Man Overpays Taxes for 22 Years, Gets Refund

Council's move called 'unprecedented.'

The year was 1988 when the state of Wisconsin acquired a portion of two properties in the 9700 block of S. Howell Ave.

One of those properties belonged to Steve Bocek. The other was owned by a neighbor, but would be obtained by Bocek in 1996. 

In 2011 - a full 23 years since the state bought part of those properties - the Oak Creek resident realized that tax records didn't reflect the state's purchase. The never received the information from the state and had been charging Bocek as if his land was bigger than it was.

In other words, Bocek has been overpaying taxes since 1988.

Bocek then asked for and received relief from the Oak Creek Common Council, which earlier this week voted unanimously to refund taxes already paid.

The council's move is unprecedented, City Attorney Larry Haskin said. Further, aldermen didn't legally have to do it since so much time has passed. According to state statute, the burden is on the taxpayer to file a claim for unlawful taxes. Bocek had no recourse if the council voted against refunding him.

But it did, and Bocek will get an estimated $4,633. It would have been more, but tax bills only go back to 1994.

To Bocek, 72 years old, retired and legally blind, the refund means a lot.

"That's a lot of money to me," he said. "I've been retired for 22 years. I'm not no kid no more. I pay the bills, I pay my taxes quarterly so I don't have a debt."

How it happened

City officials were somewhat incredulous that it took this long for Bocek to realize his property was not as big as tax records indicated. He appeared at an open book meeting with the city assessor in 2004 and again in 2007, but the mistake still slipped by.

It was only after Bocek and his son took out a tape measure about four months ago when they realized that his alleged property line was in his neighbor's house.

"I was planning on building a house maybe this year or next year on the empty lots. I got a ruler and started measuring with my son and said, 'What the hell's going on here?" he said. "We're in the middle of Ron's house."

Bocek, a 36-year resident of Oak Creek, said that the state told him it had no record of even buying the property. No receipt. No anything. 

Mayor Dick Bolender said something similar happened to him on his property when the state took land for Highway 100. Then, too, the state did not inform the city about the acquisition but Bolender caught the error in time, he said.

Doing the 'right thing'

Given the passage of time, it was completely within the discretion of the Common Council to refund Bocek the money, Haskin said.

But aldermen said the city had a moral obligation to do so.

"I think it's the only right thing to do to reimburse the man," Alderman Dan Bukiewicz said. 

"If Oak Creek is going to be a friendly place to live," Alderman Dan Jakubczyk said, "then I think the fair thing to do would be to return that money to him."

Mark B September 09, 2011 at 02:25 PM
In 2002, my wife and I finished off our basement adding living space and another bathroom. We did not add another bedroom because that would have required another exit such as an egress window. We pulled all the necessary permits and upon completion, had the improvement assessed by the city. Unknown to us, the assessor classified our improvement as "finished basement living area" rather than a "rec room". The impact of this was considerable. Instead of having the 750 sq ft assessed at $10/ sq ft for a rec room ($7500), we were assessed at $30/sq ft (22500) for a FBLA classification. It wasn't until another reassessment that seemed overly high 5 years later that we investigated and found the error. I photographed the outside of the house and submitted it to the assessor to prove we had no other means of egress and the basement improvement was changed to the "rec room" classification. I was by law, only able to recoup 2 years of the 5 years of overpayment due to the statute in the state law governing "palpable errors".
CowDung September 09, 2011 at 06:33 PM
At least they were nice enough to reclassify your space as 'rec room' instead of fining you for having 'basement living area with no egress code' violations...
Mark B September 09, 2011 at 06:51 PM
Why would they have fined me? Upon assessment of my basement improvement, they were the ones who improperly classified it as FBLA rather than "rec-room". I have no bedroom down there so I didn't need an egress as no one is sleeping in the basement.
CowDung September 09, 2011 at 09:59 PM
They had it listed as a 'living area' and you showed them an outside pic that showed that you didn't have the egress required for a living area... I thought it would have been 'safer' to provide an inside pic showing that it wasn't really a 'living area'...
Mark B September 10, 2011 at 05:35 PM
They were the one who screwed up the classification of my basement improvement. The assessor was in the basement when the job was completed to see the extent of the improvement and calculate the increased property value. There was no egress at that time nor was there another bedroom. Not sure why he classified the improvement as FBLA. I had to take pictures to prove that I was correct and the original assessment from 5 years earlier was wrong


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »