County treasurer outlines foreclosure timeline and penalties; residents press for transparency in property sales

Milwaukee County staff briefed the committee on year‑to‑date county property sales and the foreclosure process, answering repeated questions from supervisors and members of the public about timelines, penalties and how the county selects buyers for foreclosed property sales.

Economic development staff presented a property inventory and said staff are preparing several sites for disposition, reporting 12 sales year‑to‑date (seven residential homes and five vacant or commercial parcels). Emily Strep, project manager in economic development, said title searches are underway for a list of foreclosure candidates the treasurer provided and that questions on foreclosure timing should be directed to the treasurer’s office.

Treasurer’s briefing on process and penalties

Milwaukee County Treasurer David Collin explained that state law requires a statutory delay between the county receiving unpaid tax bills and filing foreclosure actions. He said county practice is to wait the period required by statute (two years from when the county acquires the unpaid tax bill) before commencing foreclosure litigation and that COVID‑era moratoria and individual legal situations can delay cases further. Collin also explained that a large portion of balances on delinquent accounts is made up of penalty and interest: “that money goes to the county bottom line,” he said, and provided a five‑year roll‑forward showing roughly $11 million collected in penalty and interest above principal in recent years.

Supervisors and public raise concerns

Supervisors pressed the treasurer on why some properties remain on the list for many years. Supervisor Shea described constituent cases where properties remained delinquent for a decade and asked why the county had not acted sooner. Collin cited multiple causes — bankruptcies, guardianships, court adjournments and COVID moratoria — and said staff prioritize cases based on balance and community harm. He said the county aims to process a manageable batch of foreclosures a few times a year so economic development can address property cleanout and reuse.

A resident, Margaret Atwood, told the committee she bid $150,000 cash on a foreclosed house for her daughter but lost to a lower offer that county records show included contingencies; she said county staff told her preference was given to a first‑time homebuyer and questioned how the county applied that preference and whether the sale process was transparent. Emily Strep and treasurer staff explained the county now uses a public buyer‑intent form and an equity factor sheet that awards points for meeting appraised value, having no contingencies, owner‑occupancy, first‑time buyer status, homebuyer counseling, proof of funds and a signed buyer affidavit. County staff said offers that meet appraised value are scored by those non‑personal community benefit factors, and ties are broken by price.

Officials asked for greater municipal cooperation

Treasurer Collin said county staff had emailed municipal officials seeking additional information on problem properties before the county files foreclosure petitions but that many municipalities did not respond; he encouraged supervisors to coordinate with municipal officials if there are specific properties of community concern.

Why it matters

The briefing clarified the legal and procedural reasons foreclosures can take multiple years and explained how penalty and interest revenue flows to the county. It also surfaced resident concerns about perceived fairness in the sale process and prompted staff to confirm the county’s current buyer‑selection criteria and to commit to adding more breakdowns and explanation to future reports.

Next steps

County staff said they will share more detailed breakdowns of penalty vs. principal in property inventory reports going forward and will accept follow‑up information from supervisors and municipal officials about properties they wish to prioritize for review.