The future neighbors of the planned $1.2 billion football stadium for the National Football League's Falcons to replace the Georgia Dome has appealed their case to the state's top court, Bloomberg reported. The plaintiffs are hoping that the decision made by Superior Court Judge Ural Glanville in Atlanta last month validating the bonds to be used to finance the facility would be reversed.
The plaintiffs have maintained that the issuance of $278 million worth of city bonds to fund the stadium project violates the constitution of the state of Georgia. According to the complaint, extending the hotel tax of the city in order to repay the bonds unconstitutionally turns a general law, which is applicable statewide, into one governing a single project. The city argued in court filings that the bonds are authorized by state law and the plan's use of 39% of the hotel tax is appropriate, the defendants argued.
Bloomberg said that under Georgia law, the government general-obligation revenue bonds requires court approval before they can be issued.
In his decision, Glanville saw no merit in the objector's arguments about the bond issue. He added that the security for the bonds was feasible, sound and reasonable, and that the NFL Falcons stadium project had met public purposes guidelines.
In an email today, the objectors' attorney John Woodham, said that the appeal filed on June 5 delays the bond issuance until final resolution of the case by the state Supreme Court. He added that this would delay the "public financing component" of the city of Atlanta of the stadium project during that time.
On the other hand, attorney Douglass Selby for the city said over the phone that construction of the stadium will proceed. He also added that although the bonds have yet to be issued, Atlanta had obtained validation of the bonds earlier on to accommodate any appeals or objections.
