Type to search

Columns Guest Column Main Slider

Community benefits need to be part of Turner Field deal

Turner Field

Turner Field part of redevelopment proposal by Georgia State University and Carter (Photo by Maria Saporta)

By Guest Columnist JASON S. DOZIER, an Atlanta native and resident of the Mechanicsville neighborhood

Fifty years ago, Atlanta’s late Mayor Ivan Allen Jr. famously quipped, “We built a stadium on ground we didn’t own with money we didn’t have for a team we hadn’t signed.”

In fewer than three years and through a series of backdoor arrangements, the City of Atlanta managed to steal a baseball team from the Midwest, build a publicly-financed sports arena, and catapult itself into the pantheon of major league cities.

Jason Dozier

Jason Dozier

While this story has been recounted as an example of Atlanta’s can-do attitude and civic ingenuity, this enterprise was one of many examples of public development projects that ravaged the communities just south of Downtown. Thousands were displaced initially, and those who did remain were separated by gated superblocks of concrete and asphalt.

Decades of development failed to lessen the human costs of this infrastructure.  Today, run-off from the interstates and parking lots floods our streets and homes.  Our schools don’t have the resources they need, and our children, youth, and seniors don’t have safe places to interact. Many of us live in homes or apartments that need repairs, while rents are rising without protections for long-time residents.

Our neighborhoods lost businesses and jobs: a hospital, a theater, an ice cream parlor, a grocery store and other small businesses that were located where the stadium and parking lots now sit.

Before the interstates, residents could walk safely or take the streetcar between neighborhoods and into downtown Atlanta.

And so it should come as no surprise that the residents of the communities surrounding Turner Field are apprehensive about public officials deciding what’s best for our neighborhoods behind closed doors.  Residents of the affected communities have organized to ensure that these development deals aren’t brought into our community without the community’s voice.

Last month, the Turner Field Community Benefits Coalition gathered outside of the stadium to announce our Community Benefits Platform and request that the Atlanta Fulton County Recreation Authority require Turner Field’s developer to enter into a Community Benefits Agreement with the affected communities.  In response, some officials have stated that adding the agreement could threaten the timing of the sale.

Turner Field

Turner Field in its current form (Photo by Maria Saporta)

There’s an assumption that the affected communities are seeking to stall the negotiation of a purchase agreement. This is not the case. We simply believe that these stakeholders have the potential to cultivate a partnership that works for us all.

We believe that they can change the historical paradigm and lay foundations that will enhance the character and quality of our neighborhoods for generations.

And we are hopeful that they believe that as well.

Just this week, AFCRA Executive Director Keisha Lance Bottoms assured residents that the developers, “will look after the community’s needs after the contract is signed.”

But hope alone can’t protect the disempowered and disenfranchised.

And so we ask for the Recreation Authority to mandate a binding condition in the sales agreement that the developer negotiate a Community Benefits Agreement with our neighborhoods. Duplicating the precedent established by the community benefits plans attempted in other stadium neighborhoods across Atlanta isn’t enough.

If we look across the country, there are a number of great examples of legally binding, negotiated contracts between private developers and community groups that create collaborative partnerships where everybody wins.

A well-implemented CBA could alleviate flooding; improve transportation and create new public space; provide jobs for residents; create opportunities for training, education and services for people of all ages; create housing for people of all incomes and prevent displacement of existing residents; and make our streets and communities safer and cleaner, while providing places to shop for people in the neighborhood.

Turner Field

Turner Field part of redevelopment proposal by Georgia State University and Carter (Photo by Maria Saporta)

In the interim, our communities are working together to improve our schools, train people for jobs, and create access to healthy food. We are building relationships between seniors and youth, and between long-time residents and new.

We are coming together to support local businesses and entrepreneurs. We invite our new neighbors to join us in righting the historical wrongs that continue to negatively affect our neighborhoods today.

We need development that supports our progress. Carter and Georgia State University have an incredible opportunity to do something great in our neighborhoods. But we need a commitment that this development process will include us.

We encourage the development team to work with us on a Community Benefits Agreement that describes our shared goals and how we will achieve them together. Because nothing about us, without us, is for us.


You Might also Like


  1. baruman March 28, 2016 10:18 am

    Is still dont get what is wanted that is not being provided by the development.Report

  2. Chad Carlson March 28, 2016 12:50 pm

    I wish we would have had this type of community activism for the Fort McPherson development, development which is now behind Tyler Perry’s wall.Report

  3. Joseph Uncle Joe Hudson March 29, 2016 12:15 pm

    Buyer beware!!!  Most of these Community Benefit Agreements are so broad and none defined that your ends may never be met even though there is the supposed agreement.  There needs to be specificity, accountability, timelines and other definitions to cause the results you want.  CBE’s are intentionally broadly written with little timelines for reporting or definitions of the type reports you want to hear not what they wish to say..  Maybe the reason for a reluctance to have a CBE is the lack of desire for accountability. Review other agreements i.e. with Falcons, et al I think you will see my point.Report

  4. Burroughston Broch March 29, 2016 8:13 pm

    Community Benefit Agreements will be locked away and forgotten after they are signed. If the features wanted are not part of the original construction, you can forget about them.Report

  5. Ptown Professor March 30, 2016 10:36 am

    Why does the TFCBC not believe that the LCI study (which the neighborhoods asked for) will not be enough? 
    What does the CBA plan to include that all the consultants and hundreds of neighbors won’t address through all the LCI workshops, which are specifically designed to drill down to a needs assessment.Report

  6. Jason Dozier April 27, 2016 9:06 am

    @Ptown Professor Know that the LCI study will absolutely inform the community benefits process, and that that work will not be discounted.  In fact, there’s a ton of overlap for what the Coalition is asking for and what the LCI is recommending.  The concern is that those LCI recommendations aren’t legally binding.  Just because the LCI recommends it doesn’t mean the developer has to follow through with it.  The RFP only asks for the developer to “demonstrate a commitment” to incorporating those recommendations and to incorporate them “where feasible.”  A community benefits process would help ensure that the developer follows through with that, and that there’s an oversight process in place to ensure implementation.Report


Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.