Georgia Supreme Court: Falcons stadium construction can proceed
No major challenges stand in the way of Falcons stadium construction
The construction of the new $1.4 billion Atlanta Falcons stadium can move ahead now that Georgia's highest court has tossed out a lawsuit threatening to delay its progress.
The Georgia Supreme Court has unanimously rejected a group of Vine City and English Avenue residents' arguments that the financing of the new Falcons stadium using taxpayer dollars was unconstitutional. The court's ruling allows work on the stadium to continue as planned. Falcons owner Arthur Blank, who had entertained moving the team prior to the deal's completion, wants the stadium to open in 2017.
Since early 2014, five English Avenue and Vine City residents referred to as the "Intervenors" had hoped the last-ditch lawsuit would prevent hundreds of millions of public dollars from being used to fund a portion of the stadium's construction. The group, which included Rev. William L. Cottrell, Sr.; Mamie Lee "Mother" Moore; Tracy Bates; John Lewis III; and Joe Beasley, claimed that the stadium would negatively affect both neighborhoods.
Buckhead attorney John Woodham, who had previously contested the Atlanta Beltline's main funding source all the way to the Georgia Supreme Court, and former Fulton Superior Court Judge Thelma Wyatt Cummings Moore argued that a law extending the city's hotel-and-motel tax violated the Georgia Constitution. They argued that the bonds, funded through that tax, could only be used for the Georgia Dome, and not a "successor" facility.
"There is nothing arbitrary or unreasonable about allowing the same taxing entities that already have experience paying for a multipurpose domed stadium facility through the collection of a 7 percent hotel-motel tax...to collect such a tax in the future to fund a different stadium after the first tax has expired," Justice Harold Melton wrote in the court's opinion.
Prior to the appeal to the Georgia Supreme Court, Fulton County Superior Court Judge Ural Glanville rejected the lawsuit last May. He subsequently validated the revenue bonds, which had not yet been issued due to the appeal, that could lead to the use of hundreds of millions of dollars in public funds to pay for maintenance and operating costs for the football and soccer stadium. According to city officials, the final cost could be more than $450 million. Other estimates have been higher.
"The new Atlanta stadium will generate $155 million in annual revenue within the city, secure the retention of the Atlanta Falcons in our downtown for another 30 years and create 1,400 well-paying jobs during the building's construction," Mayor Kasim Reed says in a statement. "It will also keep the City of Atlanta at the forefront of the hospitality and tourism industry, which generates $13 billion annually and supports more than 200,000 jobs in the region."
Common Cause Georgia, a government watchdog group that's among the biggest critics of the stadium deal, blasted the court for its decision.
"Not even the Supreme Court would protect two thirds of Atlanta citizens or the 75 percent of Georgians who did not support the public financing of this project," William Perry, the group's executive director, says in a statement. "With all of the information that has come to light over the course of this case, we know the citizens of Atlanta deserved a better deal."
We've reached out to Woodham, and members of the "Intervenors" for comment. If we hear back, we'll post an update.