County asks state court to allow local court to take lead in prison issue
The Fayette County Board of Elections has asked the state Supreme Court to delay any action tied to the local prison referendum matter until it is heard by the county Court of Common Pleas.
On Tuesday, the Supreme Court requested an answer to a motion filed by Uniontown resident John Cofchin that earlier asked the court to “exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction” and order the county to add a question regarding the planned construction of a new prison to the May 20 ballot.
The county’s response was due by noon Thursday.
John Cupp, the county’s acting chief solicitor, said that the response was filed with the court’s prothonotary’s office before the deadline.
“I merely stated that the matter should not be heard by the Supreme Court until (Court of Common Pleas) President Judge (John F.) Wagner has ruled,” Cupp said Thursday.
Cofchin is a member of the local “referendum committee” that is challenging the county’s decision to construct a 99,000-square-foot, 480-bed prison in Dunbar Township at an estimated cost of $30 million.
The committee includes Dr. Evelyn Hovanec of North Union Township, Ralph and Jerrie Mazza of Vanderbilt, David Show of Hopwood, John Buchanan of Chalk Hill and Cofchin.
The ballot question, if approved by the voters, would halt any planning, designing or financing for the construction of the new Fayette County Justice and Rehabilitation Center and mandate that officials include the public in future discussions regarding the replacement, expansion or renovation of the current 125-year-old lockup.
As the county election board was poised to deny placing the referendum ballot question on the May 20 primary ballot, the committee sought court intervention at the local and state level.
Wagner delayed scheduling a hearing pending the outcome of the election board meeting.
In a 2-1 vote on Tuesday, the election board, comprised of Commissioners Al Ambrosini, Vincent Zapotosky and Angela M. Zimmerlink, said that the referendum had no constitutional basis and could not appear on the ballot. Ambrosini and Zapotosky voted no to allowing the question be placed on the ballot, while Zimmerlink declined to vote stating that the meeting was not held in compliance with local election regulations or policies.
Cofchin advised the Supreme Court that, while the committee had met its responsibilities, the election board had violated its rights.
“The sacred trust of the people has been placed in you,” Cofchin stated in the court document. “You are the guardians of justice. Rights and statutes were constantly violated in this case, and may represent a pattern of abuse.
“(The committee) respectfully requests this honorable court to exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction and order that the prison referendum initiative be placed on the primary ballot to quickly and efficiently correct violations of (the committee’s) rights, as a matter of law vacate the lower court’s order.”
It is unclear when the Supreme Court or Court of Common Pleas will hear the matter or which court will first take up the matter.