Braves’ to-be neighbor files suit against the Cobb Board of Commissioners
by Ricky Leroux
August 16, 2014 04:00 AM | 6519 views | 8 8 comments | 16 16 recommendations | email to a friend | print
MARIETTA — With only days before bonds are set to be issued to help finance a new stadium for the Atlanta Braves, the county and the team have been thrown a late-breaking curveball.

In a lawsuit filed in Cobb Superior Court on Tuesday, attorneys representing owners of property near the proposed site of the new Braves stadium in the Cumberland area claim the county government violated zoning procedures and abused its powers to rezone a property.

The suit alleges the rezoning application for the property was “purely speculative” and “had none of the normal specificity required by the Zoning Ordinance,” and as a result, the general public was denied its due process rights because it did not have complete information.

Doug Haynie, attorney for the city of Marietta, Daniel White, Haynie’s partner at Marietta-based Haynie, Litchfield, Crane & White, and George Butler II, a real estate lawyer based in Dahlonega, brought the suit on behalf of Fairly Breezy LLC.

The company owns a 1.9-acre property at 2550 Heritage Court containing a multi-story, 25,000-square-foot building, a property which is adjacent to the 74.77-acre parcel the Braves plan to use for a new $672 million stadium and a $400 million mixed-use development.

According to the complaint, the plaintiff wants the zoning decision allowing the stadium and development to be invalidated; it also wants all court costs to be paid by the defendants.

Marietta attorney Tom Cauthorn looked at the complaint for the MDJ and said the suit contains a “very complete series of factual allegations” as to what Cobb officials may have done improperly.

“It’s probably not going to get dismissed, and it has to be taken seriously,” he said.

Tim Lee, chairman of the Cobb Board of Commissioners, said he was aware of the suit and though he normally doesn’t comment on lawsuits, he thought the board acted appropriately in the rezoning process.

“I will say I believe the zoning was sound. It was correct. It followed procedure and met all the requirements of consideration when we rezone a property,” he said.

Beth Marshall, director of public relations for the Braves, said the organization is aware of the lawsuit but declined to comment.

The suit is not currently assigned to a judge.

Butler, a former law professor at Emory University in Atlanta, described the basis of the suit.

“It is our respectful opinion that by the time the board got around to voting on the zoning, they had in essence effectively committed themselves to the outcome. And the extraordinary zoning carte blanche that they gave the Braves reflects the public-private partnership that we think Cobb County unconstitutionally gave to the Braves,” he said.

A serious matter

“The first thing that absolutely leaps off of the page is that the plaintiff is represented by Doug Haynie and Dan White,” Cauthorn said. “Doug Haynie has been the city attorney for the city of Marietta for 30 years, and … Daniel White, Judge White’s son, is his partner. And Dan White and Doug are serious-minded people.

“I’ve never known either one of them to undertake anything, as far as filing any kind of legal proceeding, where they didn’t believe that there was a meritorious claim or a meritorious defense,” he added.

Cauthorn said the writing in the complaint is not the usual dry legal pleading, so he thinks a great deal of thought went into its style and language.

For example, the suit calls the zoning action a “pig in a poke” and a “wolf in sheep’s clothing.”

A property owner must prove they have some “special standing” in order to appeal a zoning action, Cauthorn said, meaning they must show the zoning action has an impact on their property specifically, as opposed to the impact shared by the general public. Cauthorn said the suit does so by describing how the development would cause the value of the plaintiff’s property to decrease.

“In this particular instance, they have alleged that there’s going to be several impacts on their property, all of which they allege are dramatic: noise, lights, traffic,” he said.

The suit itself states the zoning action “directly and substantially damage(s) the value, marketability, and quiet enjoyment” of the plaintiff’s property.

Additionally, the complaint alleges the Braves approached the plaintiff and presented a “sub-market offer” to purchase its property and threatened “to ‘wall off’ the (property) if the offer was refused.”

A review of the zoning application revealed the Braves were intent on making good on the threat, the suit claims.

“(The Braves) were irrationally, arbitrarily, oppressively, and illegally attempting to manipulate the … zoning process in this instance so as to deny (the plaintiff) and other neighboring landowners their procedural and substantive protections against unreasonable noise, traffic congestion, illegal parking, rampant signage pollution, and violations of … limitations designed to prevent towering and unattractive monolithic structures that ‘wall off’ and block light and air to neighboring landowners,” the suit states.

Butler said the next step in the procedure is for the defendants to be served with the complaint, at which point they have the option of filing a motion to dismiss the complaint in Cobb Superior Court.

If the complaint is not dismissed, Cauthorn said, it will be decided by a judge in a non-jury trial.

Butler said he is looking forward to seeing what happens next.

“I have the luxury of believing in my position, both intellectually and as a matter of public policy,” he said. “So I am frankly interested to see what the other side has to say for themselves.”

Comments
(8)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
Fatback Lee
|
August 17, 2014
"Anti-Lee is Tiresome," Just who are you? LOL!!
no public transit!
|
August 17, 2014
People in Cobb claim not to want public transit because of the "corruption at Marta," but they just cannot get enough of this.

Hmm I wonder, what is the real difference in bringing Marta from Atlanta to Cobb and bringing the Braves from Atlanta to Cobb?

It would be lovely to see a comparison chart from the MDJ but that will never happen since MDJ are pro Braves thinking the Braves will buy ads like the car dealerships
Ed Higginbotham
|
August 16, 2014
If any curve balls are being pitched here, it is Tim Lee and his supporters, who have signed up every Cobb taxpayer on his mission to subsidize billionaire owners and millionaire players. And building the stadium in the most congested section of the county is the icing on the cake for Timbo.
whateidiids
|
August 16, 2014
Whatever happened to the article about Lee and the attorney that never ran in the AJC??? They promoted it, but never ran it> HMMMM shady dealings all around this stadium fiasco.
Beancounter Eric
|
August 18, 2014
The article was published in the 17 August edition of the AJC.

Very interesting reading.

anonymous
|
August 16, 2014
KING LEE, KING LEE
Anti-Lee is Tiresome
|
August 16, 2014
Many of us believe he is the RIGHT man for the job in this day and time. Thankfully the suits and complaints against the Braves deal, will not prevent Cobb's economic success and positive nationwide attention that as a result of this excellent deal. Looking forward to opening day and spending time in the exciting environment being created.
Rhett Butler
|
August 17, 2014
@Anti-Lee is tiresome: There is not on tax payer funded professional sports venue int he United States that has returned anything to the taxpayers.

Why do you think this one is going to be different?

Bexcuase ti is Cibb County" B.S.

Because Tim Lee is so much smarter than those other leaders who duped their people into building a stadium? double B.S.
*We welcome your comments on the stories and issues of the day and seek to provide a forum for the community to voice opinions. All comments are subject to moderator approval before being made visible on the website but are not edited. The use of profanity, obscene and vulgar language, hate speech, and racial slurs is strictly prohibited. Advertisements, promotions, and spam will also be rejected. Please read our terms of service for full guides