CCR1975061r
-- ,
f.
--
"
r-
~
r
\.
RESOLUTION #61-75
(As amended)
AUTHORIZING SETTLEMENT OF VESBACH CLAIM
WHEREAS, the city has received a claim fram Mr. Joseph
Vesbach for approximately $800.00 resulting from damage
to crops on land leased by him from the city, and
WHEREAS, the Finance Committee has contacted the Waukesha
County Agri-Business Agent for information relative to yield,
price of crops and cost of preparing land for planting, and
WHEREAS, the city's Superintendent of Public Works has advised
the Finance Committee that in his opinion less than one acre of
crops were involved,
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Common Council of the
City of Muskego does hereby recommend to the Council settlement
of the claim submitted by Joseph Vesbach in the amount of $240.00
as full payment of any or all claims under lease dated October 25,
1973.
DATED THIS 8th DAY OF April , 1975.
FINANCE COMMITTEE
Paul J. Schaumberg
~~/~ Charles P. Fo1dy
Edwin P. Dumke
ATTEST:
;ðåa/j. ~~ City Clerk
4/75
je
TO:
FROM:
r
Gentlemen:
April 4, 1975
ALL ALDERMEN Resolution #61-75,
As amended
Re:
MAYOR GOTTFRIED
On March 25, 1975, your honorable body adopted Resolution #61-75,
As amended, Authorizing Settlement of the Vesbach Claim.
- The original resolution as introduced by the Finance Committee
provided for a settlement of the Vesbach claim in an amount of $108.00.
An amendment was adopted which raised the settlement from $108.00 to
$251.00.
The explanation for the increase over the amount suggested by the
Finance Committee was that Mr. Vesbach should be reimbursed on the basis
of estimated yield of 27 bushel per acre at $8.00 per bushel plus the
estimated cost of preparing the land.
I have decided to veto the resolution, as amended, in order to give
the Council an opportunity to once again review the facts.
r- In its deliberation the Finance Committee spent a great deal of time
in an effort to determine what reimbursement Mr. Vesbach should have to
cover his claimed loss of crops as a result of the city having soil
borings taken on the city property leased to Mr. Vesbach. The review brough
out the following:
~
-
1. The city's Superintendent of Public Works estimated that the crop
loss amounted to somewhat less than an acre.
The Waukesha County Agricultural Agent advised the city that the
yield of soybeans per acre amounted to between 27 and 30 bushel.
The County Agricultural Agent also indicated that the return on an
acre of soybeans was approximately $8.00 per bushel.
2.
3.
4. The cost of preparing the land for planting was about $35.00 per
acre.
5. The equipment used in taking soil borings is a flatbed truck with
the boring equipment mounted on the back. It was therefore possib1
to straddle the rows of tvybeans in most instances as the equipme~t
moved to the locations where borings were taken.
The lease which was executed between Mr. Vesbach and the city
provided that in the event the city sold the land during the leased
period the lessee, Mr. Vesbach, would be reimbursed on a per acre
cost of preparing the land fer Eor planting as well as the cost of
the seed. He would not be reimbursed for crop loss or damages.
6.
From the above facts the Finance Committe~ agreed that Mr. Vesbach
had a legitimate right to some reimbursement. The city did, in fact,
enter upon the property for the purpose of taking soil borings without
giving Mr. Vesbach prior notice. It was therefore necessary to determine
how much damage, if any, was done to the soybean crop.
r
Since this was less than ideal land it was determined that a yield
of not more than 27 bushel per acre was a fair estimate. They further
agreed to accept the information established by the County Agricultural
Agent that $8.00 a bushel was the current price for soybeans. Multiplying
8 x 27 provided a total figure of $216.00 per acre. Th~laccepted the
statement of the Superintendent of Public Works that less than an acre
was damaged paying particular attention to the kind of equipment that
was used by the company doing the soil borings and estimated that approx-
imately one-half acre of crops were destroyed, thus the recommended
settlement of $108.00.
r
.~
r
l
r
r
,...
,,/
r
To: All aldermen
Re: Vesbach claim
From: Mayor Gottfried
Page 2.
The amendment adopted by the Council was based on the assumptior
that a full acre of crops were destroyed and that Mr. Vesbach should 1: e
reimbursed for the cost of preparing the land. As far as I can de-
termine there are no facts to support this decision.
It is my feeling that the settlement of the claim must be based
on a determination of what is å~fair and reasonàble amount of money --
fair to the city as well as to Mr. Vesbach.
From the facts established through an investigation by the
Finance Committee it should be very clear that an amount in excess
of $108.00 would be an unreasonable expenditure of city funds.
It is for the above reasons that I have decided to veto your
action of adopting Resolution #61-75, As amended. It is my sincere
hope that you will sustain this veto and accept the recommendation of
the Finance Committee.
Sincerely yours,
Jerome J. Gottfried, Mayor
City of Muskego
JJG/je
r
1
J
.~
,--
/-
Cil'J~L mu~keflo
W182 58200 RACINE AVENUE. MUSKEGO, WISCONSIN 53150
April 9, 1975
I, Bette J. Bowyer, City Clerk of the City
of Muskego, do hereby certify that on April 9, 1975,
the Mayor of the City of Muskego submitted to this
office his intention to veto Resolution #61-75, As
amended, which was reconsidered and adopted by the
Common Council on April 8, 1975.
.
j~
ëÞ-{). /3~~
Bette J. Bowyei
City Clerk
City of Muskego
je
Cil'J 0/ :linl/ RI/:Jidl/nlial, !Jndu:Jll'ia! and Recl'l/aliona! :lad!ail/:J
r
r-
, ,...-- 'f' f'
.
Cïf'l~l mU:Jkego
W182 S8200 RACINE AVENUE. MUSKEGO. WiSCONSIN 53150
March 26, 1975
I, June E. E1ger, Deputy Clerk of the Ci~y of Muskego
do hereby certify that on March 26, 1975, the Mayor
of the City of Muskego submitted to this office his
intentioø to veto Resolution 161-75, As Amended, which
was adopted by the Common Council on March 25, 1975.
CilfJ of :line K!eûJenlial, -.9nduJlria! and K!ecrealiona! :lac;/WeJ