MEDIA – Widener University is suing the City of Chester, its Mayor Thaddeus Kirkland and individuals responsible for what it says is illegal placement of parking poles and meters on its property, believing it to be an ongoing form of trespass.
On Jan. 2, Widener filed suit in the Delaware County Court of Common Pleas against Chester, Kirkland, PFS VII, LLC of Milford, Mass. and a pair of unnamed contractors to be later learned through discovery.
As the largest property owner in Chester and one of the City’s largest employers, Widener boasts 1,400 staff members and 5,600 undergraduate and graduate students.
In its lawsuit, the school claims that the City is attempting to raise revenue by illegally installing parking on its campus – something it says the City and its co-defendants were “never granted the right” to do, nor does it “serve a proper public purpose.”
Though its property is exempt from taxes, Widener maintains it pays other forms of tax and provides “substantial” financial support to the City in the form of millions of dollars to support its police department, employee tuition, educational improvements and student aid, among many others, all of which could be jeopardized given the continuing events surrounding the litigation, the suit claims.
On April 25, the City signed a “Master Asset Management Agreement” with co-defendant PFS VII, along with an “Amended and Restated Assignment, Funding and Management Agreement” later on Sept. 5.
PFS VII offers mobile resource management for municipalities that seek to collect revenue from parking meters, would be responsible for installing all parking equipment, including meters, kiosks, lighting and security cameras, plus receiving and managing all meter collections and parking fines.
Under the amended agreement, PFS VII agreed to advance to the City $1 million in three equal payments in accordance with the completion of three stages of parking equipment installation, the suit claims.
According to the lawsuit, that installation began on Nov. 21 throughout Widener’s campus. The school says it first became aware of the City’s comprehensive parking plan to install 1,500 parking meters citywide, through an issued press release on Dec. 4. 1,200 of them were set to be installed on the Widener campus.
For the 1,200 meters already installed, drivers would be charged $2 an hour to park, $48 for a 24-hour day, $336 for a seven-day week and $1,080 for a 30-day month, the suit claims. The meters were to be made operational on Dec. 31, with enforcement slated to begin on Jan. 14, the suit says.
“The 1,200 parking meters placed in the Widener University area were installed on sidewalks that are owned and maintained by Widener. Plaintiff’s property lines extended either to the middle of the cartways or to the curb line and encompass the sidewalks that are now and will be occupied by the City’s parking meters and equipment. The City did not request petitioner’s permission to install the parking meters and equipment, nor was permission ever granted,” the suit states.
The lawsuit also alleges this parking initiative will harm the school’s commuter and resident student enrollment.
“Should Widener lose its commuter enrollment and, estimating a 20 percent loss of resident enrollment, the lost annual revenue to Widener would be a staggering $30.6 million, or 20 percent of the University’s annual revenue. Even a fraction of the lost revenue would jeopardize not only the services to the City, the community, employees and the residents, but also would threaten the very existence and continued operation of the University,” the suit says.
In an answer filed Jan. 8, the City claimed enforcement was not due to begin until Feb. 4, that only 480 parking meters were to be installed on Widener’s property and that the parking rates cited by the school were incorrect.
“While the $2 charge per hour is correct for short-term parking during certain hours, the other figures are incorrect and therefore denied. The parking fee does not apply 24 hours a day and seven days per week; instead, it applies for 60 hours per week, from 8 a.m. until 6 p.m., Monday through Saturday. There will be discounted half-day and full-day rates,” the answer read.
The City maintains its actions are legal and would not harm the school’s finances.
“It has long been a matter of settled Pennsylvania law that a municipality has the authority to install parking meters on the sidewalks abutting property owned by private landowners. The City’s plan to meter parking spaces is legal and was enacted to serve the well-established public purpose of the proper regulation and control of traffic,” the answer states.
For multiple counts of permanent and continuing trespass and conspiracy, the plaintiff is seeking a temporary and permanent injunction, compensatory and punitive damages, attorney’s fees and costs, plus such other relief as may be ordered by the court.
The plaintiff is represented by Rocco P. Imperatrice III and Andrew P. Stafford of Imperatrice Amarant & Bell, in Newtown Square.
The defendant is represented by Brian T. Feeney, Kevin M. Greenberg and George J. Farrell of Greenberg Traurig, in Philadelphia.
Delaware County Court of Common Pleas case 2019-000011
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com