Monday, January 7, 2008
News So, about this $273,000 lawsuit the Atlanta Botanical Garden filed against the Friends of Piedmont Park...
Posted by Thomas Wheatley @thomaswheatley on Mon, Jan 7, 2008 at 11:18 PM
Well, that went relatively unnoticed.
On Dec. 7, 2007, the Atlanta Botanical Garden filed a $273,000 lawsuit against the Friends of Piedmont Park and Doug Abramson, the park advocacy group's president. The garden claims that because of an earlier suit filed by Abramson seeking the garden's financial records, it had to spend unbudgeted funds -- almost $300,000, according to a garden spokesperson -- on a legal defense contesting the suit.
In 2004, the garden pushed for a parking deck in Atlanta's most iconic greenspace to accommodate more visitors. The Piedmont Park Conservancy backed the idea.
FOPP, however, along with many other voices in the community, didn't like the sound of that, and fought the project with gusto. After a series of lawsuits and a lot of yard signs, a judge in September said it came down to this: The deck's getting built and the garden doesn't have to disclose its financial records -- it was and is, the judge said, a private, nonprofit entity.
(For an excellent rundown and take on the parking deck debate, click here for former CL staff writer Michael Wall's "Welcome to Piedmont Parking Deck.")
The garden says that FOPP's lawsuit was "frivolous" -- a legal imbroglio that was a whole lotta legwork, paperwork and headache. And now FOPP is being handed a $273,000 bill for legal fees, which the garden claims it had to divert from other projects in order to pay.
Click here to read the garden's lawsuit against FOPP.
And from Doug Abramson at FOPP's website:
Central to the Atlanta Botanical Garden's claim for fees is the unwarranted contention that Friends of Piedmont Park was "frivolous" in its attempt to secure a judge's ruling that the Botanical Garden must comply with open records laws. Frivolous? Hardly. Determining whether the Atlanta Botanical Garden, as a steward of public land, should be treated as a public agency is an important policy question. An impressive group of First Amendment advocates supports our position. Before going to court, Friends of Piedmont Park sought an opinion from the Georgia Attorney General's office on this issue. Initially the AG supported the position that the Atlanta Botanical Garden is subject to Georgia's Sunshine Laws and should turn over documents. Later, after our suit was filed and the AG's office consulted with Botanical Garden attorneys, the Department of Law wrote that "substantial questions remain as to whether the Garden is in fact covered by [the Georgia Open Records and Open Meetings Act]." By no stretch was it frivolous to ask a judge to resolve these "substantial questions.
A call to Doug Abramson's residence was met by an answering machine. We'll keep an eye on this one.
Comments (5)
Showing 1-5 of 5
Kudos for the botanical garden for seeking reimbursement for their legal fees! They deserve every penny back.
like
dislike
We are guilty as charged by Nelly. I admit that my wife and I are “wannabes:†--We wannabe knowledgeable about what the Atlanta Botanical Garden is doing with our land and our park --We wannabe in the know about all the safety and security risks related to the Piedmont Park parking deck and what the Atlanta Botanical Garden is doing to minimize those risks. --We wannabe be able to exercise our First Amendment right to talk about what is happening to Piedmont Park without concern about retribution from the Atlanta Botanical Garden. --We wannabe informed about how the Atlanta Botanical Garden selected contractors for the $16 million parking deck in Piedmont Park, and why the Botanical Garden didn’t competitively bid the project. --We wannabe aware of what the Atlanta Botanical Garden does with the money they make from admission fees to the Botanical Garden and will soon make from fees at the Piedmont Park parking garage.
I believe Mr. Abramson is confusing the First Amendment right to free speech with the issue of filing friviolous lawsuits. Mr Abramson and Friends of Piedmont Park (FOPPs) had 2 years to provide their comments and input (which they did vigorously and repeatedly.) Their opposiotion was heard, but the majority of neighborhood groups and city officials came to a different conclusion. The lawsuit (filed by FOPPS) was without merit and filed simply to delay the project and cost the ABG additional money. That is why two of the other plaintiffs dropped out of the lawsuit! Delay is the standard operationg procedure of FOPP's. They successfully delayed the installation of the wonderful walking paths in Piedmont Park for over two years. The real grass roots efforts and support, is that of the PPC and ABG. FOPPS is a loud but very small group of disgruntled individuals who oppose everything the PPC or ABG try to do. Thank goodness the PPC and ABG can move forward with the much needed deck and the great 50 acre expansion of the Park.
a parking deck is built on public land to benefit, in large part, a private entity, and no questions are supposed to be asked? someone remind me again who sits on the piedmont park conservancy board and how much they get paid and what connections exist between them and the atlanta botanical garden... something is rotten in the state of denmark.
Latest in Fresh Loaf
-
'Ex-gays' gather outside Atlanta this weekend 6
Meanwhile human rights groups fight the notion that "ex-gay" is a thing
-
CNN cancels Atlanta debate 3
Everybody cry
-
ARC's new map of transportation-tax projects is suitable for framing 6
Voters will decide 1-cent sales tax measure in July
- More »
Author Archives
-
City halts airport contract after vendor protests 2
City investigated, found merit in concerns raised by rejected foreign currency-exchange firm
-
Kristin Canavan Wilson: The Bureaucrat
The Ivy League grad arrives on a mission to fight homelessness and improve city services
- More »
