Share This Page

New York company to appeal sale of former glass plant in Jeannette

| Saturday, Aug. 9, 2014, 12:01 a.m.

The attorney for a New York businessman served notice he will appeal a Westmoreland County judge's decision upholding the sale of the former Jeannette Glass plant to the county, according to court records.

Aaron Kress said he will challenge a ruling by Judge Anthony Marsili in Commonwealth Court confirming the sale of Jeannette Glass to the Westmoreland County Industrial Development Corp.

City and county officials said the appeal by Zion Bullitt is not unexpected, given owner Abe Zion's track record of prolonged legal battles.

“It just shows the history of the Zion family,” said city attorney Scott Avolio.

He faulted the state Department of Environmental Protection for failing to fully enforce the terms of a consent order reached with Zion to clean up toxins and other hazardous wastes, the residue of years of glass production, on the 13-acre property.

“I hope they don't use the appeal as justification to give them additional time,” Avolio added.

“Believe me, we don't want to prolong it,” said DEP spokesman John Poister. “We want to see the work done. That's the primary objective.”

Poister said the consent order the state signed with Zion has an escape clause.

“The situation is complicated by the fact that the order says if they cannot gain access to the site for six months or more, the aspects of the consent order would be moot,” he said. “They're claiming they have not been able to gain access. We're concerned about that right now.”

If the county decision is allowed to stand, Zion Bullitt would not be responsible for the remainder of the cleanup work, which has been slowed by the company's failure to complete required tasks under the terms of the consent agreement. Zion Bullitt had completed a significant amount of remediation, but work stopped this summer.

Remaining cleanup costs would fall on the county. Avolio said the Industrial Development Corp. was aware of the potential cleanup work if it acquired the land.

“The county bid with the full knowledge there were environmental issues,” he said. “The county is prepared to deal with those issues.”

Judge Anthony Marsili ruled last month that the county Tax Claims Bureau properly notified Zion that the property was sold to the county because he failed to pay $171,000 in taxes for a two-year period. The county bid more than $305,000 for the property.

A letter sent to Zion's New York address was signed “Zion” and returned to the county. Kress, Zion's attorney from New Kensington, said Zion, 89, and his son Mark, who handles his father's business affairs, were in the Virgin Islands at the time the letter was delivered so they couldn't have signed the receipt. The elder Zion is in poor health, according to his son's testimony at a nonjury trial earlier this summer.

Jeannette has had dealings with Zion since he purchased the former plant for $4 million in 1983.

The relationship has been characterized by years of failed negotiations to get Zion to either reopen the factory, clean up the property or turn over ownership to the city.

When the DEP cited the company for a series of environmental violations in 2011, Zion appealed to the Environmental Hearing Board in a drawn-out legal fight that ended this year when the company dropped its appeal and signed the consent order.

Richard Gazarik is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 724-830-6292 or rgazarik@tribweb.com.

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 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.