Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Commercial Property Assessments topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Kenosha Board of Review upholds assessor valuations in two commercial appeals after debate over comparables and cap rates
Summary
After hearing testimony from property owners and the assessor’s office, the Kenosha Board of Review upheld the assessor’s valuations in two commercial appeals — one involving an industrial building (owner argued condition and asbestos remediation justify a steep reduction) and another involving a bank branch (owner argued income/lease-capitalization and recent branch sales support a lower value).
The Kenosha Board of Review upheld the assessor’s valuations in two separate commercial property appeals after extended testimony and technical debate over comparables, cap rates and condition-related adjustments.
In the first case, the board considered an appeal by the owner of a multi-tenant industrial building (North Shore Trucking and Distribution LLC). Owner Terry Van Atwater II testified that sections of the second floor collapsed late in 2023, that asbestos remediation and structural repair estimates total roughly $173,000 for the second floor and another $43,000 for exterior parking work, and that a 2023 bank-ordered appraisal valued the property at about $1.5 million. Van Atwater asked the board to reduce the 2025 valuation to roughly $1.1–$1.15 million, saying the building is "nowhere near worth 2,600,000" in light of condition problems. The assessor’s witness, Michael Rusinski of the city assessor’s office, said the office conducted a field review in June 2025, found the building largely usable, and defended the assessment using a sales-comparison (tier 2) approach: "the current assessment of the subject property at $20.18 per square foot is supported by the tier 2 sales comparison approach," he told the board. After deliberation the board voted to uphold the assessor’s valuation.
The second appeal concerned a former branch bank at 7535 Pershing Boulevard. Todd Baron, the property owner’s valuation consultant, presented both an income-capitalization (tier 3) analysis based on the actual lease ($118,225 annual rent) and tier-2 sales comparables (branch sales). Using market sources (CoStar, RealtyRates, RERC) Baron applied an 8.5% cap rate and calculated an income-based value of about $1.255 million; he told the board the owner requests $1,260,000. City appraiser Greg Redmond Jr. objected to several owner-submitted comparables (one was a land sale; others appeared to be vacant or 'dark' sales) and argued that single-tenant bank properties trade at materially lower cap rates (around 4.8% in net-lease market data) than the owner used. Redmond said the assessor relied on sales comparables consistent with the Wisconsin Property Assessment Manual and that the evidence supports the current assessment. After questioning and deliberation the board again voted to affirm the assessor’s valuation.
What was contested: The parties debated whether sale-leaseback transactions and long-term leases distort comparability, whether CoStar listings accurately reflect a comp’s improved status (vs. vacant land or later redevelopment), the appropriate cap rate to apply for bank branches, and how to factor condition-related deductions and unrecorded basement area into market value.
Board outcome and next steps: For both contested properties the board made motions (citing Wisconsin statute 70.4798) to uphold the assessor’s valuation; roll-call votes were recorded as affirmative and each motion carried. Staff will issue written determinations to the parties explaining findings of fact and the board’s reasoning.
Why it matters: The cases underscore recurring technical disputes in commercial assessments — particularly the selection of comparable sales, the choice of cap rates for different single-tenant property types, and how to treat property condition and unrecorded spaces (basement area) — all of which materially affect taxable values.
