Bill Cox, a local Moorestown Township resident and lawyer, has filed a lawsuit against the county and the township solicitor for allowing a referendum question submitted by Pennsylvania Real Estate Investment Trust to be placed on the Nov. 8 general election ballot.
Cox submitted a lawsuit claiming that PREIT did not wait the necessary five years to resubmit a referendum question to be placed on the ballot. In 2007 Moorestown voters roundly defeated a question that would have allowed liquor licenses to be sold in the township for restaurants to sell liquor.
In 2007, the question that was voted down read as follows:
“Shall the retail sale of all kinds of alcoholic beverages, for consumption on the licensed premises by the glass or other open receptacle pursuant to chapter one of the Title Intoxicating Liquors of the Revised Statutes (s.33: 1–1 et seq.), be permitted in this municipality?”
The question was voted down by a vote of 4,202 to 2,559 in 2007.
Four years later, the question that has been submitted for this year’s ballot reads as follows:
“Shall the sale of all alcoholic beverages at retail, except for consumption on railroad trains, airplanes and boats, and the issuance of any retail licenses, except as aforesaid, pursuant to chapter one of the Title Intoxicating Liquors of the Revised Statutes (§ 33:1–1 et seq.) be permitted in this municipality?”
The question also has a second qualifier that asks the township voters to approve the sale of the liquor licenses to retailers only located “on the same tax lot as an indoor shopping mall in the SRC zoning district.”
Cox submits that this question is not different enough than the original 2007 question and should never have been accepted by the township solicitor and Burlington County Clerk Timothy Tyler.
A hearing for the case has been set for 10 a.m. on Oct. 13 at the Mt. Holly Superior Court. Judge Ronald E. Bookbinder will hear the case.
A PREIT representative Chris Russell said the “11th hour” lawsuit is without merit.
“The lawsuit filed today (last Friday) trying to block the first referendum question from getting on the ballot in Moorestown is completely without merit and will be promptly dismissed. The five-year waiting period for the ballot question only applies if the same exact question is being asked. This year’s question is authorized by a separate statute and therefore the waiting period does not apply. Case law decisions confirm this conclusion,” he said. “This 11th hour lawsuit is a distraction from the important economic, fiscal and quality of life issues that concern Moorestown residents. We look forward to putting this matter behind us and focusing on promoting our plans to transform Moorestown Mall into a fine-dining and entertainment destination that helps provide much needed property tax relief to Moorestown residents.”
