READINGTON - Solberg Airport won a landmark victory on Friday in its long-running legal battle with the township when a state Appellate Court upheld a Superior Court ruling that dismissed the township's condemnation of the airport.
The appellate decision upholds retired Superior Court Judge Paul Armstrong's ruling, after a 39-day trial in 2014 and 2015, that the township had pursued the condemnation of the airport in "bad faith."
The appellate court ruled, however, that the township can pursue a new condemnation proceeding against the airport as long as it does not conflict with the airport's aviation-related activities and the associated buffer area.
EARLIER:Solberg court case enters second decade with township appeal
MORE:Thor Solberg Jr., co-owner of Solberg Airport, dies at 74
The court concluded its 43-page decision with a request that the township and airport attempt to find a solution.
"The present litigation has carried on for more than a dozen years," the court wrote. "Presidents and Governors have come and gone. And babies who were born when this case started will soon become teenagers. During that time considerable public and private funds have been expended on the case, with many days of proceedings. Although we appreciate the fine advocacy of both sides, we respectfully suggest that, before any further litigation is pursued, the parties might consider renewing their efforts to bring an end to this seemingly-interminable battle with an amicable resolution."
Laurence Orloff, attorney for the airport, was hopeful the decision will prompt the township to reach a settlement with the airport.
"Now that the Appellate Court has further made it clear that it is the federal and largely state regulators who will ultimately determine the size and shape of the airport, and not Readington's politicians, maybe Readington will finally sit down with the Solbergs to work out a reasonable plan for the airport’s future that should be acceptable to all parties," Orloff said in a statement. "I wish I could say on behalf of the Solbergs that they are optimistic that this will happen, but after almost 13 years of litigation, and more than 20 years of dispute, one can only hope for that conclusion and not necessarily expect it."
Orloff said the Solberg family has always wanted to reach an agreement with Readington.
"As long-time and continuing residents of Readington, they want to remain part of the community in every sense," he said.
Richard Cushing, the township's attorney in the appeal, did not respond to a request for comment.
The history
The township had sought to condemn the airport because of concerns that its runways and facilities would be expanded to accommodate small jets. One of the township's primary worries was losing control over the future of the property to either the New Jersey Department of Transportation or the Federal Aviation Administration.
A referendum on a $22 million bond to fund the condemnation of the airport was approved by township voters in 2006. The township then took legal action to acquire through condemnation the development rights to the 102 acres of the property used for the airport and acquire the remaining 624 acres.
The Solberg family opposed the township's action, leading to the legal battle which has been in the courts since then.
In 2009, an appellate panel reversed summary judgement for the township and remanded the matter for trial which finally began in May 2014.
The ruling
In its ruling, the appellate panel wrote that Armstrong's decision is "legally sound and amply supported by substantial evidence."
The decision of the three-judge panel of our Appellate Division confirms entirely Judge Armstrong's “detailed findings” that Readington, through its public officials, acted in bad faith when they condemned the Solberg Airport property. So now, including Judge Armstrong, four distinguished judges have reached this conclusion.
Sadly, this action on Readington’s part has not only prejudiced the Solbergs but also cost Readington and its taxpayers millions of dollars both in its own legal fees and that of the Solbergs.
At the end of its Opinion, the Appellate Division “respectfully suggests” that before the battle continues, the parties attempt to resolve it. That has always been the Solbergs' desire. As long-time and continuing residents of Readington, they want to remain part of the community in every sense.
In his ruling, Armstrong had written that the township's condemnation plan "was orchestrated to prevent airport expansion under the pretextual banner of open-space policy" and that it amounted to a "manifest abuse of power."
Armstrong said that "the resulting lack of transparency in the township's action subverted the political process and weakened private-property-rights protection."
Armstrong, sitting in Somerville, added that Readington's condemnation was a "deliberate subterfuge" and that the township had "no reasonable need for the Solberg property."
The township's "purpose was never environmental protection, but rather limiting airport expansion," he said.
Armstrong ruled that the township's action was "bought in bad faith" and that the township's "engaged in an elaborate public agitation effort to incite voter opposition, which it then channeled into an opaque condemnation effort under the guise of the necessity of the contiguous greenway."
The judge zeroed in on the township's use of a public-relations firm, CN Communication, in the campaign to win public support for the condemnation of the airport in 2006. The township argued the action would stop Solberg from expanding its runways.
Readington, in July 2006, issued a news release that "deceptively emphasized" the township wanted to negotiate with the airport, instead of proceeding with condemnation.
But when CN Communication sensed "public disquiet" with the use of eminent domain, the firm devised a new strategy, which touted the township's wish to preserve open space.
Testimony during the trial, Armstrong wrote, revealed that township officials were "faithful pupils" of the "shifting strategies" of CN Communication.
In a footnote, Armstrong wrote the township officials had "a shared cynical attitude toward the electorate and an imprudent lack of public candor concerning the overall costs of the first time use of eminent domain, which offends the conscience of the court."
Armstrong wrote that former Mayor Julia Allen's testimony under cross-examination "exposed a faltering memory" and was "un-forthright, evasive" and "argumentative."
Though New Jersey law allows eminent domain to be used to acquire property for open-space preservation, Armstrong ruled that Readington's use of the process toward Solberg was "a pretext for an unconstitutional taking."
Readington is 41 percent open space, the judge noted
Armstrong also wrote that Solberg, as a public-aviation airport, serves a "valuable public purpose."
"Men and women throughout history gazed longingly at the soaring effortless freedom of birds, pondering release from the symbolic bondage of gravity," the judge wrote.
Staff Writer Mike Deak:908-243-6607; [email protected]
908-484-1600
Service Areas
