ZELIENOPLE AIRPORT AUTHORITY v. LANCASTER TOWNSHIP et al

Filing 18

MEMORANDUM and ORDER denying 14 Emergency Motion for Declaratory Relief based on "Adjacent Areas" exception to Articles of Incorporation. Signed by Chief Judge Gary L. Lancaster on 5/10/11. (map)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

ZELIENOPLE AIRPORT AUTHORITY,

Plaintiff,
v.

Civil Action No. 10-1601

LANCASTER TOWNSHIP, et al.,
Defendants.

MEMORANDUM
Gary L. Lancaster,
Chief Judge.
This
Authority
Township

has

Authority's
This

is

issue

a

dispute

between

and

(ZAA)

nearby

Lancaster

refused
(WBCA)

has

~,

May

to

consent

extension

been

in

the

Zelienople

Township.

to

Western

2011

Airport
Lancaster

Butler

of

sewer

service

to

the

dispute

since

2003.

ZAA

has

County
Airport.
filed

a

motion styled an "Emergency Motion for Declaratory Relief Based
on

'Adjacent

[doc.

no.

Areas'

Exception

to

Articles

of

Incorporation.

u

Although ZAA has not attached a proposed order,

14].

in the body of the motion ZAA requests "an Order declaring that
the consent of Lancaster Township is not a condition to WBCA's
providing
Because

sewer

service

Lancaster

to

Township

the
is

Airport.
the

U

only

[doc.

Zelienople

constitute

a

Airport,

final

such

resolution

relief,
of

this

if
matter

at

5].

that

has

14

municipality

refused to consent to the extension of WBCA's
the

no.

sewer service to
granted,
on

the

would
merits,

splacing all federal claims and dispensing with the need for
any

her

proceedings

in

this

case.

For

the

following

reasons, we will deny the motion.
As an initial matter,

we do not consider the present

circumstances sufficient to warrant emergency relief.
to ZM,

an emergency

sts because of

According

the "imminent loss" of

$275,000 in grant money from the Pennsylvania Bureau of Aviation
s sewer project.

for
earma

to the Airport

cannot

be

ZM indicates that "[t] he current grant

dispute

restored

between

last week on April 30,

to

ZM and

"permanent

earmark"

Lancaster Township

grant is apparently in "

status
is

2011" and
until

the

resolved.

The

rary earmark" status which can be

terminated " ...at the pleasure of the Governor's Office ... " at any
time.

[doc . No. 14].
There is

As stated above, this dispute began in 2003.
no

doubt

related
years

that

grant

money

the

sewer

proj ect

to

t

this

dispute

has

and

other

have been
been

economic
lost

ongoing.

opportunities

during
ZAA

the

has

eight

made

no

showing that the loss of this particular grant money is somehow
unique,

future

grant money is lost,
the

loss

of

the

grant

monies

will

be

unavail

e

if

this

or that economic damages could not remedy

grant

at

conclusion

appropriate.

2

of

this

case,

if

However,

more

consented to

on

April

14,

2011,

ng Lancaster Township's deadline

the amended comp
of allowing
May [doc.

importantly,

to answer

until June 15, 2011 for the stated purpose

settlement discussions

no.

ZAA

12].

to

take

place

in April

and

Lancaster Township's answer would have

due on April 19, 2011, which is notably before the current grant
earmark

expi

Moreover,

according

to

Lancaster

Township,

counsel for ZAA actually delayed the scheduling of a settlement
meeting between WBCA,

ZAA, and all four pertinent municipalit

during the week of April

25,

2011.

ZAA cannot

convince

s
s

court that an emergency exists when it agreed only weeks

to

grant an extension of two months to Lancaster Township to answer
the

amended

failed,

The

complaint.

fact

that

settlement

negot

tions

or may have never even began for whatever reason,

does

not create an emergency.
Nor does the fact that ZAA very recently discove
potent

rable

1

incorporation,
emergency.
wi th the

the

i.e.

Despite

provision

the

Pennsylvania

adjacent
fact

that

WBCA's

in

articles

areas

provision,

these

documents

Department of State

a

in 1973,

of

create
were
it

an

filed
rs

that ZAA did not discover the existence of this provision until
after

it

Discovery

of

its

1

a

new

original
basis

complaint
on
3

which

in
to

December
obtain

of

2010.
relief

requested,

regardless of its potential strength, does not create

an emergency situation in an eight (8) year old dispute.
Finally,

we will not grant emergency relief in a case

over which our jurisdiction is disputed, and the presence of all
indispensable parties is questioned.
motion

to

dismiss

ZAA's

original

Lancaster Township filed a

complaint

on

this court lacked subject matter jurisdiction.
Lancaster Township rai
j

the

basis

that

In that motion,

serious questions as to whether ZAA's

sdictional allegations are sufficient to invoke this court's
ral

question

jurisdiction.

Lancaster

that ZAA had failed to join indispensable
Courts

of

dispute

Common

Pleas

it

as

a

have

ses

Authorities Act of 1945,
Although

5601.

ZAA's

exclusive
the

under
P.L.

filing

382,

Township

argued

rties and that the

jurisdiction
Pennsylvania

as amended,

of the

also

over

this

Municipal

53 Pa.

C.S.A.

amended complaint

§

renders

the motion to dismiss moot, Lancaster Township has made the same
arguments
serious
this

in

opposition

questions

case,

we

will

to

regarding
not

this
our

emergency motion.
jurisdiction

declaratory

amount to a final disposition of this case,
"emergencyU motion.

4

to

relief,

With

such

preside

over

which

would

in the context of an

As

such,

we deny ZAA's motion

emergency relief.

An appropriate order will be filed contemporaneously with this
memorandum.
June 15,

Lancaster Township's respons

2011.

Shou

associated with res

ZAA wish to avoid t
ng whether this court

pleading is due on
delay that may
has jurisdiction,

ZAA is may file suit in the appropriate state court.

5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

ZELIENOPLE AIRPORT AUTHORITY,
Plaintiff,

v.

Civil Action No. 10-1601

LANCASTER TOWNSHIP, et al.,
Defendants.

*ORDER
AND NOW,

this

LQ

day of May,

2011,

set forth in the accompanying memorandum,
that

Z

ienople

Declaratory

Airport

Relief

Based

Authority's
on

for

Areas'

Articles of Incorporation" [doc. no. 14] is DENIED.

cc:

All Counsel of Record

reasons

it is HEREBY ORDERED

"Emergency

'Adjacent

the

Motion

for

Exception

to