CCR2007222.
8
.
COMMON COUNCIL - CITY OF MUSKEGO
RESOLUTION #222-2007
APPROVAL OF STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR DISMISSAL
(Veolia ES Emerald Park Landfill, LLC vs. City of Muskego)
WHEREAS, The attached Stipulation and Order for Dismissal has been reviewed by
the Finance Committee and has been recommended for approval.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED That the Common Council of the City of
Muskego, upon the recommendation of the Finance Committee, does hereby approve
the Stipulation and Order for Dismissal, which resolves the litigation between Veolia ES
Emerald Park Landfill, LLC vs. the City of Muskego.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED That City Attorney H. Stanley Riffle is authorized to sign
the Stipulation and Order on behalf of the City.
DATED THIS 11TH DAY OF DECEMBER ,2007.
SPONSORED BY:
FINANCE COMMITTEE
Ald. Bob Melcher
Ald. Neil Borgman
Ald. Keith Werner
This is to certify that this is a true and accurate copy of Resolution #222-2007 which
was adopted by the Common Council of the City of Muskego.
11/07jmb
_.c.. ""..~",..
@@[F)W
.
.
CIRCUIT COI~J.ftr\.:f CIÇl.~W~~~gHA COUNTY
Ci'/IL Oh ,~,~Ort
01 DEC I 9 AM 9: 56 Veolia ES Emerald Park Landfill, LLC,
Plaintiff,
STATE OF WISCONSIN
Defendant.
FILED Case No. 06 CV 2811 IN CIRCUIT COURT
DEC 2 0 2007
v.
City of Muskego,
WAUKESHA CO. WI CIVIL DIVISION
STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR DISMISSAL ON TERMS
WHEREAS, plaintiff, Veolia ES Emerald Park Landfill, LLC, by and through its
legal counsel, Reinhart Boerner Van Deuren, S.c., by Attorney Jeffrey P. Clark, and
defendant, City of Muskego, by and through its legal counsel, Arenz, Molter, Macy &
.
Riffle, S.c., by Attorney H. Stanley Riffle, desire to resolve, through this Stipulation, all
claims and causes of action asserted by plaintiff in the pleadings in this action; and
WHEREAS, in the interest of resolving this dispute and litigation, defendant has
agreed to accept from plaintiff, as and for settlement of all issues and claims related to the
Special Assessment levied pursuant to defendant's Resolution #102-2002, the total sum
of $200,000.00; and
WHEREAS, in the interest of resolving this dispute and litigation, plaintiff has
agreed to pay to defendant, as and for settlement of all issues and claims related to the
Special Assessment levied pursuant to defendant's Resolution #102-2002, the total sum
of $200,000.00;
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between plaintiff and defendant, as
follows:
1. Plaintiff shall pay' to defendant, as and for settlement of all issues and
claims related to the Special Assessment levied pursuant to defendant's Resolution #102-
2002, the sum of $200,000.00, as follows:
.
.
.
.
.' ~\
.. ill
, ,
A. An initial partial payment in the amount of$100,000.00 shaII be paid
no later than the close of defendant's business on December 31,2007; and
B. The unpaid balance of the original settlement amount shaII Incur
interest at the annual rate of 8.0% commencing on January 1, 2008, until paid in
fuII, with said interest computed to the date of payment; and
C. The unpaid balance of the original settlement amount, together with
all accrued interest thereon, shaII be paid no later than the close of defendant's
business on December 31, 2008. There shall be no interest due in the event
plaintiff the entire balance December 31, 2007. pnor to pays
2. In the event plaintiff fails to timely remit either payment required above,
defendant shall assess against plaintiff's subject real property, as a Special Charge, the total
amount remaining unpaid, including all accrued interest thereon.
3. So long as Veolia operates within the current capacity restrictions (which is
currently 17,650 gallons per day of sewer capacity and represents 97.13 residential equivalency
connections (REC's)), Ve<?lia shall not be obligated to purchase additional capacity, unless the
Department of Natural Resources ("DNR") requires V eolia to acquire additional reserve capacity
in excess of the current reserve capacity. In the event the DNR requires Veolia to acquire
additional reserve capacity in excess of the current reserve capacity, Veolia shall be assessed at
the future user rate for each REC in excess of the current reserve. In the event Veolia does not
request additional reserve capacity or the DNR does not require additional reserve capacity in
excess of the current reserve, there shall be no further charges for reserve capacity due from
Veolia.
4. AII plaintiffs claims and causes of action asserted against defendant in this
action shall be dismissed with prejudice, without costs to any party as against the other,
and without further notice to the parties.
- 2 -
.
.
.
.
.
.
/s.Aday of December 2007. Dated at Milwaukee, Wisconsin, this
Reinhart Boerner Van Deuren, S.C.
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Dated at Waukesha, Wisconsin, this
BY:~~ A orney Jeffrey P. Clark
State Bar No.1 009316
/ 7~ day of December 2007.
Arenz, Molter, Macy & Riffle, S.C.
Attorneys for Defendant
By:
H. e lffle
State BarNo. 1012704
ORDER
Based on the foregoing Stipulation of plaintiff and defendant, by and between their
respective legal counsel:
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED,
1. Plaintiff shall pay to defendant, as and for settlement of all issues and
claims related to the Special Assessment levied pursuant to defendant's Resolution #102-
.2002, the sum of $200,000.00, as follows:
D. An initial partial payment in the amount of$100,000.00 shall be paid
no later than the close of defendant's business on December 31, 2007; and
E. The unpaid balance of the original settlement amount shall incur
interest at the annual rate of 8.0% commencing on January 1, 2008, until paid in
full, with said interest computed to the date of payment; and
- 3 -
,
F. The unpaid balance of the original settlement amount, together with
all accrued interest thereon, shall be paid no later than the close of defendant's
business on December 31, 2008. There shall be no interest due in the event
plaintiff pays the entire balance prior to December 31, 2007.
.
2. In the event plaintiff fails to timely remit ~ither payment required above,
defendant shall assess against plaintiff's subject real property, as a Special Charge, the
total amount remaining unpaid, including all accrued interest thereon.
3. So long as Veolia operates within the current capacity restrictions (which is
currently 17,650 gallons per day of sewer capacity and represents 97.13 residential equivalency
connections (REC's)), Veolia shall not be obligated to purchase additional capacity, unless the
Department of Natural Resources ("DNR") requires Veolia to acquire additional reserve capacity
in excess of the current reserve capacity. In the event the DNR requires Veolia to acquire
additional reserve capacity in excess of the current reserve capacity, Veolia shall be assessed at
the future user rate for each REC in excess of the current reserve. In the event Veolia does not .
request additional reserve capacity or the DNR does not require additional reserve capacity in
excess of the current reserve, there shall be no further charges for reserve capacity due from
Veolia.
4. All plaintiff's claims and causes of action asserted against defendant in this
action shall be and hereby are dismissed with prejudice, without costs to any party as
against the other.
Dated at Waukesha, Wisconsin, tills ~ day Of~~O7.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Paul F. Reilly
PaulF. Reilly, Circuit Court Judge .
- 4 -