Mayor held up MARTA permit over audit dispute, records show

“Anyone that told you we were holding or delaying permits was lying to you,” he said.

Credit: Ziyu Julian Zhu/AJC

Credit: Ziyu Julian Zhu/AJC

The street-level renovation of MARTA’s busiest station, scheduled to start last July, was put on hold last year at Dickens’ request. MARTA and the city announced an agreement to move forward in November but permits needed to start construction were still pending Wednesday. City staff said Thursday, after the AJC’s story published online, that the first permits needed to proceed had been approved and cited that as evidence that their approval was not tied to the audit.

MARTA officials, who contend it was improper for the city to tie nonpermit issues to permit approval, raised concerns about the process at a meeting with city executives in December.

At the Dec. 18 meeting, Atlanta Chief Operating Officer LaChandra Burks said the permit was “still tied” to an audit looking at how MARTA has used a half-penny sales tax to expand transit in Atlanta, according to official meeting minutes. Burks reiterated that point when questioned by Jonathan Hunt, MARTA’s interim chief counsel, the documents say.

“The mayor was very clear that he wants the audit resolved with or before the permitting is issued,” Burks said, according to the meeting minutes obtained by the AJC through the Georgia Open Records Act. “They must move together at rapid speed.”

On Wednesday, a spokesperson from the mayor’s office said notes from the meeting “are not always clear” and don’t reflect the full conversation. The city did not raise concerns about the accuracy or respond to questions from the AJC asking whether the minutes reflect the mayor’s position.

The meeting notes were taken by a MARTA staff member and circulated to participants, including city officials, a MARTA spokesperson said. The notes from the next meeting between the officials do not reflect any objection to their accuracy, but city officials are recorded as saying they didn’t receive the notes in time to review them.

MARTA Board Member Kathryn Powell asked Burks on Thursday what she said at the December meeting, and Burks said she didn’t remember.

Credit: Ziyu Julian Zhu/AJC

Credit: Ziyu Julian Zhu/AJC

The “Five Points Transformation” is one of the first projects MARTA pursued after voters approved a transit expansion sales tax in 2016. The street-level renovation involves replacing the leaky concrete canopy with a translucent roof, as well as adding street-level bus bays.

Downtown business leaders and city officials have panned the design. Riders also objected to initial plans that would have closed the station to pedestrian access during construction.

Credit: Courtesy of MARTA

Credit: Courtesy of MARTA

Dickens first asked MARTA last June to pause the project based on preliminary findings from the city’s audit into spending on transit expansion projects. The audit came after City Council members expressed concerns that Atlantans weren’t getting more transit from the sales tax dubbed “More MARTA.”

MARTA agreed in July to pause the project.

The city auditor’s report, completed in August, determined MARTA overcharged for operating expenses, which shortchanged the capital fund by nearly $70 million. MARTA has long objected to the methodology used by the city’s auditor and, in September, hired its own auditors to analyze spending. That report, released this week, found $865,630 is owed.

MARTA and the mayor’s office announced a deal in November to move forward on the Five Points renovation. The deal involved agreeing to keep pedestrian access and elevator service throughout construction, according to records reviewed by the AJC. Additionally, it capped More MARTA expenses at no more than $7 million beyond the original $233 million project estimate.

MARTA also agreed to transfer a portion of the excess charges identified in the city audit, about $10 million.

Records show MARTA officials believed these concessions had cleared the way for Five Points work to begin. But when contractors began filing permits in November, problems emerged almost immediately.

The first demolition permit was denied by the city a day after it was submitted. City planners told MARTA it needed a special permit that would require additional public engagement.

Hunt, MARTA’s attorney, said the city has never required that step in his 12 years with the agency. When he brought up other projects that proceeded without the special permit in the December meeting, Burks said they should have required it, according to the notes. She also said MARTA could request a waiver.

MARTA attorneys requested the waiver in January. It was granted a few days later, at which point MARTA resubmitted permit requests.

“The city is inconsistent on administration of the (special permit) process, and these inconsistencies have been the primary cause of project delays,” MARTA spokesperson Stephany Fisher said in a statement.

Then, MARTA learned from its contractor that the city was charging a fee for the permits. MARTA is exempt from city permitting fees.

Credit: Miguel Martinez-Jimenez

Credit: Miguel Martinez-Jimenez

MARTA General Manager and CEO Collie Greenwood said last month that he made the decision to pay the fees to keep the project moving.

“I feared if we stopped the process to fight the fight we’d be asked to resubmit,” he said Feb. 27. “I didn’t want to take any of those chances.”

City spokesperson Allison Fouche initially disputed Greenwood’s account.

“The city has never requested fees from MARTA,” Fouche said Feb. 28. “There has been no discussion on any type of fees.”

Records provided by both MARTA and the city show the planning office did issue fees to the transit agency on multiple occasions. MARTA and city planning staff had multiple conversations about fees related to one Five Points permit in August, according to emails.

The city issued a $250 fee before agreeing to refund it. Other, more substantial, fees were issued in February. Records show three invoices totaling $244,251 were issued. That amount matches the total on a check from MARTA’s contractor that Greenwood said was rejected.

A city spokesperson said Wednesday the address on the check is incorrect, referencing a suite on the second floor of City Hall instead of the third floor. The mayor’s office did not answer a request from the AJC to explain the discrepancy between the records and Fouche’s comment that the city never asked MARTA for permit fees.

Records provided by the city show the fees were waived, reissued, then waived again.

Credit: Ziyu Julian Zhu/AJC

Credit: Ziyu Julian Zhu/AJC

As of the end of day Wednesday, the permits were still pending.

The city’s permitting website showed staff marked one of the permits as “ready to issue” more than a week ago, on March 3. But the city said Wednesday that MARTA’s contractor needed to file an updated business license and other paperwork before a permit could be issued.

Records provided by MARTA show the paperwork was already filed on Tuesday. No additional paperwork was filed between then and when the city issued the permit Thursday.

The meeting between Dickens and MARTA on Thursday was contentious, with Atlanta staff accusing MARTA of canceling meetings and MARTA staff accusing Atlanta of blocking their phone numbers.

Dickens said he is concerned about the serious challenges facing MARTA and said the continued debate over Five Points permits and the audit “impede our ability to work together easily.”

The mayor said the latest audit into spending on More MARTA projects is “a slap in the face to all of the Atlanta taxpayers that have desired to see these projects move forward.” He also accused MARTA of going to the media to complain.

All of the delay has a cost, which Dickens acknowledged in his remarks to the board.

“We cannot allow unnecessary delays to derail critical projects,” he said. “Every day that we delay, projects continue to cost more.”

MARTA’s contractor on the Five Points project has put the transit agency on notice for fees of up to $10,000 per day while it waits for the green light to proceed. And while MARTA agreed to cap the use of More MARTA funds for the project, Greenwood said the agency would charge for “continued or new delays actively caused by the city.”

A delayed schedule also means the city’s central MARTA station will be under construction during all the major marquee events planned over the next three years. Greenwood warned Dickens of those consequences at least as early as October, records show.

“Please note, we now risk hosting the 2028 NFL Super Bowl with a construction zone at (Five) Points if we do not move with urgency,” Greenwood said.

Dickens asked to set a goal of 180 days to resolve the ongoing audit disputes. At least one MARTA board member suggested the goal should be 30 days.

City staff and board members all expressed a desire not to continue hashing out the fight publicly.

“The longer this is festering the more difficult it is to have a really constructive relationship,” MARTA board member Jim Durrett said.