Ronald L. Collison v. City of Milwaukee Board of Review, 960 N.W.2d 1

Collison owned downtown Milwaukee property (vacant former dry-cleaner building plus ~12–15-space parking lot); 2012 tank removal and soil testing revealed petroleum and perc contamination; extent and cleanup cost unknown.
For 2016 the City assessed fair market value at $31,800, assigning the building no value and using the income approach based on parking-lot income (historical rentals).
Collison appealed, arguing contamination makes the parcel unsellable (value $0) and that the City’s Environmental Contamination Standards (MECS/CMECS) improperly require a Phase II report, shifting the burden to owners, in conflict with Wis. Stat. § 70.32(1m).
The Board of Review, the circuit court, and the court of appeals upheld the assessment; courts concluded the assessor considered contamination and Collison failed to present evidence to support a zero valuation.
Wisconsin Supreme Court affirmed: it held that valuing the property by income based on its highest-and-best use as a parking lot amounted to "considering" the impairment required by § 70.32(1m); the court declined to decide the MECS statutory challenge because the assessor did not rely on MECS here.
Dissent argued the appraisal did not quantify or reduce value for contamination, that MECS are unlawful in shifting burdens to taxpayers, and would have remanded for an appraisal that explicitly considers impairment.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the assessor "considered" impairment from contamination under Wis. Stat. § 70.32(1m)	Collison: assessor ignored contamination's effect and should have reduced value (property effectively unsellable; value = $0).	City: assessor recognized contamination and, consistent with WPAM/Markarian tiers, selected highest/best use (parking) and used income approach; burden on owner to prove extent/costs.	Court: Affirmed — using income approach to value highest/best use as parking lot constituted "considering" impairment; Collison failed to present evidence to overcome the assessment.
Whether MECS conflict with § 70.32(1m) and unlawfully require Phase II evidence	Collison: MECS unlawfully shift burden to owner to prove contamination and cleanup costs.	City: assessor testified he would accept any verifiable expert evidence (not only Phase II); MECS not determinative here.	Court: Not reached/declined — issue not ripe because assessor did not rely on MECS to deny consideration.

Metro. Assocs. v. City of Milwaukee, 379 Wis. 2d 141, 905 N.W.2d 784 (2018) (explains § 70.32 tiered valuation methodology)
State ex rel. Markarian v. City of Cudahy, 45 Wis. 2d 683, 173 N.W.2d 627 (1970) (establishes tiered sales/comparison/income-cost hierarchy)
Ottman v. Town of Primrose, 332 Wis. 2d 3, 796 N.W.2d 411 (2011) (describes certiorari review of municipal/administrative decisions)
Sausen v. Town of Black Creek Bd. of Rev., 352 Wis. 2d 576, 843 N.W.2d 39 (2014) (limits scope of certiorari review and standards)
State v. Kalal, 271 Wis. 2d 633, 681 N.W.2d 110 (2004) (statutory interpretation principles)
Allright Props., Inc. v. City of Milwaukee, 317 Wis. 2d 228, 767 N.W.2d 567 (2009) (principle that real estate is valued at highest and best use)