Opponents of Atlanta’s public safety training center threw thousands of ping pong balls inside the Atlanta City Council chamber on Monday, while chanting “you dropped the ball.”
The chaos unfolded after more than two hours of public comment against the $109 million law enforcement hub being built in unincorporated DeKalb County. Organizers of the effort to get the training center on the ballot through a referendum gathered at City Hall to recognize the one-year anniversary of submitting petition signatures.
As City Council members debated whether or not to continue the meeting, protesters left the chamber arm-in-arm and draped a banner over the marble stairs in the atrium that read “Andre Dickens you dropped the ball on democracy.”
Earlier in the day, about 100 opponents of the training center held a rally at City Hall on Monday, letting city officials know they are still actively working against the facility even as it nears opening in December.
Many of the protesters at the rally are expected to address the Atlanta City Council during the public comment portion of Monday’s meeting.
“We’re here for the people,” said Rev. Keyanna Jones Moore, a local organizer with the “Vote to Stop Cop City” coalition. “We’re here because we want the people to decide how they live. We are here because the people of the city of Atlanta and beyond have a right to determine what their communities look like.”
The facility — which includes a massive 59,000-square-foot academic building, horse stables, fire station, burn buildings and a driving course — is being built in unincorporated DeKalb County and is scheduled to open by the end of this year.
arvin.temkar@ajc.com
arvin.temkar@ajc.com
It is a project that has divided the community since its inception.
Proponents say the training center is a necessary investment in the city’s first responders who have been training in outdated and even condemned buildings. Opponents worry that the enormous law enforcement hub will contribute to over policing vulnerable communities and cause irreversible damage to the South River Forest, where the facility sits.
Last June, organizers launched a referendum effort. But the future of the referendum is still uncertain. A federal appeals court has yet to rule on pending litigation that will help determine which petition signatures are valid. That ruling is necessary before the petitions can be counted to determine if the referendum initiative was successful.
It isn’t the first time that training center critics have descended on City Hall.
City Council members sat through 14 hours of public comment in June 2023, as hundreds of residents spoke out against the project. Just past 5:30 a.m. on June 6, council passed a funding package for training center construction in an 11-4 vote.
On Monday, dozens of opponents lined up to address council members. They have repeatedly asked council members to pass legislation that would put a referendum directly on the ballot.
North Atlanta native Sarah Balch said she spent last summer going door-to-door to collect signatures for the ballot initiative in extreme heat.
“I can’t believe I am here a year later with those referendum signature boxes collecting dust somewhere in this building still uncounted,” she said.
“I am not here because I believe my presence will inspire any change in City Council but to put on the record: we were here,” Balch said Monday. “Real Atlantans were here, showing up and advocating for a better future than the one that had been bought for us.”
arvin.temkar@ajc.com
arvin.temkar@ajc.com
A group of DeKalb County residents sued the city arguing that residents who live near the facility should be able to canvas Atlantans for their signatures. State law requires petition collectors to live within city limits.
A federal court judge initially ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, but the city appealed the ruling, further delaying clarity on which signatures will count and which won’t. The city has refused to begin the arduous process of validating the signatures citing lack of clarity from the courts.
In a statement, a spokesperson for the mayor’s office defended the city’s appeal and said that aside from the pending legal decision, the petition itself “raised serious legal questions whether such a referendum could be used to reverse an action previously approved by the City Council.”
“The City appealed that decision, believing we needed a clear process for referendums, and wanting to resolve any and all legal questions once and for all,” the mayor’s office said, and added that the city council had approved the project twice by the time the petition was submitted.
arvin.temkar@ajc.com
arvin.temkar@ajc.com
About the Author
