Judge clears way for Piedmont Park parking deck

By DAVID PENDERED
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Published on: 08/14/07

A group waging a last-gasp effort to stop construction of a parking deck in Piedmont Park lost four important rulings Tuesday by a Fulton County Superior Court judge, but a decision on the central issue was put off until September.

The remaining question is whether the Atlanta Botanical Garden and Piedmont Park Conservancy, two nonprofit entities that raise private money for their activities at the park, have to open their books to the public. Regardless of the judge's ruling on the open records, the parking deck can be built as planned, as long as Tuesday's decisions are not overturned, according to Michael Coleman, a lawyer for the garden.

The lawsuit contends that the garden, conservancy and Atlanta are collaborating to build the deck. And that relation means the garden and conservancy should follow the same rules a government does when building a project, including opening their records, the lawsuit contends.

The garden and conservancy counter that they are working under agreements with the city. If they have to open their books, then all entities that have agreements with the city would have to open their books, including the Braves and Delta Air Lines, said Coleman.

The city contends that its role is to manage the lease and make sure the public had a say in revisions to allow construction of the deck, said Neal Sweeney, representing Atlanta. But that does not make the deck's construction a public project, he said, anymore than the city's oversight of Atlantic Station makes the construction of that mini-city near Georgia Tech's campus a public project.

The controversy began unfolding nearly four years ago, when the conservancy revised its master plan. The new plan called for a parking deck, which has been on the garden's wish list for years because it can't provide enough on-site parking during big exhibits. The garden offered to pay for the deck's construction, and the City Council and Mayor Shirley Franklin approved the plan in 2005 despite heated opposition.

The garden has raised $30 million in pledges to start building the deck in October, its executive director, Mary Pat Matheson, said Tuesday. The construction of the deck can continue on schedule as a result of Tuesday's decision, according to Coleman.

The deck would have 743 spaces, and some of its spaces would be reserved for visitors to the park, said David Hopkins, representing the garden.

In Tuesday's rulings, Fulton County Superior Court Judge T. Jackson Bedford dismissed four counts of a five-count lawsuit filed by Friends of Piedmont Park Inc. and its CEO, Doug Abramson. Bedford rejected the lawsuit's contentions that construction of the deck is moving forward in violation of state and city laws that govern public construction and that the city was illegally providing land for the deck.

Barring an appeal of his rulings, only the public records question remains to be settled. Whether the garden and conservancy are subject to the state's Open Records Law is to be discussed at a hearing, tentatively set for Sept. 7 or Sept. 12 in Bedford's courtroom. Lawyers for the garden and conservancy say they are not required to open their books because they are private, nonprofit companies that rely on contributions.

The case has attracted the attention of the Georgia First Amendment Foundation. Executive Director Hollie Manheimer said Tuesday the foundation typically does not intervene in such cases until they are appealed to a higher court. This one may be different, she said.

"The Piedmont Park parking deck project is of huge interest to the public," Manheimer said. "And the open records act exists to enable the public to oversee and monitor large public projects such as this parking deck. To take the position that the open records act does not apply to this very public project undermines the very concept of open and accessible government in our city and state."

Abramson appeared deflated after the judge's ruling. He said he's not decided whether to appeal Bedford's rulings.

Reprinted with permission from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, 08/15/07.