Reasonableness of repair.
If a municipal governing body, building inspector, or other designated officer of a municipality determines that the estimated cost of repairs of an insured dwelling does not exceed 70 percent of the insurance policy limits of the insured dwelling, the repairs are presumed reasonable.
Nothing in this subsection shall preclude the governing body, building inspector, or other designated officer of a municipality from ordering the owner of an insured dwelling to make the building safe and sanitary under sub. (1) (b)
This subsection does not apply to any of the following:
A dwelling that the governing body, building inspector, or other designated officer of a municipality has determined to be in imminent danger of structural collapse and for which the property owner has failed to appropriately secure and limit access.
An insured dwelling that is the subject of a notification provided to the governing body, building inspector, or other designated officer of a municipality by an insurer pursuant to par. (b) 3.
The 30-day time limitation within which an owner may apply to the circuit court for an order restraining a municipality from razing a building applicable to s. 66.05 (3) [now sub. (1) (h)], requires an application to the court within the 30-day period. Service of the application or resultant order need not be made within that period, although a hearing on the merits of the controversy must be held within 20 days. Berkoff v. Milwaukee Department of Building Inspection & Safety Engineering, 47 Wis. 2d 215
, 177 N.W.2d 142
The owner has no option to repair buildings ordered razed when the cost of repair would be unreasonable, i.e., exceeding 50 percent of value. Appleton v. Brunschweiler, 52 Wis. 2d 303
, 190 N.W.2d 545
The statute only creates a presumption that repairs in excess of 50 percent are unreasonable; the property owner has the burden to show that the presumption is unreasonable in the particular case. Posnanski v. City of West Allis, 61 Wis. 2d 461
, 213 N.W.2d 51
The trial court exceeded its authority in modifying a building inspector's order to raze a building by instead ordering repairs necessary to make the building fit for human habitation. Modification of an inspector's order must be made in light of the purpose of protecting the public from unsafe buildings. Donley v. Boettcher, 79 Wis. 2d 393
, 255 N.W.2d 574
Persons affected by a raze order have an exclusive remedy under s. 66.05 (3) [now sub. (1) (h)]. Gehr v. Sheboygan, 81 Wis. 2d 117
, 260 N.W.2d 30
A city was properly held in contempt for razing a building protected by a foreclosure judgment. Mohr v. Milwaukee, 106 Wis. 2d 80
, 315 N.W.2d 504
A land contract vendor is not an owner of real estate under this section. City of Milwaukee v. Greenberg, 163 Wis. 2d 28
, 471 N.W.2d 33
The 20-day time limit under sub. (1) (h) is directory rather than mandatory. The trial court shall attempt to hold the hearing within 20 days of the application. If a timely request for judicial substitution is filed that increases the time requirements, the court shall schedule the hearing at the earliest convenient time. Matlin v. City of Sheboygan, 2001 WI App 179
, 247 Wis. 2d 270
, 634 N.W.2d 115
Sub. (1) (h) does not bar a property owner from: 1) asserting claims for torts committed in the carrying out of the raze order that are not premised on the wrongfulness or unreasonableness of the order; 2) challenging the reasonableness of a lien imposed under sub. (1) (f) if one has been imposed; and 3) asserting a claim that salvage and valuable materials have been removed from the real estate for the benefit of the contractor without giving the owner a credit against the charges for the costs of razing and removing under sub. (1) (j). Smith v. Williams, 2001 WI App 285
, 249 Wis. 2d 419
, 638 N.W.2d 635
A constructive total loss occurs following the issuance of a raze order. However, there is no requirement on the city to prove that the property was a total loss prior to issuance of a raze order under an ordinance adopted under sub. (4). A&A Enterprises v. City of Milwaukee, 2008 WI App 43
, 308 Wis. 2d 479
, 747 N.W.2d 751
The phrase “out of repair” in sub. (1) (b) 1. is simple and capable of a common understanding. A building inspector's interpretation of “out of repair” to mean that some aspect of the building required fixing or that the building was non-compliant with the relevant housing codes was a common-sense definition. A building can be “out of repair” for any of a number of reasons, including a sudden fire or rapid exposure to some other damaging condition or element. The phrase connotes no sense that the condition rendering the building “out of repair” has existed for any particular length of time. Auto-Owners Insurance Co. v. City of Appleton, 2017 WI App 62
, 378 Wis. 2d 155
, 902 N.W.2d 532
There is no basis in this section for a rule that smoke and water damage remediation are not part of the “cost of repair” of a fire. “Cost of repairs” under sub. (1) (c) is not defined, but logically it refers to the cost to remedy all conditions that render the building deficient under sub. (1) (b) 1., including not only those that render the building “out of repair,” but also those that affect the suitability of the building for human habitation. Auto-Owners Insurance Co. v. City of Appleton, 2017 WI App 62
, 378 Wis. 2d 155
, 902 N.W.2d 532
The exclusive remedy provision of sub. (1) (h) applies only to claims premised on the reasonableness of the order to raze. It does not apply to a challenge based on acts occurring during the subsequent repairs required under the order, and it does not bar a defense of equitable estoppel based on a city's implementation of the order. 1033 North 7th Street v. City of Fond du Lac, 2021 WI App 38
, 398 Wis. 2d 542
, 961 N.W.2d 903
There was no constitutional “taking" when tenants were ordered to temporarily vacate their uninhabitable dwelling to permit repairs pursuant to the housing code. Devines v. Maier, 728 F.2d 876
Small wireless facilities. 66.0414(1)(a)
“Antenna” means communications equipment that transmits and receives electromagnetic radio signals and is used in the provision of wireless services.
“Antenna equipment” or “wireless equipment” means equipment, switches, wiring, cabling, power sources, shelters, or cabinets associated with an antenna, located at the same fixed location as the antenna, and, when collocated on a structure, is mounted or installed at the same time as such antenna.
“Antenna facility” means an antenna and associated antenna equipment, including ground-mounted antenna equipment.
“Applicable codes” means the state electrical wiring code, as defined in s. 101.80 (4)
, the state plumbing code promulgated under s. 145.02 (2) (a)
, the fire prevention code under ch. SPS 314
, Wis. Adm. Code, the Wisconsin commercial building code under chs. SPS 361
, Wis. Adm. Code, the Wisconsin uniform dwelling code under chs. SPS 320
, Wis. Adm. Code, and local amendments to those codes enacted solely to address imminent threats of destruction of property or injury to persons.
“Applicant” means a wireless provider that submits an application.
“Application” means an application for a permit under this section to collocate a small wireless facility or to install, modify, or replace a utility pole.
collocate on,” or “collocation” means the placement, mounting, replacement, modification, operation, or maintenance of a small wireless facility on, or of ground-mounted antenna equipment adjacent to, a structure.
“Communications facilities” means the set of equipment and network components, including wires and cables and associated facilities, used by a communications service provider to provide communications service.
“Communications network” means a network used to provide a communications service.
“Communications service” means cable service, as defined in 47 USC 522
(6), telecommunications service, as defined in 47 USC 153
(53), information service, as defined in 47 USC 153
(24), or wireless service.
“Communications service provider” means a person that provides communications service.
“Facility” means an antenna facility or a structure.
“Governmental pole” means a utility pole that is owned or operated by the state or by a political subdivision in a right-of-way.
“Investor-owned electric utility” means a public utility whose purpose is the generation, transmission, delivery, or furnishing of electric power but does not include a public utility owned and operated wholly by a municipality or a cooperative association organized under ch. 185
“Micro wireless facility” means a small wireless facility that does not exceed 24 inches in length, 15 inches in width, and 12 inches in height and that has no exterior antenna longer than 11 inches.
“Permit” means written authorization required by the state or a political subdivision to perform an action, or initiate, continue, or complete a project.
“Political subdivision” means any city, village, town, or county.
“Right-of-way” means the area on, below, or above a highway, as defined in s. 340.01 (22)
, other than a federal interstate highway; sidewalk; utility easement, other than a utility easement for a cooperative association organized under ch. 185
for purposes of providing or furnishing heat, light, power, or water to its members only; or other similar property, including property owned or controlled by the department of transportation.
“Small wireless facility” means a wireless facility to which all of the following apply:
The wireless facility is mounted on a structure 50 feet or less in height including any antenna.
The wireless facility is mounted on a structure no more than 10 percent taller than any other adjacent structure.
The wireless facility does not increase the height of an existing structure on which the wireless facility is located to a height of more than 50 feet or by 10 percent, whichever is greater.
Each antenna associated with the deployment of the wireless facility, excluding associated antenna equipment, is no more than 3 cubic feet in volume.
All other wireless equipment associated with the wireless facility specified in subd. 1.
, including the wireless equipment associated with the antenna and any preexisting associated equipment on the structure, is no more than 28 cubic feet in volume.
The wireless facility does not result in human exposure to radio frequency in excess of the applicable safety standards specified in 47 CFR 1.1307
Except in par. (zp)
, “structure” means a utility pole or wireless support structure, whether or not it has an existing antenna facility.
“Technically feasible” means that by virtue of engineering or spectrum usage the proposed placement for a small wireless facility, or its design, concealment measures, or site location can be implemented without a reduction in the functionality of the small wireless facility.
“Utility pole” means a pole that is used in whole or in part by a communications service provider; used for electric distribution, lighting, traffic control, signage, or a similar function; or used for the collocation of small wireless facilities. “Utility pole” does not include a wireless support structure or electric transmission structure.
“Utility pole for designated services” means a utility pole owned or operated in a right-of-way by the state, a political subdivision, or a utility district that is designed to, or used to, carry electric distribution lines, or cables or wires for telecommunications, cable, or electric service.
“Wireless facility” means an antenna facility at a fixed location that enables wireless services between user equipment and a communications network, and includes all of the following:
Radio transceivers, antennas, or coaxial, metallic, or fiber-optic cable located on, in, under, or otherwise adjacent to a utility pole or wireless support structure.
Equipment that is comparable to equipment specified in this subdivision regardless of technical configuration.
“Wireless facility” does not include any of the following:
The structure or improvements on, under, or within which equipment specified in subd. 1.
Coaxial, metallic, or fiber-optic cable that is between utility poles or wireless support structures or that is not adjacent to a particular antenna.
“Wireless infrastructure provider” means any person, other than a wireless services provider, that builds or installs wireless communication transmission equipment, antenna equipment, or wireless support structures.
“Wireless provider” means a wireless infrastructure provider or a wireless services provider.
“Wireless services” means any service using licensed or unlicensed wireless spectrum, including the use of a Wi-Fi network, whether at a fixed location or by means of a mobile device.
“Wireless services provider” means any person who provides wireless services.
“Wireless support structure” means an existing freestanding structure that is capable of supporting small wireless facilities, except that “wireless support structure” does not include any of the following:
A structure designed solely for the collocation of small wireless facilities.
“Wireline backhaul facility” means a facility for providing wireline backhaul service.
“Wireline backhaul service” means the transport of communications services by wire from small wireless facilities to a communications network.
This subsection applies only to the activities of a wireless provider within a right-of-way.
Exclusive use prohibited.
Neither the state nor a political subdivision may enter into an exclusive arrangement with any person for the use of a right-of-way for the construction, operation, marketing, maintenance, or collocation of small wireless facilities or wireless support structures.
Rates and fees.
Subject to sub. (3) (e) 3.
, the state or a political subdivision may charge a wireless provider a nondiscriminatory rate or fee for the use of a right-of-way with respect to the collocation of a small wireless facility or the installation, modification, or replacement of a utility pole in the right-of-way only if the state or political subdivision charges other entities for the use of the right-of-way. If the state or a political subdivision charges a wireless provider a rate or fee as described in this paragraph, all of the following apply:
Subject to subd. 5.
, the fee or rate must be limited to no more than the direct and actual cost of managing the right-of-way.
Except as provided in par. (d)
, the fee or rate must be competitively neutral with regard to other users of the right-of-way.
The fee or rate may not result in a double recovery by the state or political subdivision if existing fees, rates, or taxes imposed by a political subdivision on the wireless provider already recover the direct and actual cost of managing the right-of-way.
The fee or rate may not be in the form of a franchise or other fee based on revenue or customer counts.
The fee or rate may not exceed an annual amount equal to $20 multiplied by the number of small wireless facilities in the right-of-way in the state's or political subdivision's geographic jurisdiction.
Beginning on July 12, 2019, the state or a political subdivision may adjust a rate or fee allowed under this paragraph by 10 percent every 5 years, rounded to the nearest dollar. During each 5-year period, the adjustment may be applied incrementally or as a single adjustment.
Except as provided in subd. 2.
, by the later of October 1, 2019, or 3 months after receiving its first request for access to the right-of-way by a wireless provider, the state or a political subdivision shall implement rates, fees, and terms for such access that comply with this subsection.
Agreements between a wireless provider and the state or a political subdivision that are in effect on July 12, 2019, and that relate to access to the right-of-way, remain in effect, subject to applicable termination provisions, except that by August 1, 2021, the state or political subdivision shall amend any such agreement to comply with the rates, fees, and terms required under this subsection.