessment, it could have made this
argument before the Board. See Nankin v. Village of Shorewood, 2001 WI 92, ¶18, 245 Wis. 2d
86, 630 N.W.2d 141 (The board of review “is not an assessing body but rather a quasi-judicial body
whose duty it is to hear evidence tending to show errors in the assessment roll and to decide upon
the evidence adduced whether the assessor’s valuation is correct.” (emphasis omitted)).

5
No. 2024AP2046

¶10 In any event, even assuming the March 10 letter did not put Middleton
on notice that the assessor was going to rely on an income valuation approach, the
appraisal that Middleton submitted three days before the Board’s hearing contained
an entire section where Middleton’s appraiser valued its property using an income
approach. WISCONSIN STAT. § 70.47(7)(af) also provides, in part, that no person
may object to a valuation “if that valuation was made by … the objector using the
income method; unless no later than 7 days before the first meeting of the board of
review the person supplies to the assessor all of the information about income and
expenses, as specified in the manual under [WIS. STAT. §] 73.03(2a), that the
assessor requests.” (Emphasis added.) Because Middleton’s appraisal included an
income valuation method, Middleton was required to timely provide the Village
assessor with the requested income and expense information. See § 70.47(7)(af).
When Middleton failed to do so, the Board properly refused to consider its
objection. We reverse the circuit court’s order and affirm the Board’s decision.

By the Court.—Order reversed.

This opinion will not be published. See WIS. STAT.
RULE 809.23(1)(b)5.

6