Politics & Government
Hearing Set for Lawsuit Against Liquor-Sales Referendum
The lawsuit contends that the placement of two questions on the ballot relating to liquor sales in Moorestown is illegal.
A state Superior Court judge will hear arguments next month in a that seeks to block a referendum on liquor sales in Moorestown from appearing on the November ballot.
Judge Ronald E. Bookbinder will hear the case at 10 a.m. Oct. 13 during a Superior Court hearing in Mount Holly. The referendum is scheduled to appear on the ballot on Election Day, Nov. 8.
The resident who filed the lawsuit, William Cox, said following a scheduling call with Bookbinder on Monday morning that he's confident the lawsuit will be resolved before then.
Find out what's happening in Moorestownwith free, real-time updates from Patch.
In a complaint filed last week, Cox contends the referendum questions proposed by Pennsylvania Real Estate Investment Trust (PREIT), owner of the Moorestown Mall, violate state laws covering the placement of referendums.
Cox's lawsuit cites one such law, which states that once voters act on a referendum question, the result remains in effect for five years and the same question cannot be reintroduced until that five-year window has expired, nor can any “ordinances, resolutions or regulations inconsistent with the result of such referendum” take effect.
Find out what's happening in Moorestownwith free, real-time updates from Patch.
He said Monday that PREIT has asked to intervene in the lawsuit, and that he did not object. This means PREIT will file its own legal papers arguing against Cox's complaint.
It wasn't immediately clear Monday how vote-by-mail ballots distributed before Oct. 13 will be treated if Cox prevails in court.
"That is going to present a practical problem for the county," he said.
The lawsuit names as defendants the township and the Burlington County Clerk's Office.
Cox, a commercial litigation attorney, argues in his complaint the referendums introduced by PREIT—the first to permit the sale of alcohol in Moorestown, the second to restrict sales to the mall—and by township council, violate that statute because voters rejected a similar referendum in 2007.
Though the wording of the 2011 question is slightly altered from the 2007 question, Cox said the spirit and the intent are virtually the same.
Acting on township attorney Thomas Coleman’s guidance, council approved resolutions in August directing the county clerk to place PREIT’s referendums on the Nov. 8 ballot.
Coleman’s position was that the referendum this year was different enough with the slight wording change, and the mall-restriction caveat, to allow its placement on the ballot.
Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.