Type to search

Latest Reports

Gov. Nathan Deal: Would be nice if legislature didn’t have to vote on Falcons stadium-GWCCA bonds

Gov. Nathan Deal, State of State, 2015 Gov. Nathan Deal delivers his State of State address. Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle stands on the governor’s right; House Speaker David Ralston stands on the governor’s left. Credit: photos.gov.georgia.gov

By Maria Saporta

Gov. Nathan Deal confirmed Friday morning that the Atlanta Falcons and the state are exploring options that would not require approval from the state legislature.

But Deal said it is too early to know whether that would be possible.

“We are sort of in a waiting period right now,” Deal said after a press conference announcing a major expansion of AirWatch’s operations in the Atlanta region.

Deal said that the parties have agreed to a 15-day period of silence as they explore the various options to build a $1 billion retractable roof stadium adjacent to the Georgia World Congress Center.

“I’m still very much encouraged,” Deal said. “It would be nice if we did not have to ask the members of the General Assembly to have to vote on this. I’ve tried my best to relieve members of the General Assembly from difficult decisions that they have to make that have political consequences.”

Initial polls have shown that there is not much support to fund a new stadium partly with public dollars. Members of the state legislature so far have been lukewarm to support a stadium deal given the public sentiment.

But a more recent WXIA poll released on Jan. 18 showed that if building a new stadium is the only way to keep the Falcons playing in downtown Atlanta, it had the support of 54 percent of those polled with 37 percent opposing it.

Deal also confirmed that one option being explored is the possibility of the City of Atlanta issuing up to $300 million in bonds for the public-funding portion of the deal. The Atlanta Falcons and the National Football League would be responsible for pay for the balance of the project including any possible cost overruns.

“I don’t have any assurance that we can do that (bypass the General Assembly),” Deal said. There is the issue of the City of Atlanta’s bonding capacity as well “as other implications.”

Once the bonds were paid, the new stadium would belong to the public — most likely the state or possibly the state with the city and/or Fulton County.

“There’s always going to be a linkage between the Congress Center and any new stadium,” Deal said.

The legislature, during the 2010 session, approved extending the City of Atlanta’s hotel-motel tax to either renovate the Georgia Dome or build a new stadium — as long as it is built on land owned by the Georgia World Congress Center Authority.

That hotel-motel tax, which also applies to hotels and motels in unincorporated Fulton County, is expected to generate about $300 million. Currently, the GWCCA has a $200 million bonding capacity that was used to build the Georgia Dome more than 20 years ago. But the governor said it is not clear whether that $200 million bonding capacity could be applied to the new stadium without having to be approved by the legislature.

“It just depends,” he said. “Those are the kind of things we have to explore.”

The governor said that one possibility would be to see if there was a way to revise the $200 million GWCC bonding capacity so that it would operate as a line of credit for the convention center rather than earmarked for the Georgia Dome. “That is one possibility,” Deal said.

The governor also made a point to emphasize that hotel-motel taxes belong to the local jurisdictions that collect the tax, and the City of Atlanta’s hotel-motel tax was “going to be the only source of revenue” from public dollars for the new stadium project.

“There are some hard choices we’ll have to make,” Deal said. “This (the new stadium) is one that has significance for the entire State of Georgia.”

Maria Saporta

Maria Saporta, Editor, is a longtime Atlanta business, civic and urban affairs journalist with a deep knowledge of our city, our region and state.  Since 2008, she has written a weekly column and news stories for the Atlanta Business Chronicle. Prior to that, she spent 27 years with The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, becoming its business columnist in 1991. Maria received her Master’s degree in urban studies from Georgia State and her Bachelor’s degree in journalism from Boston University. Maria was born in Atlanta to European parents and has two young adult children.


You Might also Like


  1. The Last Democrat in Georgia January 25, 2013 2:56 pm

    Well, if there was ever a day to make a move on a new stadium today would be the day since everyone is totally and completely distracted by the surprise news and sudden announcement of Georgia U.S. Senator Saxby Chambliss’ impending retirement.Report

  2. ScottPressman January 25, 2013 4:24 pm

    Ok…so am I missing something here?  The City has to issue the bonds and when paid the ownership goes to the State????  The State contributes nothing other than their blessing and they get the stadium when Atlanta finishes paying for it.  There is no public money (not counting the hotel tax which would be collected regardless) going into this project.  Why on earth does the State have to inject itself into Atlanta’s affairs on a constant basis??  I thought Republicans were all about “local control”?Report

    1. The Last Democrat in Georgia January 25, 2013 6:26 pm

       {{“Why on earth does the State have to inject itself into Atlanta’s affairs on a constant basis??”}}
      In this particular case, the State of Georgia has to be actively involved because it is the State of Georgia that owns the land that the Georgia World Congress Center and the Georgia Dome sit on and because state law currently requires that any change in bonding capacity for the state-controlled GWCCA (Georgia World Congress Center Authority) must be approved by the Georgia Legislature.
      It was also the State of Georgia that originally funded the $214 million cost of construction of the Georgia Dome, likely because the state has a much-larger bonding capacity than the City of Atlanta.
      That means that with the amount of money that the state has invested in the Georgia World Congress Center/Georgia Dome property, the state has a lot of public money riding on the fate of that particular area of the City of Atlanta, meaning that the state has a heckuva lot of “skin in the game” so to speak.
      The problem is that the appearance of the act of the State Legislature voting to approve an increase in the bonding capacity of what is basically a state agency in the GWCCA that controls the Georgia World Congress Center/Georgia Dome property is a very-unpopular proposition politically right now, despite the fact that the hotel-motel tax that would fund that increase in bonding capacity would be collected entirely within the corporate limits of the City of Atlanta.
      By current state law and due to the amount of money that the state already has tied up in the property around the Georgia Dome and the Georgia World Congress Center, there is no way around direct hands-on state involvement in this issue.Report

  3. Burroughston Broch January 26, 2013 12:31 am

    It would also be nice for politicians if they were elected for life and never had to stand for re-election.
    Maximum power with no accountability or visibility is a politician’s dream.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.