Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procedural Waiver And Deadline topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Homeowner's late objection denied as Pewaukee board cites 48‑hour filing rule
Summary
A Pewaukee homeowner, Edwardine Magnus, asked the Board of Review to accept a late notice to object after missing mailed notices while out of town; the board concluded Magnus did not show good cause under the 48‑hour rule and denied the waiver, with one member recusing.
A Pewaukee homeowner who said she missed mailed notices while traveling asked the Board of Review on May 6 to accept a late notice to object; the board denied the request, concluding the statutory 48‑hour filing window had passed.
Edwardine Magnus, identified herself at the meeting and told the board she had been out of town and did not receive mailed notices in time. Magnus said, “I really don't have a legal jargon, just the homeowner,” and asked that the board still accept her paperwork. Staff confirmed assessment notices were mailed on April 20 and discussed the 48‑hour requirement for filing a notice of intent to object, which the board said had a cutoff the Monday before the meeting. Board members examined when Magnus said she left town and when mail was delivered, and several members expressed skepticism that postal delay alone established good cause.
Board discussion focused on whether circumstances were “beyond the person's immediate control” and whether the facts supported a discretionary waiver. A board member moved that the board not accept the request for an extension; another seconded the motion. One member recused from the vote, citing a 30‑year family friendship with the petitioner. After a voice vote — recorded in the transcript as 'Aye' and then 'Motion is carried' — staff told Magnus the board had decided not to accept the late filing.
Why it matters: the 48‑hour notice requirement is statutory and is used to ensure timely processing and scheduling of objections. Board members referenced guidance from the Department of Revenue handbook when discussing standards for good cause.
What was next: Magnus protested the decision from the audience after the board ruled; staff will record the denial in the minutes and notify the petitioner. The transcript shows that other objections and stipulations will proceed on the schedule the board confirmed, including a hearing on May 11 for JM Tax Advocates and additional dates to be arranged.
Attribution note: where speakers did not give full names on the record, this article attributes remarks by role (e.g., Assessor, Chair, Committee member) consistent with meeting practice and the transcript’s explicit identifications.
