City Loses Tax Fight with Adams Outdoor Advertising

January 13, 2011 5:18 pm

A cool million or more for the taxpayer to pay . . . just from the city . . . more for the county and schools.

From: May, Michael
Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2011 12:00 PM
To: Cieslewicz, Dave; ALL ALDERS
Cc: Brasser, Dean; Hanson, Mark; Kurth, Mike; MY GROUP; AT GROUP; Gawenda, Dave
Subject: City Loses Final Appeal in Adams Tax Cases

Today I received a one sentence order from the Wisconsin Supreme Court denying the City’s petition to review the lower court decisions in the Adams Outdoor Advertising tax appeals. This means the lower court decisions stand, and the City will be required to make a significant tax refund to Adams. We have no further legal remedies.

The decision effectively ends a number of pending tax cases with Adams, covering at least 5 years of taxes, and will similarly end some pending cases with Lamar Advertising.

Our office will need to meet with the Comptroller and Assessor to determine the City’s liability for refunds. Last year, when we reported to the BOE on these pending cases, we estimated that the total liability (all jurisdictions) for the Adams cases could reach $1 million, including interest. The City’s share of this (other taxing jurisdictions are also affected) could be in the range of $400,000. The amount at stake in the Lamar cases is much less. Last year we estimated the potential liability (all jurisdictions) to be around $200,000, including interest. We will need to update these figures, including checking with the Assessor and Comptroller to determine if these estimates included the most recent tax year.

Once we have determined the City’s tax refund liability, we also will meet with the Assessor to analyze whether, under the court decisions, the City has any legal method of assessing these properties at what we consider their fair market value on a prospective basis.

Michael P. May
City Attorney

4 COMMENTS

lukas January 13, 2011 7:38 pm At 7:38 PM

So, anyone to blame or is this just some unfortunate legal thing that happened?
Teresa Doyle January 13, 2011 8:02 pm At 8:02 PM

Oh, good I am not the only one wondering. Lukas verbalized it better than I would and my additional question was, “Is this kind of planning ahead needed that Paul Soglin has been lacking?”
michael donnelly January 14, 2011 10:52 am At 10:52 AM

Is this for billboards?
Brenda Konkel January 14, 2011 11:27 am At 11:27 AM

@michael Yes, about billboard, I think it was a question of how we were valuing them.

@lukas Not sure if anyone is to blame, per se.