VIRGINIA

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF

PRINCE WILLIAM COUNTY
---------------------------------------------------------------x
ACTION for RURAL CRESCENT, LLC )
Plaintiff )
) COMPLAINT
vs. )
) CL 175954
THE BOARD OF COUNTY SUPERVISORS )
OF PRINCE WILLIAM COUNTY, VIRGINIA )
Defendant. )
)
SERVE: )
)
Michelle R. Robl, Esq. )
County Attorney, Prince William County, VA )
1 County Complex Court )
Prince William, Virginia 22192-9201 )
)
and )
)
Hon. Corey A. Stewart, Esq., Chairman )
Prince William County, Virginia )
Board of Supervisors )
1 County Complex Court )
Prince William, Virginia 22192-9201 )
---------------------------------------------------------------x

COMPLAINT FOR TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT

INJUNCTIVE AND DECLARATORY RELIEF

This is an action for temporary and permanent injunctive and declaratory relief,
brought by the Plaintiff, Action for Rural Crescent, LLC to prevent the Defendant, the
Board of Supervisors of Prince William County, from implementing its approval of an
application for a Special Use Permit, relating to the granting of a sewer connection in the
Rural Crescent of Prince William County, in an exceptionally designated rural district in
Prince William County, that prohibits such sewer connections without the showing of
extraordinary and extenuating circumstances for such an allowance.

Plaintiff, asks this Honorable Court to grant the injunctive and declaratory relief
requested herein, because the actions of the Board of Supervisors of Prince William
County in approving the Special Use Permit was in violation of Virginia law, including,
but not limited to, the Prince William County Comprehensive Land Use Plan, the Prince
William County Zoning Ordinance, the Virginia Administrative Code and the Board of
Supervisors own governing rules and procedures.
 JURISDICTION AND VENUE

1. Jurisdiction is proper in this Court pursuant to VA. Code Sec. 8.01-330

and Sec. 8.01-620 and the Prince William Zoning Ordinance Sec. 2-300.90.

2. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to VA. Code Sec. 8.01-261.

THE PARTIES

3. Action for Rural Crescent, LLC (the "Plaintiff") is a Virginia limited

liability corporation doing business in Prince William County.

4. The Defendant is the Board of County Supervisors of Prince William

County (the "BOCS").

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

5. The real property that is the subject of this action is located at 12655 Vint
Hill Road, Nokesville, Virginia 20181, approximately 550 feet east of the intersection of
Vint Hill Road and Kettle Run Road, and west of Schaeffer Lane, identified as GPIN
7495-71-6506 (the subject "Property"').

6. The Property is currently owned by ADAMS Greater Gainesville, LLC,

46903 Sugarland Road, Sterling, Virginia 20164.

7. An affiliate of the Property owner, the All Dulles Area Muslim Society
("ADAMS"), is a religious organization, established in 1983, which has developed and
built religious facilities in the Northern Virginia municipalities of Sterling, Ashburn,
Centerville, Chantilly, Great Falls, Herndon, Leesburg, McLean, Manassas and Reston.

8. The Property is designated under local regulations as AE, Agriculture or

Estate, in Prince William County's Comprehensive Plan, in an exclusive area designated
"Rural Crescent", and is zoned A-1, Agricultural.

9. Defendant first adopted The Comprehensive Plan in 1974, which has been
revised with multiple, formal legislative amendments over the years.

10. The Comprehensive Plan is a general guide to the location, character,

and extent of proposed or anticipated land use, including public facilities. It
provides guidance for land use development decisions made by the Planning Commission
and the Board of County Supervisors.

11. In 1998 Defendant adopted a Comprehensive Plan that, for the first time,
formally established an Urban Growth Boundary in order to the strengthen the County's
capacity to control urban sprawl by defining an area that was available for higher density
development and a protected rural area known as the Rural Crescent.

-2-
 12. The Rural Crescent is that portion of Prince William County containing
agricultural, open space, forestry, and large-lot residential land uses, as well as two
federal parks. A rural area zoning designation helps preserve the Countys agricultural
economy and resources, the quality of the groundwater supply, and the present open
space and rural character of Prince William County. The Rural Crescent may be served by
public water facilities but not by public sewer facilities, except under emergency
conditions identified in the Prince William County's Sewer Plan or to serve specific
public facilities. Designation of the Rural Crescent and application of the development
goals, policies, and action strategies for it are intended to help avoid the negative
economic, social, and environmental characteristics of sprawl development.

13. ADAMS, through a related limited liability company, purchased the

subject Property in order to develop a large (22,400 square foot) religious facility which
was not in conformity with the existing A-1 zoning of the subject Property, the
Comprehensive Plan, nor the character of the Rural Crescent.

SPECIAL USE PERMIT

14. The Defendant has jurisdiction over the Special Use Permit process in
Prince William County, Virginia.

15. The purpose of a Special Use Permit in Prince William County, Virginia is
to mitigate conflicts with neighboring properties. According to the Prince William County
Reference Manual for Special Use Permits the definition of a "Special Use" is "a land use
that has the potential for creating conflicts with uses on adjacent properties ..." .

16. ADAMS approached a local Prince William County Supervisor with

regard to ADAMS' interest in building on the subject Property.

17. ADAMS was unable to persuade the local Supervisor that the subject
Property was suitable for a sewer connection.

18. The local Supervisor recommended ADAMS consider other, more suitable
sites for their project.

19. ADAMS declined to pursue the Supervisor's recommendations.

20. In March 2014, ADAMS submitted an application for a Special Use

Permit (#PLN2014-00313), dated March 31, 2014, to the Prince William Board of
County Supervisors, by submission to the Prince William County Planning Office and its
staff, for approval to develop and construct a 22,400 square foot facility on the Property
with a connection to public sewer. Several revised submissions were submitted and
reviewed ("ADAMS SUP").

-3-
 21. The Planning Office Staff report to the Planning Commission, dated
October 21, 2016, stated that the ADAMS SUP did not meet the criteria necessary to
grant a sewer connection within the Rural Crescent and therefore the Staff was unable to
recommend approval of a sewer connection for the ADAMS SUP.

22. The supporting documentation for the ADAMS SUP application to the
Planning Office contained no soils analysis or site planning for a septic systems as
required under Planning Office guidelines.

23. The ADAMS SUP application did not adequately analyze the traffic
impact of their proposed project on the community.

24. On December 7, 2016 the Planning Commission recommended against a

sewer connection for the subject Property.

THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS' HEARING

25. The Prince William County Board of Supervisors' actions and decisions is
governed by its Rules of Procedure, Board of County Supervisors, Prince William County
(as amended thru June 21, 2017) (the "BOCS Rules").

26. The BOCS Rules provide that Roberts Rules of Order Newly Revised
"shall govern the conduct of all meetings..." (BOCS Rules, Section I.1).

27. The Board of Supervisors scheduled a public hearing for the ADAMS SUP
on Tuesday, June 27, 2017 at 7:30 PM at the Prince William County Complex in
Woodbridge, Virginia.

28. The Board of Supervisors public hearing on June 27, 2017 lasted
approximately 8.5 hours with over 175 persons speaking for and against the ADAMS
SUP during the allotted Citizens Time.

29. After a prolonged Citizens Time period, the Board of Supervisors took up
for consideration the ADAMS SUP application with various Board Members using their
Supervisors Time to make preliminary public statements for and against the Application.

30. During the Supervisors discussion regarding the ADAMS SUP, Supervisor
Jenkins spoke forcefully in opposition to the ADAMS SUP sewer connection.

31. After various motions and counter-motions, the eight (8) member Board of
Supervisors voted on a motion to allow for the construction of the ADAMS facility with
sewer connection. Four (4) members voted against the motion and four (4) members
voted in favor of the motion, resulting in a tie vote of 4-4 regarding the ADAMS SUP
Application.

-4-
 32. Under the BOCS Rules, a tie vote is deemed to be a denial of the motion
under consideration. (BOCS Rules, Section D.4 states: "In the event of a tie vote, the
motion under consideration shall be deemed denied").

33. On June 20, 2017 the BOCS voted on a different matter, resulting in a tie
4-4 vote, relating to a November 2017 referendum motion to authorize Prince William
County to issue general performance bonds for a proposed Potomac Nationals Stadium
and improvements in Woodbridge, Virginia (the "Potomac Motion").

34. Based upon the BOCS Rules, the tie vote of 4-4 was deemed by BOCS a
denial of the Potomac Motion under consideration.

35. The June 27-28, 2017 BOCS discussion should have concluded and the
meeting adjourned immediately following the 4-4 tie of the Board of Supervisors.

36. On June 28, 2017, in the early morning hours, Chairman Corey Stewart of
the Board of Supervisors insisted, without explanation or reasonable basis, on pursuing
an improper motion for reconsideration in contravention of the already defeated motion
for the ADAMS SUP.

37. In pursuit of the improper motion for reconsideration, Chairman Corey

Stewart forced the Board of Supervisors to navigate through a series of invented and
confusing procedures.

38. During the sequence of those confusing procedures imposed by Chairman

Corey Stewart, Supervisor Jenkins was inappropriately directed by Chairman Corey
Stewart to vote "yes" in favor of a rogue "question" granting a sewer connection.

39. The entire BOCS meeting of June 27-28, 2017 was video recorded and is
available on the public record.

40. An expert Parliamentarian's analysis of the procedures employed by

Chairman Corey Stewart concluded that there were multiple infractions of the BOCS
governance at the June 27-28, 2017 BOCS Hearing.

COUNT I
DENIAL OF DUE PROCESS__

41. Paragraphs 1 through 40, above are incorporated herein by reference, as if

fully set out in this paragraph 41.

42. There exists an actual controversy between the parties, and Plaintiff is
without a remedy at law other than by means of this action for injunctive and declaratory
relief.

-5-
 43. The ADAMS' Special Use Permit submitted to the Prince William
Planning Commission failed to comply with the requirements of a Special Use Permit
application process in Prince William County.

44. Defendant's failure to enforce the application requirements of a Special

Use Permit submission in Prince William County constitutes a denial of Plaintiff's due
process rights under the Constitution of the United States and the Commonwealth of
Virginia.

45. Defendant failed to follow and observe its own rules and regulations and
Virginia law in granting the ADAMS' Special Use Permit.

46. Defendant's failure to follow and observe its own rules and regulations and
Virginia law in granting the ADAMS' Special Use Permit constitutes a denial of
Plaintiff's due process rights under the Constitution of the United States and the
Commonwealth of Virginia.

47. Plaintiff will suffer irreparable injury unless temporary and permanent
declaratory and injunctive relief is granted to it by the Court.

48. The threatened injury to Plaintiff outweighs any potential injury to

Defendant that the Court's granting of temporary and permanent declaratory and
injunctive relief to Plaintiff may cause.

49. The temporary and permanent declaratory and injunctive relief requested
herein by Plaintiff is for the benefit of, and would not be adverse to, the public interest.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Action for Rural Crescent, LLC, asks this Honorable
Court to grant temporary and permanent declaratory and injunctive relief by ordering:

(a) that Defendant's actions are in violation of the Prince William

County Zoning Ordinance;

(b) that Defendant's actions are in violation of Plaintiff's due process

rights;

(c) that Defendant's approval of the ADAMS' Special Use Permit is in

violation of law and is null and void ab initio;

(d) that ADAMS' Special Use Permit is denied; and

(e) awarding to Plaintiff all such other and further relief as the Court
finds just and equitable under this action.

-6-
 COUNT II
ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS APPROVAL
OF
SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION__

50. Paragraphs 1 through 49, above are incorporated herein by reference, as if

fully set out in this paragraph 50.

51. There exists an actual controversy between the parties, and Plaintiff is
without a remedy at law other than by means of this action for injunctive and declaratory
relief.

52. Defendant's approval of ADAMS' Special Use Permit application was

arbitrary, capricious and in violation of Virginia law.

53. Plaintiff will suffer irreparable injury unless temporary and permanent
declaratory and injunctive relief is granted by this Court.

54. The threatened injury to Plaintiff outweighs any potential injury to

Defendant that the Court's granting of temporary and permanent declaratory and
injunctive relief may cause.

55. The temporary and permanent declaratory and injunctive relief requested
herein by Plaintiff is for the benefit of, and would not be adverse to, the public interest.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Action for Rural Crescent, LLC, asks this Honorable
Court to grant temporary and permanent declaratory and injunctive relief by ordering:

(a) that Defendant's actions are in violation of Section 32-700.60 of

the Prince William County Zoning Ordinance;

(b) that Defendant's approval of the ADAMS' Special Use Permit is in

violation of law and is null and void ab initio;

(c) that ADAMS' Special Use Permit is denied; and

(d) awarding to Plaintiff all such other and further relief as the Court
finds just and equitable under this action.

Respectfully submitted,

BY: _/s/_______________________________
Member of
ACTION for RURAL CRESCENT, LLC
4445 Corporation Lane, Suite 264
Virginia Beach, VA 23462

-7-