*1 (97 CV 438J) Albright, Shirley Ahrens, Robert Richard Ahrens, Shirley Albright, Allen, Allen, Nicholas Barbara Anderson, Margaret Amell, Arnold Allen, June Ann Dolores Augustyniak, Anderson, John Loraine Augustyniak, Bates, Bates, Milton Helen Robert Bear, Bear, Karen Michael Bauer, Bauer, David Gail Benz, Black, Bellettiere, Otto Glen Bellettiere, Pat Blanchard, Black, Blanchard, Jane Melaine Edward Nancy Blazyk, Kathy Bolstad, Bolstad, Jim Nordine Virginia Boswell, Booker, Robert Booker, Diana Mary Kathy Brake, Brake, Boszko, Donald Boszko, Mary Brueggeman, Brueggeman, Fred Ann Albert Rosemary Campbell, Burrow, Wallace Burrow, Gary Clark, Clark, Childers, Robert Ilona Donald Lyla Curry, Curry, Dahlke, Dahlke, Donald Sandra Emery DeRosier, M.A. DiMar DeRosier, Luvern Duessing, Draws, Dean cantonio, Thomas Vernon Farmer, Eveland, Kathleen Eveland, Donna Lewis Finger, Finger, Fisher, Robert Farmer, Louis Loretta Mary Foley, Foley, Lou Charles Fisher, Mike Jean Foudray, Milly Foudray, Franke, Neff, Diane Bill Wayne Fritz, Gauer, Frantz, John Paul Frantz, Janet
Sandy Gehrt, Gehrt, Antonino Gauer, Gene Jane Giardina, Giardina, Giardina, Frank Donald Rose Ginchoff, Goff, Kenneth Ginchoff, Patricia Sandra Gray, Gray, Gross, Gross, Wilbur Jane Richard Jane Gruspier, Gruner, Joe
Groth, Groth, Lois Caroline Gruspier, Gurholt, Hanlon, Alice Donna Robert Shirley Hefka, Hefka, Donald Hanlon, William Gail Mary Hill, Hill, K.
Heidner, Heidner, Helen Jack Hinchley, Hinchley, Marge Hoefs, Darwin Edward Judy Philip Hoefs, Hoke, Bill Hoke, Howard, Rita Howard, Helen Huber, Huber, Albert Arlene Dean *2 Jinny Craig Hughes, Huffstutler, Huffstutler, Sandra Hughes, Hughes, Hughes, Terry Edward Marlene Hurm, Hurm, Jendal, Susan Lenard Jendal, W. Edith Mary Herman L. Johnson, Kane, Edward Kaszubow Maryellen ski, Kostakos, Steven Kozina, Francis Kruszynski, Kruszynski, Kozina, Walter Loretta Joseph Kucher, Kucher, LaPlant, Ruth Elaine Wil Timothy Linde, Liv, liam Liv, Christine Mike Lockard, Ralph Lockard, Tina Lowe, Richard Lowe, Dawn Lytle, Lytle, Lussier, Lussier, Theresa James Rita Matijevich, Mason, Donald Mason, Barbara Marshall Mayer, Betty Mayer, McCarthy, C. James James McCarthy, Evelyn Elizabeth McGraw, Albert McGraw, McGuire, Thomas McIntosh, Howard Rosetta McIntosh, Meinzer, William A. Marion Joseph Melzer, Michalowski, Michalowski, Rose Raymond Murphy, Murphy, Mysliwiec, Lillian Walter Mysliwiec, Negus, Negus,
Marcia Clarence Imelda Nelson, Nickel, Niemann, Edwin Carl Jack Linda Niemann, Obukowicz, Obukowicz, Marion Grace Olson, Patricia Parsons, Parsons, Michael Linda Craig Peterson, Thomas Peterson, Pearson, Diane Pearson, Peterson, Peterson, JoAnn Ruth Melvin Wil Pflughaupt, Caryl Pflanz, liam Pflanz, Jackie Leonard Pflughaupt, Phillips, Carolyn Phillips, Wallace Phillip Pierce, Donald Pierce, Piotrowski, Jeanne Piejda, Mary Piejda, Piotrowski, Deborah Leonard Kathryn Joyce Pluta, Pluta, Proctor, Brian Homer Proctor, Rausch, Renaud, Michael Richard Vincenette Wayne Riley,
Renaud, Rice, Rice, Dolores John Riley, Rippberger, Annette Norman Barbara Rippberger, Rogers, Eugene Romanski, Dale Ilene Hugh Ryan, Romanski, Rother, Schimka, James Carl Nancy Schultz, Schmidt, Clarence Schmidt, Roman Joyce Schultz, Schultz, Harriet T. Schultz, Warren Shelley, George Schurmann, Schumert, Lemke Glenn Gary Shulz, Short, Shulz, Carol Short, Rosa Robert George Simmons, Sims, C. Simmons, Lillian Louis D. Ray Staley, Solner, Smith, Ronald Jr., E. Marvin Staley, Beverly Stefaniak, Stefaniak, Frank Londine Joseph Szamlewski, Sulaver, Sulaver, Milan Corinne Wesley Szamlewski, Tanner, Carmelia Tan Barbara Theis, Tivador, Doris ner, Theis, Jean Martin Ronald Josephine Stephen Tobolic, Ulam, Charles Tivador, Joyce Lloyd Wallestad, Ulam, Wallestad, David Weinmann, Weinmann, Madeline Weber, Thomas Whitney, Whitney, Harry Wirt, Jr., Robert Donna Marilyn Jyles Lynn Sr., Wirt, Womack, Wirt, Robert Mary Wright, Wright, Jerome Womack, J. Hubert *3 Fay Young Anthony Zappia, Young, Plaintiffs-
Appellants,† v. Defendant-Respondent. Fulton, Town of 303J) (96 CV Shirley Albright, Ahrens, Richard Robert Ahrens, Shirley Albright, Allen, Allen, Barbara Nicholas Anderson, Lor Allen, Amell, June Ann Arnold Dolores Margaret Augustyniak, Anderson, John raine Augustyniak, Bates, Bates, Milton Helen Robert Bauer, Bauer, Bear, Bear, Karen Otto Gail David Blazyk, Kathy Black, Benz, Black, Melaine Glen Nancy Booker, Bolstad, Bolstad, Jim Diana Nordine Kathy Virginia Booker, Boswell, Boszko, Robert granted. to review †Petition Mary Brueg Boszko, Brake, Brake, Donald Albert geman, Mary Brueggeman, Burrow, Ann Fred Rosemary Campbell, Burrow, Wallace Donald Gary Curry, Childers, Clark, Clark, Robert Ilona San Curry, Lyla Emery Dahlke, Dahlke, dra Donald DeRosier, DeRosier, DiMarcantonio, M.A. Luvern Duesing, Draws, Farmer, Thomas Vernon Lewis Finger, Finger, Farmer, Kathleen Louis Loretta Foudray, Milly Fisher, Fisher, Robert Jean Charles Foudray, Wayne Neff, Franke, Frantz, Bill Diane Sandy Frantz, Fritz, Gauer, Gauer, Janet John Paul Gehrt, Gehrt, Giardina, Gene Jane Antonino Rose Frank Giardina, Giardina, Ginchoff, Donald Patricia Gray, Gray, Ginchoff, Goff, Sandra Kenneth Jane Gross, Gross, Groth, Groth, Richard Jane Lois Wilbur Gruspier, Gruspier, Gurholt, Joe Alice Donna Robert Shirley Hanlon, Hanlon, Hefka, Hefka, Gail William Mary Hill, Heidner, Heidner, Donald Helen Jack K. Hinchley, Marge Hinchley, Hill, Edward Darwin Judy Philip Hoefs, Hoefs, Hoke, Hoke, Bill Rita Howard, Howard, Huber, Huber, Helen Arlene Albert Jinny Hughes, Huffstutler, Huffstutler, Dean Edward Hughes, Hughes, Hughes, Sandra Edward Marlene Terry Jendal, Hurm, Hurm, Susan Lenard Edith Mary Jendal, Johnson, Kane, Herman L. Edward Kas zubowski, Kostakos, Kozina, Steven Francis Kruszynski, Maryellen Kozina, Walter Loretta Krus zynski, Joseph Kucher, Kucher, LaPlant, Ruth Elaine Timothy Ralph Linde, Liv, Liv,
William Christine *4 Lytle, Lytle, Lussier, Lussier, Theresa James Rita Matjevich, Mason, Mason, Donald Barbara Marshall McCarthy, Mayer, Betty Mayer, James C. James McCarthy, Evelyn McGraw, Elizabeth Albert McGuire, Meinzer, A. Bur McGraw, Thomas William Joseph Melzer, Melton, Melton, ness Juanita Marion Raymond Murphy, Michalowski, Michalowski, Rose Mysliwiec, Mysliwiec, Murphy, Lillian Walter Marcia Negus, Negus, Nelson, Clarence Imelda Carl Edwin Nickel, Niemann, Niemann, Jack Linda Marion Parejko, Obukowicz, Obukowicz, Grace Willard Parsons, Parsons, Peterson, Michael Linda Thomas Peterson, Pflanz, Pflanz, Diane William Jackie Caryl Pflughaupt, Pflughaupt, Leonard Wallace Phil Carolyn lips, Phillips, Pierce, Pierce, Donald Jeanne Kathryn Pluta, Brian Pluta, Rausch, Michael Richard Wayne Renaud, Renaud, Rice, Vincenette Dolores Riley, Riley, Rippberger, Rice, John Annette Norman Romanski, Rodgers, Eugene Rippberger, Barbara Dale Hugh Ryan, Romanski, Rother, ene James Carl Il Nancy Schimka, Schmidt, Roman Schmidt, Clarence Joyce Schultz, Schultz, Schultz, Warren Harriet George Shelley, Schultz, Shumert, T. Glen Robert Gary Short, Short, Shulz, Shulz, Rosa Carol Louis D. George Simmons, Simmons, Sims, Lillian C. Jr., Ray Staley, Beverly Smith, Solner, Marvin Ronald Staley, Stefaniak, Frank Stefaniak, Londine Milan Joseph
Sulaver, Sulaver, Szamlewski, Corinne Wesley Szamlewski, Tanner, Barbara Carmelia Tan ner, Theis, Theis, Tivador, Ronald Jean Martin Doris Stephen Josephine Tivador, Tobolic, Ulam, Charles Joyce Lloyd Ulam, Wallestad, Wallestad, David Harry Whitney, Whitney, Weber, Wirt, Donna Robert Marilyn Jyles Lynn Jr., Wirt, Wirt, Womack, Robert Wright, Mary Wright, Womack, Hubert J. Jerome Young, Fay Young Anthony Zappia, Plaintiffs-
Appellants,† v. Defendant-Respondent. Fulton, Town of granted. to review †Petition
(98 422) CV Shirley Albright, Ahrens, Richard Robert Ahrens, Shirley Albright, Allen, Allen, Barbara Nicholas Allen, Amell, Anderson, June Ann Arnold Lor Dolores Margaret Augustyniak, Anderson, raine John Augustyniak, Bates, Bates, Milton Helen Robert Bauer, Bear, Bear, Michael Bauer, Gail David Karen Black, Bellettiere, Bellettiere, Benz, Pat Otto Glen Black, Blanchard, Blanchard, Jane Melanie Edward Kathy Blazyk, Nancy Bolstad, Bolstad, Jim Nordine Virginia
Booker, Booker, Boswell, Diana Robert Kathy Mary Boszko, Brake, Brake, Boszko, Donald Brueggeman, Mary Brueggeman, Ann Fred Albert Rosemary Campbell, Burrow, Burrow, Wallace Gary Clark, Childers, Clark, Donald Robert Ilona Curry, Curry, Lyla Dahlke, Dahlke, Sandra Donald
Emery DeRosier, DeRosier, Luvern M.A. DiMar Duesing, cantonio, Draws, Thomas Dean Vernon Eveland, Eveland, Farmer, Kathleen Donna Lewis Finger, Finger, Fisher, Farmer, Louis Loretta Robert Mary Foley, Foley, Fisher, Jean Mike Lou Charles Milly Foudray, Foudray, Neff, Franke, Bill Diane Wayne Gauer, Frantz, Frantz, Fritz, Janet John Paul
Sandy Gauer, Gehrt, Gehrt, Jane Antonio Gene Giardina, Giardina, Giardina, Rose Frank Donald Goff, Kenneth Ginchoff, Ginchoff, Patricia Sandra Gray, Gray, Gross, Gross, Jane Wilbur Jane Richard Gruspier, Gruner,
Groth, Groth, Lois Caroline Joe Gruspier, Hanlon, Gurholt, Alice Donna Robert Shirley Hanlon, Hefka, Hefka, Gail Donald William Mary Hill, Hill, K.
Heidner, Heidner, Helen Jack Hinchley, Marge Hinchley, Hoefs, Darwin Edward Phillip Judy Howard, Hoke, Hoke, Bill Rita Hoefs, Huber, Huber, Arlene Dean Howard, Helen Albert Jinny Craig Hughes, Huffstutler, Huffstutler, Sandra Hughes, Hughes, Hughes, Terry Edward Marlene Hurm, Hurm, Susan Lenard Jendal, Jendal, W. Edith *6 Mary Johnson, Herman L. Kane, Edward Kaszubow Maryellen ski, Kostakos, Kozina, Steven Dr. Francis Kruszynski, Kruszynski, Kozina, Walter Loretta Joseph Kucher, Kucher, LaPlant, Ruth Elaine Wil Timothy Linde, Liv, Liv, liam Christine Lockard, Mike Ralph Lockard, Tina Lowe, Lowe, Richard Dawn Lytle, Lytle, Lussier, Lussier, Theresa James Rita Matijevich, Mason, Mason, Donald Barbara Marshall Mayer, Betty Mayer, McCarthy, C. James James McCarthy, Evelyn McGraw, Elizabeth Albert McGraw, McGuire, McIntosh, Thomas Howard McIntosh, Rosetta Meinzer, William A. Burness Joseph Melton, Melton, Melzer, Juanita Marion Raymond Murphy, Michalowski, Michalowski, Rose Murphy, Mysliwiec, Mysliwiec, Lillian Walter Marcia Negus, Negus, Nelson, Clarence Imelda Edwin Carl Nickel, Niemann, Jack Niemann, Linda Marion Obukowicz, Obukowicz, Grace Olson, Patricia Willard
Parejko, Parsons, Parsons, Michael Linda Thomas Craig Peterson, Peterson, Diane Pearson, JoAnn Pear son, Peterson, Melvin Ruth Peterson, Pflanz, William Pflughaupt, Caryl Pflughaupt, Pflanz, Jackie Leonard Phillips, Carolyn Phillips, Wallace Pierce, Donald Phillip Pierce, Piotrowski, Jeanne Deborah Piotrow Piejda, Mary Piejda, ski, Leonard Pluta, Brian Kathryn Joyce Pluta, Homer Proctor, Proctor, Michael Wayne Rausch, Renaud, Richard Vincenette Renaud, Riley, Riley, Rice, Rice, Dolores John Annette Norman Rippberger, Rippberger, Rother, Barbara James Nancy Roman Schmidt, Schmidt, Schultz, Clarence Joyce Schultz, Schultz, Warren Schultz, Harriet Shelley, Lemke Schurmann, Glenn Smith, Marvin E. 130 Wesley Tanner, Tivador, Martin Tanner, Carmelia Lloyd Harry Stephen Tobolic, Weber, Tivador, Doris Whitney, Whitney, Wirt, Jr., Robert Robert Donna Lynn Marilyn Jyles Womack, Womack, Wirt, Wirt, Young, Fay Wright, Mary Wright, J. Jerome Hubert Anthony Zappia, Plaintiffs-Appellants,† Young and
v. Defendant-Respondent. Fulton, Town of Appeals Court of 19, May Submitted on 2000. Decided No. 99-2466. briefs 16, November App WI 643.) (Also reported 621 N.W.2d *7 granted. to review †Petition *10 plaintiffs-appellants,
On behalf of the the cause on the of Dianne M. and was submitted briefs Soffa Devitt, Devitt of & Russell W. Whitewater. Soffa defendant-respondent, On behalf of the the cause Meg Vergeront was submitted on the brief of ofStafford LLP, Rosenbaum Madison. Dykman, Deininger, P.J., J., and
Before William Judge. Eich, Reserve DEININGER, Ahrens, J. Richard and other of located on
numerous individually owners mobile homes County subdivision, in a
owned lots Rock dismissing appeal judgment a their action to recover by allegedly Fulton unlawful taxes levied Township. granted The trial court the sum- Town's mary judgment concluding that, if motion after even question improperly homes in classi- mobile were subject property, they fied as real would have been personal property in as the real taxes the same amount by property taxes levied the Town. We conclude that properly at issue classi- most of the mobile homes were property, and that at least one that was fied as real qualify exemption improperly did not for classified judg- personal property taxes. We thus affirm the from dismissing of the of these ment the claims owners interpret However, homes. because we statutory differently requirements exemption appealed judg- court, than did the trial we reverse part of a consideration ment in and remand for any remaining whether owners can establish exemption. entitlement to the
BACKGROUND ¶ 2. A "mobile home" is defined statute as a originally is, constructed, structure "that... or was as by any designed transported to be motor vehicle public highway designed, equipped pri- and and used marily sleeping, eating living quarters, and or is any used; additions, intended to so and be includes appurte- attachments, annexes, foundations 66.058(l)(d) (1997-98).1 nances." Wis. Mobile Stat. may property, homes Wisconsin be taxed as real or personal property, they may exempt prop- as or from be erty altogether, depending things taxes on such physical support location, their and size.
(1) home, A mobile as defined in s. *11 66.058(l)(d), improvement is an to real if it upon is connected to utilities and is set a foundation upon by land which is owned the mobile home section, In a upon owner. this mobile home is "set a if upon foundation" it is off its wheels and is set support. some other
(2) home, A mobile as defined s. in 66.058(l)(d), personal property if the land upon by which it is located is not owned the mobile home owner if upon or the mobile home is not set a foun- dation or connected to utilities. However,
Wis. Stat. 70.043. mobile homes "that are larger square prima- no than 400 feet and that are used rily temporary living quarters recreational, for
1A11references to the Wisconsin Statutes are to the 1997-98 version unless otherwise noted.
136 travel or seasonal are camping, purposes" exempted 70.111(19)(b). from taxes. WlS. STAT. general property plaintiffs "approxi- 3. The are the owners of ¶ mately separate lots" a subdivision known as 138 They Wisconsin's Rock River Leisure Estates. com- separate challenging menced three actions lawfulness of real taxes the had Town levied years on mobile homes situated on their lots for the 1995, 1996 and 1997. The three actions were consoli- parties stipulated dated, and the the facts pertaining twenty plaintiffs mobile homes of representative plaintiffs would be deemed to be of all purposes summary judgment for of the Town's motion. parties' stipulation provides 4. The the follow- ing regarding twenty plaintiffs. facts these Each of consisting them has on his or her lot a unit" a "basic originally is, "structure that designed constructed, or was as transported by any to be motor vehicle a public highway designed, equipped pri- and and used marily sleeping, eating, living quarters." The ranges area floor of these "basic units" from 372 to 420 square twenty being feet, all one of the with but square feet remain or less. Wheels on each of basic weight exceptions, units, and with three partially The units "is at least on these wheels." remaining weight of the units is borne "stabilizers" placed them, under such as cement or cinder blocks or jacks.2 units, The all reside in their basic screw owners only year-round. Most reside in them for but few do so year. two to seven months of the weight completely "is off the units' of three units *12 wheels," they by completely supported and are "stabilizers." unit, unit, however, One has no stabilizers under the basic but porch, and square-foot is caulked to a 489 screen room which footings. sits on
137 ¶ or more struc- 5. Each lot also contains "one The "additional tures in addition to the basic unit." things attached to structures" include such as decks lug nuts; units with screened rooms or basic by porches footings, units on attached to the basic caulking; standing All and free sheds. of the basic units are connected to utilities. The and taxed all of the 6. Town assessed own-
ers' basic units and additional structures improvements 1995, real and estate 1996 paid the taxes and filed claims owners with taxes, Town for the refund of "unlawful" which were litigation See 74.35. This fol- disallowed. Stat. Wis. summary judgment lowed, and the Town moved for of dismissal. The trial court concluded that a mobile home on an lot real owner's could not be taxed as majority weight unless "the of the home is support borne some other than its wheels." Nonethe- less, because the court also concluded that none of the exempt personal property mobile homes were from judgment dismissing taxes, it entered the owners' appeal judgment. claims. The owners
ANALYSIS
summary judgment
¶ 7. We review an order for
applying
novo,
de
the same standards as the trial court.
City Middleton,
737, 748,
Voss v.
162
2dWis.
470
of
(1991). Summary judgment
proper
N.W.2d 625
when
pleadings, answers,
admissions
affidavits
genuine
moving
show no
issues of material fact and the
party
judgment
May-
is entitled to
as a matter of law.
Publ'ns,
v.
Inc.,
555, 558,
nard
Port
98 Wis. 2d
(1980).
appeal largely
N.W.2d 500
present
The issues in this
statutory
questions
interpretation,
which we
*13
Martin,
also decide de novo. See Truttschel v.
208 Wis.
(Ct.
1997).
App.
361, 364-65,
2d
¶ 9. The Town that the trial court was dismissing only claims, correct in the owners' not properly did, the reason it but also because the Town improve- question in assessed the mobile homes ments to real under WlS. STAT. § 70.043(1).3 reply in that cannot The owners assert their brief we incorrectly argument the trial court entertain the Town's that 70.043(1) interpreted the Town did not WlS. STAT. because cross-appeal portion respondent, that of the court's decision. A however, may filing cross-appeal raise an issue without when that, corrected, sought raising all is the of an error .if that our de novo review of the first conclude We begin summary judgment appealed must where analysis question trial court's did—with the of whether question "set a founda- the mobile homes were they properly property, so, If taxed as real tion." were conclude that this was the case for most of the and we *14 presented homes for which facts were on sum- mobile mary judgment. that, We further conclude one "representative" mobile home which did not meet the statutory improvement prop- definition for an to real erty, subject was nonetheless not to an unlawful tax.
¶ 10. The owners concede that each of their
by the
mobile homes is situated on land owned
mobile
owner,
home
and that each is connected to utilities.
dispute
require-
Thus, there is
that two of the three
§
no
taxing
a
ments under WlS. STAT. 70.043
improvement
But,
home as an
to real
are met.
place
units,"
because wheels remain in
on the "basic
requirement
the owners claim that the final
for real
property taxation is not met—the units are not "off
[their]
upon
support."
set
some other
See
wheels and...
70.043(1).
argues
Town,
hand,
The
on the other
that
representative
all
because
but one of the
mobile homes
upon
support"
are "set
in
some other
addition to their
upon
wheels, each is "offits
and is thus
a
wheels"
"set
meaning
foundation" within the
of the statute.
We,
court,
like the trial
conclude that WlS.
¶
ambiguous
meaning
is
because its
§70.043(1)
STAT.
readily
plain language.
cannot
be determined from its
upon
foundation," i.e.,
statute's definition of "set
a
Co.,
judgment.
would sustain the
Auric v.
111
Continental Cas.
(1983).
507, 516,
words,
2d
In
Wis.
¶ 12. When the *15 a statute of ous, are turn we to to extrinsic aids such as the legislative history, scope, purpose context and of the legislative statute to determine intent. Anderson v. City ¶ Milwaukee, 18, 12, 208 Wis. 2d 25-26 of (1997) (citations omitted). legislative N.W.2d 563 The history compels reject of the statute us to the trial "majority weight" court's test. WISCONSIN STAT. part 342, 70.043 was enacted as of 1983 Act Wis. originated Legislative Special which with the Council Zoning. Committee on Mobile Home Taxation and In report legislature, Legislative its to the Council law, noted that under then current a mobile home was subject to taxation as real if the value of "addi- tions, attachments, annexes, foundations and appurtenances" equaled to the home or mobile exceeded 50% of the assessable value of Report Legislative 20 to home. Wisconsin Council No. 1983) ("R.L. (May Legislature, 24, the 1983 at 3 83-20"). report goes explain: The on to testimony
The Committee received major current defects. test under law has two "50%" First, time-consuming it is difficult and foundation, to determine the value of a assessors additions and attachments to the mobile home as a percentage the value of the mobile home itself. Second, the 50%-of-value test is not an accurate given indicator of a mobile home has taken whether and, improvement on the character of a real estate therefore, subject should be taxation as housing. is conventional (connected present three-pronged to utili-
Id. test by ties, foundation," "set a on land owned owner) mobile home was thus recommended both because it was deemed to be "a better indicator ... of given when a mobile home has taken on the character property" easily-adminis- of real and because a "more necessary." "Property 4, tered standard is See id. at Legislative Wisconsin," Taxation of Mobile Homes 1982). (July 82-10, 1, Council Staff Brief at 15 requires A13. test which an assessor to deter- weight mine much of the a how of mobile home is supported supported by wheels, its and how much is supports partially hardly other rests, on which it could easily be said to be more administered than the "50%- replaced. of-value" test it If the former test was deemed time-consuming," "difficult and is hard to see how "primary support" "50%-of-weight" or test would not be Moreover, more so. it is not clear an even how assessor *16 resulting, determination, would make the as the Town argues, large speculation in a measure of or arbitrari- history statutory language ness. The of the current
142 legislature simplify makes clear that the intended to personal-versus-real property and streamline goal determination, a that would be if thwarted we adopt interpretation. were to the trial court's By reject interpreta- token, the same we an require weight tion that would the entire of a mobile supported by home be other than its wheels before it may improvement be deemed an to real estate. This contrary legislative purpose enacting would be to the in property/personal property a real in distinction taxation of mobile homes: primary rationale under the property tax
system distinguishing for between real and per- sonal property is that personal property is more than property. real It is easier to enforce and property collect taxes which are upon levied real property than taxes upon personal which are levied property. Therefore, assessment procedures, pay- ment due dates and the remedies which are available to collect property taxes according differ to whether the property is prop- classified as real erty personal or as property. 83-20,
R.L. at 3-4.4 To conclude that a mobile home may realty weight not taxed as be until its last ounce of has been removed from its wheels would thwart legislature's goal treating of mobile homes which have improvement" "taken on the character of a real estate housing" property the same as "conventional taxa- purposes. argue tion See id. at 3. To that mobile homes such as record, most those described in this which only jacks, not rest or blocks but also have exten- example, For generally payable real estate taxes are paid. two installments and become a lien on the real estate if not Personal taxes are due in lump sum and are the personal obligation owner. *17 stationary footings, attachments on additions and
sive have in character because the owners remain "mobile" purpose them, under defies chosen to leave wheels argues, legislative and, as the Town distinction of the prop- manipulation provides opportunities for system. erty taxation Having rejected possible alternatives two contrary legislative intent, to it unreasonable and
as interpreting Wis. consider whether remains for us to 70.043(1) require § improvement a home to be taxed to mobile Stat. any part real estate whenever an to upon weight "offits wheels and ... set some other its is legisla- support" and consistent with the is reasonable purpose. First, that it is. intent and We conclude ture's upon only being a foundation" is one note that "set we subjecting requirements the mobile home to ofthree property. A home on a rented taxation as real mobile campground park excluded, is in a mobile home or lot something how little it rests on no matter how much or By token, its the same other than wheels. temporarily parked land on its owner's is home that unlikely to "connected excluded because it would be be truly storage if it in a or transient to utilities" were And, if a mobile home is on the owner's status. even temporary use, utilities for an land and connected to by may preserve sim- a unit's mobile character owner supports. ply leaving and no other Once it on its wheels beyond steps the connection to utilities the owner takes mobility, e.g., by resting the home's it to further reduce part "stabilizers," on or other it is in whole or blocks why treated, the home should not then be hard to see housing," purposes, the same as "conventional for tax legislature intended.5 as the ("The that, 83-20, R.L. at 4 Committee believed under See utilities, upon set a founda- [connection these circumstances ¶ 16. We thus conclude that home, when a mobile situated on land owned owner, its is connected to completely supported by utilities and is not wheels, its part support, but also rests in on some "other" means of support," is "offits wheels" and "set some other *18 upon and is therefore "set a foundation" within the 70.043(1). meaning § of WlS. STAT. We find this inter- pretation legislature's to be consistent with the intent purpose, by history and as evidenced statute, provides and it a reasonable and workable standard for taxpayers assessors and alike. "representative" 17. Most of the mobile homes properly by
described in the record were thus assessed improvements property the Town as to real because they part, supports rest, in whole or in on other than application their wheels. We next consider the statute to the one mobile home described in the record having support as no for the basic unit other than its by caulking wheels, but which was attached to a sub- porch, footings. stantial screen room and which sits on argues The Town that this mobile home should also be improvement deemed an to real because the supported structures attached to the basic unit "are not by wheels at all" and thus the "home is not in 'mobile' any position sense of the word." The Town's is essen- tially statutory that, because the definition of a mobile any home "includes additions, attachments, annexes, appurtenances," foundations WlS. STAT. 66.058(l)(d), any § auxiliary pre- if of these are items sent wheels, and not on the mobile home must be tion, on land owned owner] the mobile home the mobile home sufficiently permanent is that it should be taxed as is conven- housing."). tional improvement under WlS.
deemed an to real 70.043(1). disagree. § We STAT. acknowledge §
¶ 18. that WlS. STAT. 70.043 We 66.058(l)(d) § a to for definition of refers WlS. STAT. defining However, what it means "mobile home." when foundation," a to a for mobile home be "set 70.043(1) requires home "off its to be added). (emphasis It makes no sense to talk wheels" being porch an about attached deck or "offits wheels." language legis- plain implication of is that the this referring unit," lature to is the was the "basic which only have on wheels. structure would once been agree although the Town And, we with that mobile its in some home that is still "on wheels" but way attached may permanent another, structure, more be every wheels," bit that is "off its as immobile one legis- attachment to other structures is not the test the specified making lature real- has 70.043 versus-personal property distinction.
¶ then, 19. is for consider remains, What us to the owner of last-described home whether this mobile subjected he an has established that or she was to 74.35(2) "[a] permits § "unlawful tax." WISCONSIN STAT. by person aggrieved levy the and of an collection against property" unlawful tax assessed his or her to against "file claim to recover the unlawful tax the tax," taxation the district which collected the is which alleged. cause of action the owners have An "unlawful property "general respect tax" is a tax with to which 74.33(l)(a) (f) specified one or in more errors s. to were 74.35(1). specified made." Section errors are: (a) A clerical error has been made in the property in the description computation or the tax.
(b) The assessment included real property improvements did which not exist on the date under making s. 70.10 for the assessment.
(c) The property exempt by law from taxa- (2). tion, except provided as under sub.
(d) The property is not located in the taxation district for which tax roll was prepared. (e) A double assessment has been made.
(f) arithmetic, An transpositional or similar error has occurred. 74.33(1).
Wis. Stat. § alleged ¶ complaint 20. The owners in their that against taxes levied their mobile homes provided were unlawful "as in WISCONSIN STATUTE (b) (c)." 74.33(l)(a), § and If the Town committed an levying collecting property error and taxes on a wholly home that wheels, rests on its however, intentionally, erroneously, the error was that but improvement classified the mobile home as an to real property, personal property. rather than as failWe see, therefore, how error could be construed as 74.33(l)(a). § "clerical" under Neither do we believe the alleged may error be characterized as the inclusion of a property improvement real that "did not exist" on (l)(b). assessment date under The owners do not claim that their mobile homes did not exist on the assess- they date, ment but do not constitute "improvements property," per- to real but were instead 70.043(2) exempt sonal under Stat. WlS. 70.111(19)(b). from taxation under WlS. STAT. any unlawfully Thus, if mobile homes were alleged by only taxed, the owners, it could be they "exempt because were law from taxation" *20 74.33(l)(c). exempt under WlS. STAT. To be from taxa- tion, home, a 66.058," "as defined in s. must be
147 primarily square larger . . . used feet and than 400 "no camping, living quarters temporary recreational, purposes." § 70.111 or seasonal travel WlS. Stat. (19)(b). of "mobile noted, the definition And, as we have 66.058(l)(d) specifically includes in WlS. Stat. home" "any annexes, foun- attachments, additions, within appurtenances" the associated with mobile dations Dictionary terms include definitions for these home. following:6 to or that is attached "[a] structure
Addition — building predates that with another connected room, etc., building." structure"; added to a wing, "a or "something . . . that is affixed Attachment — something else"; "something attached to connected connected; bound]." [joined; attached, "[something that is such as Annex — subsidiary building "a building"; an addition to a ... building." a or an addition to * belongs that or is Appurtenance "[s]omething — something else"; "something to attached another, thing; important more subordinate accessory." adjunct; foregoing any It seems clear from the porches, like, that are attached in
rooms, decks and the any way unit" are included within the to the "basic any Thus, the area of definition of a mobile home. when determin- attached structures must be counted ing footage square Town, of a "mobile home." go step hold that however, have us a further to would any freestanding situated the floor area of structures included on same lot as a mobile home must also be exempt determining home is whether mobile when The first definition for each term is from Black's Law (7th Dictionary 1999); ed. the second is from The Random (2nd 1987). Dictionary English Language ed. House *21 70.111(19)(b). § from taxation under WlS. STAT. For support, points to the fact that some of the terms employed statutory in the definition of a mobile home enough are broad to include unattached as well as (e.g., appurtenances). attached structures annexes, Department The Town also claims that the Wisconsin (DOR) supports of Revenue Assessor's Manual this view. reject
¶ proffered interpreta- 23. We the Town's place freestanding tion that would sheds, barns and garages statutory within the definition of a "mobile Although statutory home." some of the terms in the might, standing definition of a mobile home alone, be capable supporting interpretation, of such an taken together, statutory language plainly we believe the only envisions structures that are attached or affixed to although agree the "basic Moreover, unit." we with the may Town that the DOR's assessment manual be relied interpreting as an authoritative aid in Wiscon- sin's taxation statutes,7 we do not read the advising manual as assessors to include the area of freestanding determining structures when whether a qualifies exempt mobile home status under WlS. 70.111(19)(b). The Town asserts that the man- STAT. ual "instructs assessors to count all structures on a lot determining square footage the of mobile homes." However, such an instruction is not to be found in the sections of the manual the Town cites. Rather, the manual recites that WlS. Stat. 66.058(l)(d) includes within the definition of a "any
home additions, attachments, annexes, founda- appurtenances," tions and and advises that "these square items must be included in calculation of the 7See, e.g., TDS Corp. City Madison, Realestate Inv. v. 151 (Ct. 530, 1989). 540-41, Wis. 2d 445 App. N.W.2d 53 (emphasis
footage." Manual at 15-22 Assessor's added). merely statutory quotes thus manual interpre- but does not endorse Town's broad terms contrary, very them. next sentence tation of To the assertion that in the manual undermines Town's interpretation: supports "A unit and the manual its greater square feet is not" an than attachments *22 added.) (Emphasis exempted mobile home.8 represen- Applying foregoing ¶ 25. the to the one entirely by supported mobile that is its tative home wheels, conclude that home was not we mobile 70.111(19)(b). parties exempt The under Stat. WlS. stipulated that home of a this mobile consisted basic comprising square together feet, with a screen unit room/porch 396 to unit"
"which is caulked the basic and encompasses rendering square feet, an 489 additional
8 Department Further that the of Revenue indication does freestanding properly view structures as includible when not ascertaining the under status of mobile home WlS. taxable 70.111(19)(b) following excerpt in the is found from a STAT. publication Property entitled "A Tax Guide for DOR Mobile Home Owners": my an to deter-
How should assessor measure mobile home qualifies exemption? mine if it for gross square footage to The assessor should calculate the rounded square using length the outside the nearest foot and width any The mobile home. assessor should also include the area of Only clearly and to additions attachments mobile home. .the to attached additions and attachments the recreational gross footage. square of Exam- home are included in the calculation decks, ples of additions and attachments would include attached porches, pop-out screen and rooms. Assessors should not include standing in the area calculation. free structures mobile home sheds, standing garages, Assessors should and other free assess as real home own the land or structures estate if mobile owners property they personal as if do not own land. square the countable area well in excess of feet. exempt personal Since this mobile was from home not property we, taxation, court, like the trial conclude that tax levied and collected the Town was not 74.33(1) §§ an "unlawful tax" under WlS. Stat. and 74.35. dispute that, do not owners whether realty personally,
taxed
or
the valuation of a mobile
hence,
same,
home would be the
so would the tax
upon
levied
it. See State ex rel. Keane v. Board of
(Ct. App.
Review,
584, 588,
99 Wis. 2d
¶ 27. The claim that since the owners Town noti- only levy against them fied of a their mobile homes as property, any real personal property whose were in owners homes fact exempt, proper tax
and were denied opportunity and notice the to be heard. But the record just contrary. The that shows the claim some of the exempt homes should be ruled tax 70.111(19)(b) under mobile WlS. § heard, has both here been and Stat. conclusion, trial that of the court. Our and the trial any court, that the tax on home that was
151
realty
unless
improperly
not "unlawful"
as
classified
"exempt
from
law
it was
establish that
owner can
its
levying
judicial
not constitute
taxation," also does
merely performing a
court are
the trial
a tax. We and
of
ofwhether
properjudicial
determination
function —the
by the Town.
levied
has been
tax"
an "unlawful
equal pro-
of
¶
claimed violation
The owners'
effectively deprives
ruling
"the court's
tection is that
property
[them]
classification," and
of an accurate
property
potentially
[them]
clas-
"subjects
incorrect
except
consequences."
very
But,
real
with
sifications
timing
col-
methods of
and
in the
some differences
for
opposed
property
personal
to real
taxes, as
of
lection
point
that has
to no harm
taxes, the owners
exception
any
possible
them, with the
of
befallen
may
"non-representative"
able to
be
owners
some
clas-
have been
homes should
that their
establish both
they
property,
personal
meet
and that
sified as
70.111(19)(b)
requirements
under WlS.
STAT.
twenty representative
exemption.
owners,
As to
any
non-representative
who cannot
owners
showings,
tax
they
claim that more
there is no
make these
non-exempt
paid
mobile homes because
on
was
had
than if the Town
deemed real
were
personal property.9
as
assessed them
reject
constitutional
the owners'
29. We thus
arguments
They
policy
well,
make some
claims.10
are
only "unlawful" taxes that
points out that
The Town
("If
may
WlS. STAT. 74.39
be recovered.
found to be "excessive"
paid by the
amount of taxes
that the
. . . the court determines
excessive,
be entered for
judgment shall
plaintiff is not
defendant.").
Village
v.
rely Marina Fontana
The owners also
on
*24
215,
Lake,
the "recreation and
state,
tourism industries" to our
legislature
specific
"the
assert that
has
a
chosen
(1983) for
proposition
taxing body may
the
that a
not offset the
underpayment
of tax on
piece
property against
one
of
taxes
overpaid
another,
they
on
which
claim is
of
the result
our and
Fontana is of no assis-
rulings.
holding
the trial
in
court's
The
owners,
There,
tance to
village attempted
however.
the
by
recovery
taxpayer
illegal property
avoid a
of
taxes levied on
taxpayer's
claiming
real
underpaid
estate
that
it had
legitimately
personal
taxes
due on certain
located on
premises.
similarly
the same
court
supreme
interpreted
predecessors
worded
to the statutes before us now and con-
Here, however,
improper.
cluded that such an offset
was
dispute
only
object
is over
one
taxation —the
of
owners’ mobile
Fontana does
holding
preclude
homes. The
not
Town
from
arguing in
of
defense
the taxes it levied on the mobile homes
they
subject
equal
would have been
to an
of tax if
amount
personal
the mobile
had been
rather
homes
classified as
than
See id. at
see also
v. Marinette
property.
223-24;
real
Fifield
(1885) (A
County,
532, 541,
taxpayer
62 Wis.
classification and today holding agree, our We and mobile home users." legislature's interprets applies classi- the intended and exemption does eliminate scheme—it not fication and having his or "recrea- it. If an owner to avoid her wishes improvement to real mobile home" taxed as an tional may simply estate, he elect to it in a or she locate campground land, on or it instead of owned not connect wholly supported by utilities, it to leave its wheels. or preserve eligibility exemption personal And, to for from only that it is taxes, the owner need ensure any not attached to structures whose area would cause statutory exceed size limitation the mobile home to the By square doing so, thus of 400 feet. the owner would mobility preserve her the and smallness of his or exemption prop- consequent the from home, mobile and erty legislature taxes the intended when which exemption a created tax for "recreational mobile homes." Finally, disposition
¶ 31. we must address the of "non-representative" the claims the hundred more of or argues parties' stipu- that under the owners. The Town non-representative given lation, the the owners were opportunity the to after trial court's initial decision argue exemp- come forward and their entitlement to homes, tion from taxes their mobile but for may so, none did This be have so. but we modified regarding conclusions reached the trial court what qualify exempt must be shown home personal property particular, from taxation. In the trial apparently adopted court the Town's view freestanding area on lots floor structures the owners' against square-foot must be counted the 400 limitation 70.111(19)(b), interpretation § an under Wis. STAT. rejected. any which we have On remand, therefore, "non-representative" given opportu- owner shall be nity qualifying to establish facts his or her mobile home personal property for assessment as under WlS. STAT. 70.043(2), exemption under 70.111(19)(b), interpreted as we have these provisions.
CONCLUSION ¶ 32. For the above, reasons discussed we appealed judgment part, reverse the in and we remand proceedings opinion for further consistent with this respect "non-representative" with to the owners. To recap, the mobile homes all of owners whose "basic supported entirely by units" are not properly their wheels were improvements taxed the Town as to real any "non-representative" estate. If the owner of (1) home can establish on remand both that his or her wholly qualifying basic unit wheels, rests on its thus (2) personal property purposes as for taxation; of together the total area of the unit, basic with that of any any way, structures attached to it in does not (and square "primarily exceed 400 feet that it is used temporary living quarters camping, recreational, for purposes," travel or seasonal see WlS. STAT. 70.111(19)(b)); exempt the mobile home is from tax and the Town levied and collected an tax unlawful from that owner.11 appealed judgment
¶ 33. We affirm the insofar "representative" as it dismisses the claims own- is, course, The owner still liable real for estate taxes properly levied on freestanding the lot and all structures which may it, be situated on but a refund is due for the taxes levied on exempt itself, mobile home including its attached structures. "non-representative" claims of those
ers, as well as the showings in the described make the cannot who owners party paragraph. entitled to preceding shall be Neither 809.25(l)(a)5. appeal. See WlS.STAT. in this costs part; Judgment By in affirmed the Court. — part remanded with directions. and cause reversed in (dissenting). nutshell, ¶ DYKMAN, In a P.J. 34. giving majority it does not like has concluded that legislative exemption homes to for certain mobile gives everybody qualifies, it to and therefore who exemptions principle nobody. agree I While they narrow be limited because from taxation should join majority opinion because base, I cannot the tax legislative opinion rather than its is a I conclude that judicial explain this conclusion. act. I will legislature budget 1984, the bill for In its purposes. See tax a "mobile home" defined distinguishes Act 342. Because Wisconsin 1983 Wis. personal tax in some real estate and between *27 explained a mobile contexts, the new definition when personal it real and when was home was and taxes on most real estate Wisconsin levies estate. personal property. some Mobile homes have on some many contexts, the differ- of each. In characteristics legislature the has relevant, not but because ence is exempted homes that are taxation some mobile from important. personal property, the distinction is often (1997-98)1 § a 70.043 defines when WISCONSIN Stat. personal real and when is mobile home is estate: the Statutes are to
1A11references to the Wisconsin unless otherwise noted. 1997-98 version
156 (1) home, A mobile as defined in s. 66.058(l)(d), an improvement is to real property if it is connected to upon utilities and is set a foundation upon land is by which owned the mobile home section, owner. In this a mobile home is "set upon a foundation" if it is off its wheels and is upon set some other support.
(2) home, A mobile as defined in s. 66.058(l)(d), personal property is if upon the land which it is located is not owned the mobile home if owner or the mobile home is not set a foun- dation or connected to utilities. 1991, In legislature decided
¶ to exempt small qualifying homes from personal property taxation. See 269, Wis. Act 490m. But § is not exemption available if the mobile home is realty. Wis. Stat. statute, exemption 70.111(19)(b), § "Mobile exempts: homes, 66.058, as defined in s. that are no larger than 400 feet square and that are used primarily as temporary for recrea- living quarters tional, camping, travel or seasonal purposes." 37. When it enacted 70.111(19)(b), WlS. STAT. § 70.043(1) the legislature was aware of WlS. Stat. § Wis. of 348.10(5)(c), which requires Stat.
mobile home must have at thirty-five least pounds of Both tongue weight.2 statutes were in existence when legislature enacted present version 348.10(5)(c) Wisconsin Stat. provides: (5) imposed upon The load trailers or semitrailers shall be prevent sway distributed in a manner that will side under all operation: conditions of (c) by any trailer, The load carried semitrailer or mobile positioned weight pounds home shall beso that a ofnot less than 35 imposed point towing at the center of the of attachment to the parked vehicle when on a level surface. *28 70.111(19)(b). legislature knew that § Thus, the weight legally all of its rest have home could not mobile exempt home which Moreover, an mobile on its wheels. weight be ridicu- on its wheels would all of its carried forty-foot-long teeter- like a would behave lous—it majority's that "an owner rationalization totter. The by simply may preserve leav- character a unit's mobile may supports" ing true, be and no other it on its wheels hair-raising exper- so is in for an owner who does but night getting up in the to visit iences when legislature that I find it doubtful bathroom. intended this. majority
¶ has concluded is that no 38. What can owner's real estate be home located on its mobile exempted disconnects taxation unless the owner from majority The from its utilities. the mobile home requires hun- it one reaches this conclusion because weight percent carried home's to be dred of the mobile exemption applies. But no such on its wheels before 348.10(5)(c), § all Under WlS. STAT. home exists. mobile thirty-five pounds at least homes must have mobile something weight wheels, other than their rest on their thirty-five majority pounds that the uses disqualify 400-square-foot less, or landowner- all per- utility-connected occupied, homes from mobile property tax-exempt status. sonal legislature have intended to The must personal 70.111(19)(b). exempt homes from some mobile taxes when it enacted WlS. STAT. 70.043(1) legislature and the aware of WlS. STAT. was significance mobile homes of the distinction between personal property and homes that are that are legislature to tax small real estate. Had the utility-connected wanted located on their own- mobile homes easily done so in estate, it could have ers' real *29 70.111(19). only explana- § it not. The But did rational exemption applies is that it to all small tion qualifying homes located on their owners' real mobile estate. nothing ¶ 40. There is in WlS. STAT. 70.111(19)(b) suggesting exemption carefully
§ an apply crafted so as to to no one who the owned upon utility-connected which his or her mobile home placed. just gleaned concept would be That cannot be 70.111(19)(b). § face, from the words of On its 70.111(19)(b) applies placed homes mobile their owners' real estate. It defies common sense to legislature deny conclude that the exemption had a secret towish they all if to mobile homes were connected to utilities and located on their owners' land. But that majority opinion accomplishes. is what the legislature presumed ¶ 41. The is also to use English language in words of the their normal 990.01(1); ordinary sense. See WlS. STAT. State v. (1980). 347, 356, 288 94 Wis. 2d N.W.2d 786 Ehlenfeldt, ambiguous concept. "Offits is not a or wheels" difficult Anyone changed who has a car tire or watched a tire being changed fully significance is aware of the touching touching ground. the the If between tire or not touching ground, remains it cannot be the tire changed. space If there is a between the tire and the ground, If do the vehicle is off that wheel. all four tires ground, the vehicle is off its wheels. If not touch they interpret phrase touch, it is on its wheels. To majority has done to mean "on its "offits wheels" as just not make sense. Under this defini wheels" does every traveling tion, highways or trailer on our mobile home doing
is so "offits wheels." easily concept ¶ 42. "Off its wheels" is a deter- they by mined assessors. All have to do is bend down space home's If there is between mobile and look. ground, not, "offits wheels." If there is tires and the Interpreting its the statute then it is not "off wheels." hardship for assessors. will cause no written majority explains its decision not- 43. The ing: homes such as most of those argue
To *30 record, only not rest described in this which also have extensive additions jacks, blocks or but stationary remain footings, and attachments on in the owners have cho- "mobile" character because them, purpose sen to wheels under defies the leave and, legislative distinction as the Town argues, opportunities manipulation for provides system. taxation agree exemptions I that from can 44. taxation people's exemptions. behavior; alter that is true of all People exemption an will tailor their actions who want exemption. Many people to fit the seek tax advice on advantage provi- to take of the income tax code's how illegal, immoral, or unethical. The sions. This is not majority qualifying "manipu- a views a mobile home as may system." be, lation of the taxation That it legislature policy has made the decision that but majority homes distress the are still mobile which exempt personal property homes, and still from mobile 66.058(l)(d) taxation. WISCONSINStat. describes a any home as the vehicle itself "and includes additions, annexes, attachments, foundations adopt appurtenances." I no reason for a court to see exemptions that tax are not available to rationalization actively them, that constitutes those who seek because "manipulation."
¶ I would read the words of the statutes they say. language involved for what Their is neither complicated language If nor technical. that results in exemption legislature taxation, an from so be it. If the policy regarding feels that a different small mobile appropriate, easily adopt home taxation is it can policy. probably agree majority's new I with the view exemption landowner-occupied, small, that an ity-connected util- inappropriate public
mobile homes is policy. unwilling judicially repeal But I am the stat- granting exemption, part. ute Therefore, even I respectfully dissent.