Georgia Appeals Court denies city of Albany’s request to dismiss rail-to-trail case

ALBANY – A lawsuit seeking to force the city of Albany to complete a 13.62-mile recreational/commuter trail stretching from downtown Albany to Sasser will continue, as a court ruling this week denied the city’s attempt to dismiss the case.

The Georgia Court of Appeals released its ruling denying the appeal on Tuesday, moving the case back to Dougherty County Superior Court, where Southwest Georgia Rails to Trails (SGRT) filed suit in October 2022 citing breach of contract.

That lawsuit was filed after the city failed to fulfill an agreement from April 2015 in which it agreed to complete the multi-use trail within five years. As part of the deal, SGRT sold the city property along the corridor that allowed the city to extend utilities to reach customers in Lee County.

In its lawsuit, the trail group claims breach of contract and is seeking $7 million. Superior Court Judge Willie E. Lockette earlier denied the city’s request to dismiss the lawsuit.

The city has maintained that the 2015 contract is invalid, void and unenforceable, a claim with which the Court of Appeals disagreed. That ruling was based on the city’s primary purpose in the contract was a proprietary one of producing revenue through the utilities rather than a public purpose such as construction of a road.

“Because the city’s actions were primarily undertaken for the purpose of producing revenue, rather than for benefitting the public, the provisions … do not immunize the city from SGRT’s breach-of-contract claim,” the court said in its ruling.

The Court of Appeals did not rule on the city’s claim that the contract was invalid, void and unenforceable because the agreement did not spell out the city’s specific costs associated with construction of the trail. That claim was not addressed by the Superior Court and thus was not considered on appeal.

During a November 2023 hearing, the city’s attorney argued that city and county governments cannot legally form contracts that do not state the financial liability the city could incur during the current fiscal year and subsequent fiscal years.

For its part, SGRT is looking to meet its responsibility to have the trail constructed and protect its designation as the trail manager under the federal railbanking law, group President Bo Johnson said on Wednesday.

“This is the second denial of the motion to dismiss,” he said. “We have a contract, and we would love for the city to come to it and try to work out our differences. It’s our job to ensure the terms of railbanking are upheld.

“Considerable taxpayer dollars have been spent in legal fees by the city fighting our nonprofit charity after we were forced to litigate when the city decided to renege on our signed agreement to build a recreational ‘rail-trail’ in exchange for real property.”

The same day that the Court of Appeals’ decision was released, the Albany City Commission discussed a contract for a preliminary engineering study to survey traffic at intersections along the trail route and traffic engineering as well as identifying environmental issues.

A representative with consultant Keck and Wood Inc. of Duluth told commissioners that the $1.35 million study, 80% of which will be paid by the state, will mean a time frame for starting construction is about three or four years down the line.

Initially the city received a basic cost estimate that was no-frills and did not take into account the heavy traffic that users of the trail would encounter at busy intersections, Albany Mayor Bo Dorough told The Herald on Wednesday.

“In retrospect, it is obvious that the city entered in negotiations without a full understanding of the scope of such a project,” he said. “That is evidenced by our discussion during which the consultant explained there would have to be traffic studies to show how design would provide for sections of the trail that traverse roads and streets, and most significantly those areas in Lee County where the trail would have to be an overpass over a trail to avoid high-speed traffic.

“Additionally, environmental studies are required to assure there is no more than minimal disturbance to wetlands and other fragile areas.”

The city has the option to appeal to the Georgia Supreme Court or to proceed to discovery for a trial in Dougherty County Superior Court, the mayor said.

Since the Court of Appeals did not rule on three of the city’s claims made in the appeal, “I would suggest the city needs to secure a ruling on those three rulings at the trial court (Superior Court),” Dorough said. “Those challenges to the enforceability of the contact will have to be resolved by the trial court.”