Two Pits Not The Same

6/10/2015

Today the public learned via the West Bend Daily News (DN) that Danah Zoulek is taking the village (which in essence means village residents) to court. Any costs the village has to pay to defend this case will have to be taken from tax payer dollars. Can you think of any other source for court costs?

The DN article makes reference to the Jacklin Pit on Hubertus Road but anyone who followed that development knows the facts about the two pits are not the same. By taking the village to court, residents may very well see less money for roads. Just what will make some activists in town very happy. The same tactic taken by them on the Hwy 164 road issues which cost tax payers lots of money at both local and state levels. The very same people who support Danah at the village board meetings.

The paper notes that Danah Zoulek is seeking a restraining order to prevent village officials from interfering with her plans to haul fill to a former sand and gravel pit on Scenic rd.

It was good to learn that Washington County Circuit Court Judge Gonring is refusing to grant a temporary restraining order and will schedule a date for a formal hearing.

According to the DN article, "In a sworn affidavit, Scenic Pit LLC managing co-owner Danah Zoulek accused village officials of “acting unreasonable and discriminatory in regards to our site versus other sites in the area.”

Most every one in Richfield knows these two pits are not the same and one could argue need two different outcomes.

In the article Danah whines “Payne and Dolan restored the Jacklin Pit on Hubertus Road in the village and even received more lots for residential development than our zoning allowed.”

Could it be the Dayne and Dolan development was good for residents and the village? The residents living around the Jacklin Pit were in support of the final proposal.

It is well documented at village board meetings that the filling of the Scenic Pit is not supported by residents who live around the pit and will not be good for those residents. Danah does have the opportunity to create residential lots on her newly purchased property.

The newspaper article goes on to note, Village Administrator Healy said the matter has been turned over to the village’s insurance carrier, who will be handling the case now that it has reached the court stage.

Money down the drain: The Two Pits Are Not The Same.

26 Comments

marie

6/10/2015 04:00:00 am

posting today who is lena

Lena

6/10/2015 04:19:48 am

Hi Marie. Lena here. What's up?

With respect to the village taking action, if the owners of the scenic "restored kettle" are not complying with noise and permitting ordinances of the village (that we are all subject to), why should they not be ticketed per occurrence just like we would be?

marie

6/11/2015 12:53:43 am

agree....I think your posts are the most intelligent ones

Lena

6/11/2015 01:35:45 am

Thank you, Marie. I have really appreciated your posts and Shelly's too. She has done a fantastic job of researching and presenting the facts.

Jennifer

6/10/2015 10:17:31 am

I would like to know more details about this project. How long will the trucks haul fill? What days will it be done? Who is paying for the fill and exactly where is it coming from? I would like to see more information please!

Shelly

6/10/2015 11:32:07 am

According to the proposed developer they intend to haul fill for 10 years, yes 10 years, 6 days a week. Their proposed route is Hwy Q to Colgate Rd, to the 4 way stop at Amy Belle Elementary School. From there the trucks are to head west on Willow Creek to Scenic. Two lane roads, no sidewalks, and often little to no shoulder. The area is completely agricultural and residential.

They will likely solicit customers from the construction industry who will pay the Zouleks to dump their fill onto the site. Thomas Zoulek, of Mid City Plumbing in Butler, is a member of the Wisconsin Underground Contractors Union. I'm sure he'll find no shortage of contractors who need to get rid of fill.

Shelly

6/10/2015 11:45:10 am

He is also a former Trustee in the Village of Butler.

Lena

6/15/2015 01:46:12 am

"He is also a former Trustee in the Village of Butler. "

Well, Shelly, that was an interesting google.

While Thomas was accused of conflict of interest (his father's company/employer received business from the village of Butler) and lost his election in the midst of the accusations, he was later cleared of wrongdoing.

His brother was not so fortunate and did resign an official capacity in Butler when a conflict of interest was involved.

What struck me about Dana's campaign for trustee was the lack of disclosure that she would substantially profit personally from an adversarial matter that was pending before the trustees that she would be voting on and dealing with, and that further, that she planned on proceeding forward with a lawsuit if they (and she, had she won) voted in her favor. In my opinion, that was an enormous and undisclosed conflict of interest.

The election flier I saw talked about her vet service and motherhood but nary a mention of her substantial business interests that she was in the midst of getting the trustees (of which she hoped to be one) to approve.

In my opinion, Dana's campaign was deliberately deceptive about a conflict of interest. I personally would not trust someone who displayed what is in my opinion, a poor showing of ethics, to suddenly find their ethics when taking loads which no one may ever know were tainted.

Aside from that, I don't feel the community's water supply should be made vulnerable to one individual person's ethics and judgment call for 250 loads of waste per day, which will be deposited approx 20 feet above our water table- particularly when that one individual profits each time they accept a load.

She would have a conflict of interest with her implied fiduciary responsibility to our water supply and no accountability. NOT a good situation.

Jennifer

6/11/2015 12:41:36 am

Thank you for the information. So, this is going by an elementary school with additional dust? What hours are planned for trucks to operate and who will fix the roads after all is done?

Shelly

6/11/2015 01:06:59 am

The estimates are between 100 and 250 trucks per day, six days a week, 10 years. The hours they have listed are 7:00am - 5:00pm M-F, and 7:00am - 12:00pm on Saturdays. This is not an operation to restore the land, this about operating a large scale business. They will destroy the habitat that is already there in order to fill the the kettle with crap for 10 years.

We, the tax payers, will ultimately be responsible for keeping up the roads. Just as we are now responsible for defending our community against the lawsuit they are filing against the Village.

Lena

6/11/2015 01:31:55 am

Further information on the elementary school is that is it is situated on a narrow country road with no shoulders and limited access to pick up/drop off students.

On any day, you can see dozens of cars parked mostly off the road and into the ditch as parents walk their children from these parked cars to the school (across or beside the road).

Additionally, some children bike home from the school so now they will be competing with road space with up to 250 dump trucks per day.

Having operated trucks of similar size casually, I can tell you that an elementary sized child on a bicycle (or walking) will be in the truck's blind spot as the truck passes the child. If the driver is paying attention to the road more than to their phone, the driver may see that the child upon approach but then has to trust they have gotten over far enough or that the child will not subsequently fall (since they won't be able to see the child for the whole time in which they pass him/her) as they pass the child.

Further the roads surrounding this area are very curvy and hilly, so oncoming pedestrian or bicycle traffic is often not visible until the last moment. Residents around here are used to this, expect pedestrians, and drive accordingly. Truck drivers (250 per day!) from other areas will not be aware to be expecting pedestrian or bicycle traffic on our roads.

Ben

6/11/2015 02:04:51 am

Just curious- I have seen some commentary about using the old 'haul road' on HWY Q to the site, and even mention of a tunnel under Scenic Road. It that still an option to avoid local roads? Guessing that the 'haul road' hasn't been used in decades and would deteriorate quickly -if it is even in usable shape- with trucks driving on it. Would need 8-10" minimum of traffic bond to keep that road useable with our WI weather, based on what i have seen in the past. Not that this solves the noise/dust/well issue at the pit, which for me puts me being against this moving forward anyways.

Again, best of luck to all involved.

Shelly

6/11/2015 03:15:04 am

The old haul road is privately owned by several different people. They have not agreed to let Scenic Pit LLC use their lands. My guess is that they don't want the truck traffic, pollution, noise, dust, etc... running along their property.

Lena

6/11/2015 07:44:09 am

According to a link I saw today, apparently one difference between the two pits is that one (Jackiln) became a superfund site.

http://www.homefacts.com/environmentalhazards/Wisconsin/Washington-County/Hubertus.html

"Jacklin Gravel Pit is a superfund site located at 3849 Hubertus Road, Hubertus, WI 53033. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) identifies sites such as Jacklin Gravel Pit because they pose or had once posed a potential risk to human health and/or the environment due to contamination by one or more hazardous wastes."

Does Richfield need another superfund site?

Plowboy

7/6/2015 09:18:34 am

Maybe you hit the nail on the head! The village board does not want to let the information out on the hazardous fill that was dumped to the east of the Scenic Rd. pit from Jacklin's pit until the superfund is refunded so it can get some money for it. It would certainly help if Scott Walker would get to be president and help us with getting money from the super fund.

Jennifer

6/11/2015 10:12:30 am

Wow, this a lot of information. Thank you! So, she is going to use the public roads then and trample in the new asphalt the village just put in. My family bikes and walks scenic and willow creek all the time. It is already a hazard without having to dodge huge trucks. We can't even enjoy leisure time then if this pit filling happens.

marie

6/15/2015 01:35:10 am

FYI- the Zouleks are going to try and intimidate anyone who is against them. What they don't understand is that most of us CANNOT be intimidated. Time for the Village to stand up to them

Lena

6/15/2015 10:40:07 am

I just did more research on Dana's non-disclosure of her conflict of interest when running for for a Trustee slot.

Her campaign materials are scolding the village president for not recusing himself on the Scenic "Restored Kettle" pit, but all the while NOT disclosing that she herself would have a more direct conflict of interest than he would. She states that a "local family" wanted to buy the pit and omits the rather KEY fact that the local family is HERSELF. Her campaign materials provide the impression that she would work to "right" this "wrong"!

From her campaign site:

"4) Regularly engages in inappropriate business deals.

Our Village President is a top executive at Zenith Tech, a sister company to Payne and Dolan. He recuses himself for road projects but Payne and Dolan continues to get the roadwork even when other contractors have the lower bid. Payne and Dolan redeveloped the Jacklin Pit and received special exceptions by the VIllage Board. The Village Board used the Payne and Dolan redeveloped quarry as an example of how other quarries in Richfield should be redeveloped in the 20 Year Comprehensive Plan passed June 2014. However, in February 2015, when a local family proposed to redevelop another quarry for their future home, the Village President did NOT RECUSE HIMSELF and participated in changing the Comprehensive Plan from quarry redevelopment to single family residential. Then the Village Board REZONED the property from M5 mineral extraction/mine restoration to single family residential without the property owner's consent."

http://www.votefordanah.com/#!faqs-/c1usl

Marie

6/16/2015 12:37:45 am

Not surprised at this. I guess she has tried to steal land from neighbors while at the same time she called the sheriff on one of the neighbors who were walking on their common land. She tried to say they were trespassing .

Lena

6/16/2015 12:49:34 am

Yes, Marie. She references "trespassers" in one of her postings in this blog, yet did not go on to clarify that the "trespasser" she called the sheriff on was actually walking on the Windemere subdivision's common property, and not on HER property.

She also mentioned a trespasser picking morel mushrooms. I happened to be walking in the woods the day the two gentlemen were picking morel mushrooms and not only did I witness that they were on the Windemere common property (not hers) but when I spoke to them they described how morel mushrooms only are available to be picked one or two days each year. So should they have stepped into her "restored kettle" pit - which I even wonder if they did because they were harvesting for mushrooms in shaded, woody areas (like the Windemere common property) even mentioning a one-time, harmless situation as if it were a trespassing problem is a bit much.

marie

6/16/2015 03:32:37 am

Lena-- it is going to be a fight with her. I feel sorry for her that she feels that its personal. It is not! it is about the project which most of us are against.

Susan

6/16/2015 11:08:46 am

Thanks for writing this post, more Richfield residents need to be aware of the truth in all this. It's unfortunate that the Zouleks have moved forward to purchase the property even after many of their attempts to secure permissions and approvals were turned down. The original offer to purchase the land was contingent on permits and approvals to fill the pit. When those were rejected, the Zouleks moved into plan B: a 10 year lease with the Holz family as well as forming Scenic Pit LLC to continue trying to do what they want despite opposition from the community and residents who will be directly impacted by their actions. When this had not proven effective they are now in Plan C: purchasing the land outright and filing this lawsuit to eat up taxpayer money until they get their way. Scenic Pit LLC states they are doing this to "heal the land" and restore it, but their actions are doing nothing to promote community and if they do win their way with lawyers and force they will have live with the residents they have bullied.

concerned village resident

6/19/2015 02:57:42 am

went passed the "pit" this morning. TWO dump trucks sit on the drive. Not sure if they had dumped or not. It could be that they are trying to taunt the neighbors or they are already accepting material

Shelly

6/19/2015 10:59:28 am

We are a long way from " we won't do anything the community doesn't want" aren't we?

marie

6/29/2015 01:37:25 am

way too quiet on this blog. Anyone know what the Zouleks are doing now.

Susan

6/29/2015 03:13:43 am

We live in the adjacent subdivision and have clear views from our neighborhood walking trails. The Zouleks have been using equipment to widen what used to be a dirt & grass ATV trail going down to the pit. It is now filled with gravel and definitely a type of drive that could handle large vehicles. Probably something they are able to do without any permits on "their own land", looks like they are moving forward with prep to receive larger vehicles (dump trucks) to the bottom of the pit though it's anyone's guess as to what is really going on.

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.

Two Pits Not The Same

Leave a Reply.

About

Archives

Categories