The Georgia Supreme Court on Tuesday will hear arguments against Cobb County’s plan to issue up to $397 million in bonds for the the public financing of the new Atlanta Braves stadium.
The county’s plan — in which the Cobb-Marietta Coliseum and Exhibit Hall Authority issues the debt, which is repaid with a variety of county revenue sources, including county-wide property taxes — was approved by a Cobb Superior Court judge in July.
Three Cobb residents are appealing that authorization with a variety of arguments, including that the county doesn’t have the authority to borrow the money without a public referendum, and that the stadium will not be a public facility and therefore should not receive public money at all.
Attorney Tucker Hobgood, a plaintiff in the case, makes both arguments in his appeal.
“In my opinion, the county can’t have a non-public professional baseball stadium and give it to the owners of the Atlanta Braves,” Hobgood said. “There is no argument that I can understand that makes that facility public.”
Lawyers for Cobb County government say their plan to borrow nearly $400 million isn’t considered “debt within the meaning of the Georgia Constitution.”
Georgia law says that local governments must have a referendum before borrowing money. But the county says that the Supreme Court has held as legal similar bond issuance for retail developments, waste water treatment plants and airports. In all of those cases, the government signed an intergovernmental agreement with a quasi-governmental agency that issued the debt.
“This court has time and again upheld the validity of contracts authorized by (intergovernmental agreements) against attacks asserting that such contracts were merely efforts to circumvent (referendum) requirements of the debt clause, ” says a brief filed by government lawyers.
The two other residents appealing the bonds are Larry Savage and Rich Pellegrino, who is being represented by attorney Gary Pelfrey. Savage is representing himself.
All three will share the allotted 20 minutes.
Savage said that his and Hobgood’s arguments “dovetail” nicely. Savage said squeezing three arguments into 20 minutes is “unworkable” but that he plans on talking fast.
“Whatever the outcome, I am confident in what I’ve done and that it was the right thing to do,” Savage said. “I have to accept any decision the court delivers, but I cannot imagine a result that convinces me I was wrong.”
The Supreme Court in November heard arguments against publicly financed bonds being sold for construction of the Falcons new stadium. A ruling is expected soon in that case.
It is unclear when the court will rule on the Cobb County case.
About the Author
