The Supremes ruled that the Riley plan:
* Did not have to comply with the competitive bid provisions of the State Land Sales Act;
* Did not have to consider the per-capita income and average family income of Alabamians, as provided by the Gulf State Park Improvement Act;
* Did not violate Section 93 of the Alabama Constitution by creating a state interest in private enterprise or by engaging in works of internal improvements or the lending of money or credit without specific constitutional authority;
* Did not have to comply with Section 213.32 of the Alabama Constitution, which requires that any facility constructed on property at Gulf State Park be operated exclusively by employees of the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources.
Based on the Alabama Supreme Court ruling, the only thing standing between the Riley administration and the luxury hotel is the State Park Concession Act. If the state legislature changes the act to allow a 70-year lease that Riley seeks, the hotel project could be a go.
At first glance, the Supreme Court ruling appeared to be a victory for those who want to protect Gulf State Park from private enterprise. But a closer look shows that the Republican-dominated court brought the Riley administration to the edge of victory.
Before the Supreme Court ruling, the Riley plan had to clear five legal hurdles. Now it only has to clear one.
1 | 2
