#04 Act on unlawful tax claim from St. Peter's Lutheran Church
CITY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE MEMORANDUM
March 31, 2011
TO: City Council
FROM: Tim Wellnitz, Assistant City Attorney
SUBJECT: Consideration and action on a claim for unlawful taxes in the amount of
$1,860.93 for the year 2010 from St. Peter’s Lutheran Church regarding
property located at 1315 Putnam
Staff Recommendation
The City Assessor recommends denying and disallowing the claim as he does not
believe that the proper exemption paperwork was filed by March 1, 2010. St. Peter’s
Lutheran Church believes that the paperwork was filed on time and therefore should be
exempt from general property taxes and there is nothing to refute their claim.
City Attorney Wald Klimczyk’s Recommendation
Based upon the particular facts and circumstances, City Attorney Wald Klimczyk
recommends that the Common Council accept and approve this claim.
City Manager’s Recommendation
Based on the facts and City Attorney’s Office’s recommendation, I concur with the City
Attorney’s recommendation.
Suggested Motion
Here are two suggested motions that the Council could adopt:
1. I move to allow the claim in the amount of $1,860.93 from St. Peter’s Lutheran
Church regarding property located at 1315 Putnam.
2. I move to deny and disallow the claim from St. Peter’s Lutheran Church
regarding property located at 1315 Putnam.
Background
St. Peter’s Lutheran Church has submitted a claim in the amount of $1,860.93 under
Wis. Stat. § 74.35 regarding the collection of unlawful taxes for the year 2010 for
property located at 1315 Putnam. Property is presumed to be taxable and the burden of
proof is on the property owner who is claiming an exemption. Property is exempt from
general property taxes under Wis. Stat. § 70.11(4) if owned by churches or religious
associations “including property owned and used for housing for pastors and their
ordained assistants, members of religious orders and communities, and ordained
teachers, whether or not contiguous to and a part of other property owned and used by
such associations or churches.” St. Peter’s obtained ownership of the property in 2007
and says that the property has been used exclusively as the residence for their pastor
since February 2009.
1
Since the property was not previously exempt a request for an exemption on a form
designated by the Wisconsin Department of Revenue was required to be filed with the
Assessor by the property owner by March 1, 2010 under Wis. Stat. § 70.11. St. Peter’s
believes that this paperwork was submitted in January 2010 and therefore the property
should be exempt from general property taxes for 2010. The Assessor has no record of
this paperwork being received. The Assessor has made an honest attempt to determine:
A) if his office received an application and subsequently misplaced it or B) his office
never received one. He cannot prove either to be the case nor can St. Peter’s. Thus it is
not clear whether the property tax exemption request was submitted by the March 1,
2010 deadline or not. Along with this claim, St. Peter’s has provided a property tax
exemption request form that is filled out and dated January 24, 2011 along with other
documentation relating to the property which is referred to as “updated documentation.”
These documents are attached for your reference. The Assessor has reviewed those
documents along with supplemental information since received from St. Peter’s. He’s
determined that, pending field verification of the actual use of the property, exemption
will be granted for 2011.
Analysis
Wisconsin statutes require general property taxes to be imposed unless an exemption
applies. The property owner has the burden to prove that an exemption applies and
must submit to the Assessor by March 1 a form designated by the Wisconsin
Department of Revenue which requests this exemption. The City Council shall
determine whether or not the property owner has proven that the property is exempt
from general property taxes and has submitted the required form designated by the
Wisconsin Department of Revenue by the March 1, 2010 deadline. If this burden has
been met by the property owner then the claim should be allowed in the amount of
$1,860.93. If this burden has not been met by the property owner then the claim should
be denied and disallowed.
cc: Eric Levitt, City Manager
Jacob J. Winzenz, Assistant City Manager/Director of Administrative Services
2