SARANAC LAKE – The village will pay $150,000 to settle a costly and long-running legal battle over a sewer line it installed in 2005.

Following an executive session Monday night, the village Board of Trustees approved the settlement with Wayne and Denise Bujold, the owners of Harbor Hill Inn and Cottages on Lake Flower.

Village Manager John Sweeney said he’s pleased the matter is finally resolved, although he wasn’t in any way excited about the outcome.

“I don’t really feel good about this,” he said. “We both invested a lot of finances, ours village-wise as well as the Bujolds. We struggled to get there. I’m glad it’s done.”

Contacted by the Enterprise Monday night, Denise Bujold declined to comment on the settlement and referred the Enterprise to her attorney, Ed Flink of Albany.

“The Bujolds are tired,” Flink said. “They just don’t have the energy. They just want it over.”

The legal battle dates to 2005 when the village used eminent domain to gain emergency access to a series of Riverside Drive and Kiwassa Road properties to replace a sewer line. Several property owners took the village to court, arguing it didn’t follow the requirements of the state’s Eminent Domain Procedure Law in its effort to get sewer easements from them.

In an August 2010 ruling, state Supreme Court Judge David Demarest agreed, but his decision was overturned the following year by a state appeals court. It found the village did follow proper procedure and was entitled to immediate access to the properties because it was at risk of losing its no-interest financing for the project and because raw sewage from the sewer line had leaked into the lake, sparking concerns from state and federal regulators.

The only remaining issue, at that point, was how much the property owners should be paid by the village for the taking of an easement across their land. The Bujolds, the only remaining property owners who hadn’t reached a settlement with the village, asked for $300,000 to cover the value of the easements, the damage to their properties, restoration work and attorney fees. The village offered $75,000.

In a series of hearings last year, each side had its own appraiser testify as to what impact the easements had on the value of the Bujolds’ property. The village’s appraiser said the easements didn’t affect the property’s value at all, while the Bujolds’ appraiser estimated total damages at $196,000.

However, Demarest threw out both appraisals in a ruling in March of this year, saying neither expert provided a “plausible basis” for his opinion. He said there was “ample proof” that the Bujolds’ property was not restored to the condition it was in before the sewer line was installed: numerous trees and shrubs were destroyed, relocated manholes were more visible and attempts to restore grass were “minimally successful.” The judge put the cost of restoration at $48,193 and the total damages due to loss of trees at $42,570. He issued a judgement against the village for that combined amount, plus interest and other costs, and ordered the two sides to settle the matter.

Once the judge threw out the two appraisals, Flink said the only recourse for the Bujolds would have been to seek a new trial on the value of the easements. He said his clients didn’t want to do that.

“What made (the settlement) much more palatable for them was that the judge agreed with them 100 percent that the village damaged their property, never restored it, and was obligated to make good on that,” Flink said. “The judge awarded us more than the village ever offered. This is not the outcome we hoped for, but it’s a compromise.

“Judge Demarest, for what it’s worth, had a tough role here,” Flink added. “I think he called it like he saw it. The Bujolds and my firm appreciate his position and his hard work in getting this resolved.”

Doug Foss, the Rochester-based lawyer who handled the case for the village, said he thought the settlement was reasonable.

“Like most settlements, neither party is happy with it,” he said. “Given the position of the parties before the hearing, do I think it’s a better outcome? Yes, I do.”

Village Treasurer Paul Ellis said the $150,000 would be taken from the village’s sewer reserves.

“We do have sufficient fund balance to cover the expenditure,” he said.

This has been a costly fight for the village. Village officials reported in late May 2012 that the case had cost $408,830, mostly in legal fees, since September 2005. That number is higher now, given that the case continued for another two-and-a-half years. Ellis said he wasn’t immediately able to provide an estimate on those additional expenses. The $408,830 also doesn’t include any costs prior to September 2005, when the village hired other lawyers and incurred other expenses in a failed attempt to obtain the easements.

Mayor Clyde Rabideau described the case as a “sad saga,” noting it started before he took office in 2010.

“I really regret the village getting tangled up in court with any village taxpayer,” he said. “I’d really like to put this behind us, and if there’s any similar type of case in the future, I’d like to sit down and work it out before the lawyers get their talons into it.”