Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 33.25 (2026)
Petition
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
33.25(1)(a)(a) Before a county board may establish a district under s. 33.235 or 33.24, a petition requesting establishment shall be filed with the county clerk, addressed to the board and signed by persons constituting 51 percent of the landowners or the owners of 51 percent of the lands within the proposed district. Governmental subdivisions, other than the state or federal governments, owning lands within the proposed district are eligible to sign such petition. A city council or village or town board may by resolution represent persons owning lands within the proposed district who are within its jurisdiction, and sign for all such landowners.
33.25(1)(b)(b) For a landowner that is a trust, foundation, corporation, association or organization, a petition under par. (a) shall be signed by an official representative, officer or employee who is authorized to do so by that landowner.
33.25(2)(c)(c) That the public health, comfort, convenience, necessity or public welfare will be promoted by the establishment of the district and that the lands to be included therein will be benefited by such establishment; and
33.25(3)(3) Verification, plat. The petition shall be verified by one of the petitioners, and shall be accompanied by a plat or sketch indicating the approximate area and boundaries of the district.
33.25(4)(4) Presumption. Every petition is presumed to have been signed by the persons whose signatures appear thereon, until proved otherwise.
33.25(5)(5) Withdrawing from petition. Any landowner who is considered to have signed the petition under sub. (1) may withdraw from the petition if the landowner files a written notice of the withdrawal with the county clerk at least 10 days before the date of the hearing under s. 33.26.
33.25 AnnotationThe requirements for a verification under sub. (3) are that it is made under oath and carries the jurat of a notary public. Every person giving the oath is considered to have been lawfully sworn. Use of the word “certify” rather than “verify” is irrelevant. Nielsen v. Waukesha County Board of Supervisors, 178 Wis. 2d 498, 504 N.W.2d 621 (Ct. App. 1993).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4
cases, 1993–2003 · leading case: Nielsen v. Waukesha Cnty. Bd. of Supervisors, 504 N.W.2d 621 (Wis. Ct. App. 1993).
Nielsen v. Waukesha Cnty. Bd. of Supervisors, 504 N.W.2d 621 (Wis. Ct. App. 1993). “The appellants contended that the alleged defects (in some instances individually and in other instances collectively) reduced the number of valid signatures supporting the petition below the 51% figure required by sec. 33.25(1), Stats. The circuit court rejected the appellants’…”
Donaldson v. Bd. of Commissioners of Rock-Koshkonong Lake Dist., 2003 WI App 26 (Wis. 2003). “Wis. Stat. § 33.25 (1) and (2)(d). 3 If at least fifty-one percent of the landowners in *242 the proposed district sign the petition, the county board must hold a hearing within thirty days, appoint a committee to conduct the hearing, notify by mail all landowners in the…”
Nielsen v. Waukesha Cnty. Bd. of Sup'rs., 504 N.W.2d 621 (Wis. Ct. App. 1993). “The appellants contended that the alleged defects (in some instances individually and in other instances collectively) reduced the number of valid signatures supporting the petition below the 51% figure required by sec. 33.25(1), Stats. The circuit court rejected the appellants'…”
Donaldson v. Bd. of Com'rs of Rock-koshkonong Lake, 2003 WI App 26 (Wis. Ct. App. 2003). “§ 33.25 states, in relevant part: (1) ...”
Wis. Stat. § 33.25(1): 3 cases
Nielsen v. Waukesha Cnty. Bd. of Supervisors, 504 N.W.2d 621 (Wis. Ct. App. 1993). “The appellants contended that the alleged defects (in some instances individually and in other instances collectively) reduced the number of valid signatures supporting the petition below the 51% figure required by sec. 33.25(1), Stats. The circuit court rejected the appellants’…”
Nielsen v. Waukesha Cnty. Bd. of Sup'rs., 504 N.W.2d 621 (Wis. Ct. App. 1993). “The appellants contended that the alleged defects (in some instances individually and in other instances collectively) reduced the number of valid signatures supporting the petition below the 51% figure required by sec. 33.25(1), Stats. The circuit court rejected the appellants'…”
Donaldson v. Bd. of Com'rs of Rock-koshkonong Lake, 2003 WI App 26 (Wis. Ct. App. 2003). “§ 33.25 states, in relevant part: (1) ...”
Wis. Stat. § 33.25(2): 2 cases
Nielsen v. Waukesha Cnty. Bd. of Supervisors, 504 N.W.2d 621 (Wis. Ct. App. 1993). “The appellants contended that the alleged defects (in some instances individually and in other instances collectively) reduced the number of valid signatures supporting the petition below the 51% figure required by sec. 33.25(1), Stats. The circuit court rejected the appellants’…”
Nielsen v. Waukesha Cnty. Bd. of Sup'rs., 504 N.W.2d 621 (Wis. Ct. App. 1993). “The appellants contended that the alleged defects (in some instances individually and in other instances collectively) reduced the number of valid signatures supporting the petition below the 51% figure required by sec. 33.25(1), Stats. The circuit court rejected the appellants'…”
Wis. Stat. § 33.25(3): 2 cases
Nielsen v. Waukesha Cnty. Bd. of Supervisors, 504 N.W.2d 621 (Wis. Ct. App. 1993). “The appellants contended that the alleged defects (in some instances individually and in other instances collectively) reduced the number of valid signatures supporting the petition below the 51% figure required by sec. 33.25(1), Stats. The circuit court rejected the appellants’…”
Nielsen v. Waukesha Cnty. Bd. of Sup'rs., 504 N.W.2d 621 (Wis. Ct. App. 1993). “The appellants contended that the alleged defects (in some instances individually and in other instances collectively) reduced the number of valid signatures supporting the petition below the 51% figure required by sec. 33.25(1), Stats. The circuit court rejected the appellants'…”
Wis. Stat. § 33.25(4): 2 cases
Nielsen v. Waukesha Cnty. Bd. of Supervisors, 504 N.W.2d 621 (Wis. Ct. App. 1993). “The appellants contended that the alleged defects (in some instances individually and in other instances collectively) reduced the number of valid signatures supporting the petition below the 51% figure required by sec. 33.25(1), Stats. The circuit court rejected the appellants’…”
Nielsen v. Waukesha Cnty. Bd. of Sup'rs., 504 N.W.2d 621 (Wis. Ct. App. 1993). “The appellants contended that the alleged defects (in some instances individually and in other instances collectively) reduced the number of valid signatures supporting the petition below the 51% figure required by sec. 33.25(1), Stats. The circuit court rejected the appellants'…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.