In a March 27, 2008 posting to my blog, I noted that the Sunrise Property was incorrectly assessed for value as "vacant" land, while it actually did --- and still does --- consist of land Plus "improvements" (buildings). 

Below is  part of the posting detailing that the assessor dropped almost $600,000 of value from the property, which means all Shorewood taxpayers picked up the difference on their tax bills.

Now that Sunrise is Sunset --- will the Village properly assess the parcel for its current market value --- as prescribed by State Law and Regulations ?

"The property at 3907-09 N Sherburn, which is one of the parcels for the Sunrise Development that the Village Board is planning on funding for $800,000 plus had a drastic change in assessment for 2007.

The assessment dropped $598,059 or about 21% of its former assessed value.  In addition, the assessor changed the property from a parcel with improvements to vacant land --- even though there is still an apartment building on the property.

When I questioned the Assessors Office as to why the new assessment discounted the aparment building, I was told that the Assessor knew there was an offer on the property, and that the new owners planned to tear down the building and get TIF funding for a new project --- and that the Assessor valued the property as though is was empty land, based upon what might happen.

In fact, the property had an occupied apartment building and there was not even a closed sale on the property.

In checking with the WI Dept of Rev, they affirmed that the assessment was done incorrectly, and that the property should have been properly assessed with the improvements, and not as vacant land.  Future planned use has no affect on the present use and market value.

The almost $600,000 that the assessor dropped off the value of the property means that all property owners in Shorewood pay more in taxes to make up the difference."

 WHAT DO YOU THINK ?  YOUR COMMENTS ARE WELCOME !

Dear friends in the Village of Shorewood and Shorewood Village Trustees

Many of you have already informed me of Sunrise Senior Living's recent pullout from the property where I used to live and where the Riverbrook Restaurant was located.  For those of you who haven't, here's the story:

http://www.jsonline.com/business/34467754.html

My final words at the Village Board Meeting that decided this were: "I really hope I'm wrong on my concerns and that this development ends up being successful, butSunrise does not have the Village of Shorewood as it's primary concern, it has it's shareholders."  During discussions I had brought up several cases nationally where Sunrise did this exact same thing - bought property, pulled out and sold.  Someof you assured me there was more oversight and this wouldn't be the case.

It is distressful that a Milwaukee Landmark was closed and that many low-income and diverse families were forced out of Shorewood and this latest development rubs salt in that wound.

The reason I'm writing is two-fold: 1) to encourage you to watch this development closely and to keep pressure on the Village to make smart decisions on this valuable piece of riverfront property, and 2) to give you a final rundown on how I thought the players, our elected and appointed officials, handled this case.

Winners:  Trustee's Jeff Hanewall and Dawn Anderson

These two Board Members answered my concerns in a respectful and thoughtful manner.  I didn't always agree with them but I knew that they heard my concerns and addressed them.  Justice Hanewall actually spent a half-hour with me on the phone - very well appreciated. 

Trustee Anderson addressed the concerns about credit and finances of Sunrise at the Board Meeting - and I'm not sure her concerns, prophetic as they were, were adequately addressed by the others.

The verdict is still out:  Trustee's Margaret Hickey and Michael Maher, President Guy Johnson, Village Manager Cris Swartz

Trustee Hickey was the only other person to respond to my e-mail, which I appreciated, but I was disturbed by an incident that happened at the final Board Meeting.  After the public input session while the Board went into closed discussions, one "public" individual, who appeared to be a developer  very close to Village government, was allowed to speak.  When the apartment manager later tried to do speak, Trustee Hickey shot back in an angry tone "Public input is over!".   (But apparently only for some)

Trustee Maher and President Johnson were silent observers.  Neither replied to my concerns.  I reminded all the Board members, and this is also addressed to the new Trustee, Sean Cummings, It is infinitely better to get a reply that I don't like then no reply at all.

Village Manager Swartz was respectful throughout the process.  The only thing I didn't like was his periodic comment to the effect that "either you're getting Sunrise or you're getting a huge condo".


Most frustrating: Pete Petrie, Chair CDA, Trustee Ellen Eckman, Trustee Michael Phinney, Laura Hester, Sunrise Senior Living

Pete Petrie was by far the most frustrating figure to work with.  He produced these terrible ad-hoc "studies" that showed that 100% of the communities that Sunrise were located in benefited.  Of all the people he appeared most driven to plow this thing through - and I don't know what he had to gain.  His constant threat: if we don't get Sunrise in this property, it could be five years before another proposal came through.  Not the kind of forward-thinking and patience I want from a government official over a project that will be around for many years to come.

Trustee Eckman also did not reply to my e-mails, and after I called her and the others out at the meeting, I got a list of excuses but not an apology.  Please, just be honest and straightforward.  She was also frustrating at the CDA meetings.  Her response to our concerns: "The public brought up the same concerns over a development by Downer Woods and everybody ended up loving it".  Not sure what to make of that, are you saying the public shouldn't bring up concerns and just trust the board?  (By the way, I checked with many of you residents over that development and there are a lot of people that are still very bitter about the process and the development - I don't think we can count them among the everybody who loved it)

Of course Laura Hester, the representative at Sunrise was just plain awful.  In fact, her associate came to me after a meeting saying Sunrise is working out a compensation plan for the residents of the apartment - clearly an attempt to appease and quiet us as nothing was ever in the works.  When things didn't go her way at meetings, her ire would come out, threatening to pull out, and being appeased by certain members of government.


So there you have it.  I have sinced move from Shorewood, but I hope that something good can finally come from this mess.  I hope that all of the Village Board Members take my criticism in a constructive way and that in the future you do your best as elected officials to respect and acknowledge the people you represent.  If you feel I have been unfair or misrepresented the situation I will gladly discuss things further.

For those of you who supported me and the other tenants of the apartments - THANK YOU!  Thank you for coming out to the meetings, for writing letters, for helping to spread the word.  It meant a lot to us.

Sincerely,

Tim Vargo

 WHAT IS YOUR OPINION ?  YOUR COMMENTS ARE WELCOME !

 I had noted in an earlier posting that a major TIF property had a questionable assessment.

The property at 3907-09 N Sherburn, which is one of the parcels for the Sunrise Development that the Village Board is planning on funding for $800,000 plus had a drastic change in assessment for 2007.

The assessment dropped $598,059 or about 21% of its former assessed value.  In addition, the assessor changed the property from a parcel with improvements to vacant land --- even though there is still an apartment building on the property.

When I questioned the Assessors Office as to why the new assessment discounted the aparment building, I was told that the Assessor knew there was an offer on the property, and that the new owners planned to tear down the building and get TIF funding for a new project --- and that the Assessor valued the property as though is was empty land, based upon what might happen.

In fact, the property had an occupied apartment building and there was not even a closed sale on the property.

In checking with the WI Dept of Rev, they affirmed that the assessment was done incorrectly, and that the property should have been properly assessed with the improvements, and not as vacant land.  Future planned use has no affect on the present use and market value.

The almost $600,000 that the assessor dropped off the value of the property means that all property owners in Shorewood pay more in taxes to make up the difference.

Also when the TIF district does their calculations on the increase of value on the property, they will have an extra cushion of $600,000 that will go to the TIF and not to the schools, county, MATC, etc ......  which again will be taxes shifted from that property to other property owners in Shorewood.

Following are the assessments for the Sherburn property for the past few years, applying the applicable State Equalizers:

Sherburn                                      Land                           Improvements                    Total

2004                                           474,000                        1,627,240                         2,101,240

2005                                           507,900                         2,250,282                        2,758,182

2006                                           530,425                         2,350,081                        2,880,506

2007                                          2,282,447                       00000000                         2,282,447

                      This is a drop in the assessment of $598,059  which equals a 21% drop in value !!

HERE IS A COPY OF THE ACTUAL TAX REPORT THAT STEVE REQUESTED I POST

                    WHAT DO YOU THINK?               YOUR COMMENTS ARE APPRECIATED !

According to property tax information available on the internet, the property at 3907-09 N Sherburn, which is one of the parcels for the Sunrise Development that the Village Board is planning on funding for $800,000 plus has changed dramatically for 2007.

The past assessments for the Sherburn property had a separate assessment for the land and a separate assessment for the improvements (buildings) which is the normal breakdown, and is the way that the property at 1111 E Capitol (Riverbrook Restaurant) is assessed.

Following are the assessments for the Sherburn property for the past few years, applying the applicable State Equalizers:

Sherburn                                      Land                           Improvements                    Total

2004                                           474,000                        1,627,240                         2,101,240

2005                                           507,900                         2,250,282                        2,758,182

2006                                           530,425                         2,350,081                        2,880,506

2007                                          2,282,447                       00000000                         2,282,447

                      This is a drop in the assessment of $598,059  which equals a 21% drop in value !!

                      (note: the 1111 E Capitol Dr property had a decrease in its assessment of about 4%)

• Is this the only property in Shorewood that has dropped in value by 21% ?
• Why is the assessment no longer broken down into its parts ?
• What implications does this have for the proposed Sunrise Development ?
•  Inquiring Minds Want to Know !!

                                     Do you Know ?            Do you have any Comments ?