70.365 Notice of changed assessment. When the assessor assesses any taxable real property, or any improvements taxed as personal property under s. 77.84 (1), and arrives at a different total than the assessment of it for the previous year, the assessor shall notify the person assessed if the address of the person is known to the assessor, otherwise the occupant of the property. However, the assessor is not required to provide notice under this section if land is classified as agricultural land, as defined in s. 70.32 (2) (c) 1g., for the current year and previous year and the difference between the assessments is $500 or less. If the assessor determines that land assessed under s. 70.32 (2r) for the previous year is no longer eligible to be assessed under s. 70.32 (2r), and the current classification under s. 70.32 (2) (a) is not undeveloped, agricultural forest, productive forest land, or other, the assessor shall notify the person assessed if the assessor knows the person's address, or otherwise the occupant of the property, that the person assessed may be subject to a conversion charge under s. 74.485. Any notice issued under this section shall be in writing and shall be sent by ordinary mail at least 15 days before the meeting of the board of review or before the meeting of the board of assessors in 1st class cities and in 2nd class cities that have a board of assessors under s. 70.075, except that, in any year in which the taxation district conducts a revaluation under s. 70.05, the notice shall be sent at least 30 days before the meeting of the board of review or board of assessors. The notice shall contain the amount of the changed assessment and the time, date, and place of the meeting of the local board of review or of the board of assessors. However, if the assessment roll is not complete, the notice shall be sent by ordinary mail at least 15 days prior to the date to which the board of review or board of assessors has adjourned, except that, in any year in which the taxation district conducts a revaluation under s. 70.05, the notice shall be sent at least 30 days prior to the date to which the board of review or board of assessors has adjourned. The assessor shall attach to the assessment roll a statement that the notices required by this section have been mailed and failure to receive the notice shall not affect the validity of the changed assessment, the resulting changed tax, the procedures of the board of review or of the board of assessors or the enforcement of delinquent taxes by statutory means. After the person assessed or the occupant of the property receives notice under this section, if the assessor changes the assessment as a result of the examination of the rolls as provided in s. 70.45 and the person assessed waives, in writing and on a form prescribed or approved by the department of revenue, the person's right to the notice of the changed assessment under this section, no additional notice is required under this section. The secretary of revenue shall prescribe the form of the notice required under this section. The form shall include information notifying the taxpayer of the procedures to be used to object to the assessment. The form shall also indicate whether the person assessed may be subject to a conversion charge under s. 74.485.

History: 1977 c. 418; 1981 c. 20; 1983 a. 490; 1991 a. 248; 1997 a. 237; 2007 a. 210; 2013 a. 228; 2019 a. 2.

Under s. 74.37 (4), a taxpayer must challenge an assessment in front of the board of review before filing an excessive assessment claim, unless the taxing authority failed to provide a notice of assessment under circumstances where notice was required. Under s. 70.365, a notice of assessment is required only when the property's assessed value has changed. After reading these statutes, it should have been clear to the taxpayer that: 1) because it did not receive a notice of assessment, its property's assessed value for 2011 would be unchanged from 2010; and 2) if the taxpayer wanted to challenge the 2011 assessment, it needed to object before the board of review. These requirements did not violate the taxpayer's rights to due process. Northbrook Wisconsin, LLC v. City of Niagara, 2014 WI App 22, 352 Wis. 2d 657, 843 N.W.2d 851, 13-1322.