Ligonier supervisors pick special counsel to handle Foxley Farm matters
Ligonier Township supervisors have appointed attorney Gary Falatovich as special legal counsel for matters involving Foxley Farm as it seeks to offer agritourism events and weddings in a district zoned for residential use.
During a meeting held before the board's work session on Thursday, the supervisors voted to accept attorney Mark Hamilton's resignation letter.
Hamilton, a Mt. Lebanon attorney who resides in Rector, was appointed interim solicitor in November.
In January, supervisors appointed Scott Avolio as township solicitor, but Hamilton was retained for matters in which Avolio had a conflict of interest, including Foxley Farm.
Hamilton's resignation letter, dated May 14, was sent after supervisors voted 2-1 on May 13 to reject a zoning amendment he proposed to allow agricultural tourism on residential properties as a conditional use.
Foxley Farm owners PJ and Maggie Nied want to host weddings and other events, which are not permitted on their property.
The Nieds, Ligonier Township and several neighbors of the farm have been involved in a dispute in Westmoreland Common Pleas Court.
The board voted unanimously to appoint Falatovich, who has a law office in Greensburg, at a rate of $110 per hour. According to his website, Falatovich specializes in cases involving gas and oil leases, personal injury and real estate contracts and zoning.
Falatovich declined to comment on Thursday.
Nicole Chynoweth is a staff writer for Trib Total Media.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.