Laserfiche WebLink
Louisville City Council Meeting <br />September 4, 2001 <br />Page 15 <br /> <br />EXECUTIVE SESSION... "Consultation with attorneys representing the City with <br />respect to pending litigation. Pending litigation shall include cases wherein a lawsuit is <br />actually commenced and any situation where the person requesting the executive session <br />believes in good faith that a lawsuit may result. The council may discuss settlement <br />strategies in an executive session." (Louisville Code of Ethics, Ordinance No. 1079, <br />Series 1992 - Chapter 2.90 & 2.90.090 (C) - Authorized Topics) <br /> <br />The City Attorney Light requested the City Council convene an Executive Session for the <br />purposes of consultation with respect to pending litigation and reviewed the background <br />of the lawsuit. He noted the purposes of the Executive Session was to discuss litigation <br />strategies and matters subject to litigation involving the Centennial Valley Properties IV, <br />LLC v. City of Louisville, Case No. 01CV580, Boulder County District Court, Div. 3. <br />He noted that the lawsuit was filed in April of 2001 and the City of Louisville was served <br />in August. The lawsuit involves the 1983 Sewer Treatment Plant Agreement between <br />Louisville Associates and the City of Louisville. In the Agreement, the developer of <br />Centennial Valley paid money to the City for expansion of the Sewer Treatment Plant. In <br />return, they received a certain capacity through the Sewer Plant, and were the beneficiary <br />of a provision stating that sewer tap fees would not have to be paid until 340,000 gallons <br />capacity had been used by the developing project. He noted that there is a dispute <br />concerning whether the 340,000 threshold has been reached, and whether there should be <br />a reimbursement of sewer tap fees paid for development within the Centennial Valley. <br />There are two claims in the lawsuit, one for breach of contract for the alleged breach of <br />the Sewer Plant Agreement, and a second alleging claim for Unjust Enrichment. <br /> <br />City Clerk Nancy Varra read Sec. 2.90.50 Public Statement of the Municipal Code, <br />which specifies the topics that may be discussed in an Executive Session. <br /> <br />MOTION: Sisk moved that Council convene an Executive Session for the purposes of <br />consultation with respect to pending litigation (Centennial Valley Properties, IV, LLC v. <br />City of Louisville, Case No. 01CV580, Boulder County District Court, Div. 3.) and asked <br />that the Finance Director, Public Works Director and City Administrator attend the <br />executive session, seconded by Keany. All in favor. <br /> <br />Council went into Executive Session at 8:50 p.m. <br /> <br />Sisk reconvened the meeting at 9:40 p.m. <br /> <br />Report by City Attorney on from Executive Session - (Centennial Valley Properties, <br />IV, LLC v. City of Louisville, Case No. 01CV580, Boulder County District Court, Div. <br />3.) City Attorney Light stated that Council discussed litigation strategy. He stated that <br />the Council has given direction on litigation strategy to City Staff. <br /> <br />15 <br /> <br /> <br />