Monroeville Redevelopment Authority's change in its meeting venue from the municipal building to Community College of Allegheny County-Boyce Campus may not matter if a former councilman wins an appeal in Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas.

John Danzilli Jr., former 4th Ward councilman, filed an appeal for a declaratory judgment. The appeal seeks to remove all members from the authority board, claiming their appointments were illegal under Monroeville, state and federal law, according to the petition.

The appeal also seeks ap-pointment of a new authority board by council or Greg Erosenko, the new mayor.

Danzilli petitioned the Pennsylvania attorney general and Allegheny County district attorney to remove the authority board members, but nether has taken such action, according to the appeal.

The attorney general de-ferred to the district attorney, who declined to take such action but indicated it would be merited if Danzilli's petition to remove the board members failed "to remedy the situation," the appeal says.

James Lomeo appointed the authority board members at the Feb. 12 council meeting, the same meeting during which he resigned as mayor.

In choosing those appointees, some of whom were at odds with council on matters such as development, Lomeo in essence was forcing council and some of its biggest detractors to work together.

But the authority board so far has been characterized by infighting and a decision to not use Monroeville's municipal building or staff for meetings.

The appeal, in which attorneys Brenda Sebring and William Otto are representing Danzilli, claims Danzilli was deprived of rights to due process because the appointments did not give him the opportunity to apply for the authority board.

The appeal claims the authority board members were appointed sooner than was allowed under Monroeville's home rule charter and that some of those appointments were made for longer than five years or with no ending date.

The appeal also claims that because four of the five appointees are female, gender was used in consideration of the appointments, which also violates U.S. and state law.