The applicant, a corporation seeking to construct a housing complex for the elderly in an area designated “high density residential,” was denied a application for a condition permit because the proposal did not include the required amenities for such a complex, nor did it address the traffic and access issues associated with housing for the elderly. The applicant then deposed a number of people including the township’s planning consultant, the township manager and the township’s attorney. Following a decision by the trial court upholding the township’s denial, the applicant appealed and argued, among other things, that the board acted in an arbitrary and biased manner. As a result, the township appointed a special solicitor to represent them, but the applicant alleged that the appointment of the special solicitor created a biased and prejudiced tribunal, was not authorized by state statute, and that the special solicitor acted in an adversarial nature throughout the proceedings. The Court found these arguments unconvincing and, contrary to the applicant’s assertion, found that the appointment of the special solicitor was necessary to avoid a conflict of interest. The Court cited to statutory language supporting the board’s authority to retain an independent attorney to defend it.
K. Hovnanian Pa. Acquisitions, LLC v. Newtown Twp. Bd. of Supervisors, 954 A.2d 718 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 7/25/2008).
The opinion can be accessed at: http://www.aopc.org/OpPosting/CWealth/out/669CD07_7-25-08.pdf
