Montgomery development news

[Capital Heights]

Wow. You must work in the Riley press office. I take issue with nearly every statement you just made. But so what, right?

[thoraudio]

How do you take issue with the Supreme Courts ruling. It's pretty specific.

There's also the issue that some of the language says that 100% of the proceeds from 'charity' bingo is to go to the charity. But the ag say, "oh, it doesn't really mean 100%... There's got to be a little 'reinvestment' and loan payoff money".

[Capital Heights]

Well....I really meant I disagreed with the Riley cheerleading. As to the Supreme Court ruling: first, I have trouble with an elected judiciary but that is beside the point, second, I have not ready the court ruling but my understanding is that there have been two or three rulings specific to Constitutional amedments in Jefferson and Etowah Counties. The Court has affirmatively stated that they have not ruled on the legality of electronic bingo in the other counties that have thier own amendments.

The amendment in Macon County specifically authorizes that a for profit company can run the bingo operations, for profit, in the name and for the benefit of the charities. Pretty clear to me.

[thoraudio]

So, the $100,000,000 hotel was paid for out of 'Consulting' fees? Are 'Consulting fees' generally multiples of the amount paid to the charity?

Howabout Country Crossing in Houston County, where the amendment states "No nonprofit organization or club may pay consulting fees, any compensation or salary to any individual or entity for any services performed relating to operating or conducting any bingo game."

I wonder how CC makes their money?

The Bingo laws (a fault of our own fractured/ruined/useless constitution), were not written for Casinos.

[Capital Heights]

I suspect the $100 million hotel is not payed for. Probably a business loan like any other development.

[neilson]

Originally Posted by thoraudio

So, the $100,000,000 hotel was paid for out of 'Consulting' fees? Are 'Consulting fees' generally multiples of the amount paid to the charity?

Howabout Country Crossing in Houston County, where the amendment states "No nonprofit organization or club may pay consulting fees, any compensation or salary to any individual or entity for any services performed relating to operating or conducting any bingo game."

I wonder how CC makes their money?

The Bingo laws (a fault of our own fractured/ruined/useless constitution), were not written for Casinos.

Which is why I support letting the people vote. Personally, I vote yes for Electronic Bingo because it is a job creator for communities that need them badly. I also don't want to be anti-Indian, but I don't appreciate the Mississippi Indians trying to stop the likes of Ronnie Gilley and Milton McGregor from making money in Alabama. Indians need to back off.

[bystander1]

'Open container' bill sent to governor
February 17, 2010
Montgomery Advertiser

A bill that would allow Montgomery to change the way that alcohol is sold and consumed in specified parts of the city is ready for the governor's signature, just in time for the coming baseball season and spring pub crawls downtown.

The Senate gave final passage to an "open container" bill for Montgomery on Tuesday. It would allow the city to establish, by ordinance, "entertainment districts." In those designated areas, people would be allowed to purchase alcohol from a licensed provider and then could consume it anywhere within that district.

Currently, if people buy an alcoholic drink at one business, they cannot leave that business and go somewhere else with that drink. If they do, they are violating an Alabama Alcoholic Beverage Control Board rule. The bill is aimed at downtown Montgomery, but it isn't limited to that area. Instead, it gives the city the authority to establish an entertainment district in any part of the city.

Gov. Bob Riley has six days to sign the bill or veto it. If he does not sign it within six days, it becomes law without his signature.
-- Markeshia Ricks

UPDATE: Looks like the bill passes but Riley adds his own amendment to it.

The freakin' gov puts his nose in something else it needs not be. He held up the bill because he doesn't want the city to be able to establish it's own entertainment districts. He only wants it to be limited to a couple of businesses in the Alley. This would still limit what the pub crawl organizers were trying to accomplish in the first place. The ABC board (Emory Folmar), thinks the bill may be unconstitutional anyway, so the city will now take the matter to court.

What a tool...!!!

[RSAHort]

As I said in a previous post, Baumhowers at the RSA HQ will officially open on March 2nd. It will tentavively be open from 7am to 7pm everyday. This schedule may change after it has been open for a while. It seats about 140 people and has two serving bars. It also has 19 televisions and you can play that trivia game they have at the other restaurant.

Parking: You will be able to park in the basement level of the RSA HQ parking deck. You will need to enter off of Union Street. The entire basement level will be reserved for Baumhowers customers and employees so parking will not be an issue. You will enter the building from the basement atrium and will either take the stairs or elevator to the first floor.

[OCA REP]

Originally Posted by RSAHort

As I said in a previous post, Baumhowers at the RSA HQ will officially open on March 2nd. It will tentavively be open from 7am to 7pm everyday. This schedule may change after it has been open for a while. It seats about 140 people and has two serving bars. It also has 19 televisions and you can play that trivia game they have at the other restaurant.

Parking: You will be able to park in the basement level of the RSA HQ parking deck. You will need to enter off of Union Street. The entire basement level will be reserved for Baumhowers customers and employees so parking will not be an issue. You will enter the building from the basement atrium and will either take the stairs or elevator to the first floor.

Good to hear. I work in Folsom and lots of us are looking forward to eating at Baumhowers and checking out the new RSA HQ building.

[OCA REP]

Originally Posted by bystander1

UPDATE: Looks like the bill passes but Riley adds his own amendment to it.

The freakin' gov puts his nose in something else it needs not be. He held up the bill because he doesn't want the city to be able to establish it's own entertainment districts. He only wants it to be limited to a couple of businesses in the Alley. This would still limit what the pub crawl organizers were trying to accomplish in the first place. The ABC board (Emory Folmar), thinks the bill may be unconstitutional anyway, so the city will now take the matter to court.

What a tool...!!!

... and how much LONGER is SpongeBob in office?

I saw on the news where the Governor felt the need to interfere. He wants it totally contained to the Alley area. Todd Strange mentioned to us at an earlier meeting that he thought this might be a good thing for us in Cloverdale too. Not sure how that will shake out now.

... again, how much longer is SpongeBob in office?

[SpawnOfVulcan]

Originally Posted by OCA REP

... and how much LONGER is SpongeBob in office?

I saw on the news where the Governor felt the need to interfere. He wants it totally contained to the Alley area. Todd Strange mentioned to us at an earlier meeting that he thought this might be a good thing for us in Cloverdale too. Not sure how that will shake out now.

... again, how much longer is SpongeBob in office?

Unfortunately, not too much longer

[OldCloverdale]

Unfortunately ... to get the two Cloverdale business districts included, there will have to be another law enacted.

[SpawnOfVulcan]

Originally Posted by OldCloverdale

Unfortunately ... to get the two Cloverdale business districts included, there will have to be another law enacted.

Would it be constitutional in Alabama for the state legislature to take away the power of the Governor to change a bill the way he did? I love Bob Riley, but I do agree that what he did with the open cup, or whatever it's call, bill was kinda ridiculous. Of course, if the legislature had consulted with him on the topic and discussed it, producing a good bill, we could have avoided this mess.

[OCA REP]

Originally Posted by OldCloverdale

Unfortunately ... to get the two Cloverdale business districts included, there will have to be another law enacted.

That's a real shame. The Governor should stick to State business and not concern himself with local legislation.

[SpawnOfVulcan]

Originally Posted by OCA REP

That's a real shame. The Governor should stick to State business and not concern himself with local legislation.

Well, technically it is state business I mean, if you're going to argue that the Governor needs to stay out of local business then you also need to argue that the ENTIRE state shouldn't have to approve an amendment for a single city or county, which is something that we all do.

Let's not forget that a committee in the state legislature recently killed a bill that would have brought about a referendum on whether or not to call a constitutional convention. Any future hopes of whittling away ridiculous powers, like the one the Governor just used when he signed that bill, flew out the window with that.

Again, they could have avoided this if they had simply consulted the Governor about this and asked what he thought appropriate. Then MAYBE, they could have come to some kind of compromise that accomplished what the city wanted, but also please the Governor enough to the point where he would have signed it as it was. The legislature dropped the ball one that, and the Governor screwed the city with what he did.

[OCA REP]

Originally Posted by tredici

Again, they could have avoided this if they had simply consulted the Governor about this and asked what he thought appropriate. Then MAYBE, they could have come to some kind of compromise that accomplished what the city wanted, but also please the Governor enough to the point where he would have signed it as it was. The legislature dropped the ball one that, and the Governor screwed the city with what he did.

I guess we will have to just disagree here. The local deligation should not have to consult the Governor to see what Riley thought was APPROPRIATE for Montgomery, Alabama. It is their responsibility to be in touch with City leaders, etc. and devise legislation to meet their needs. Riley should be above inserting his views into this. He has been a major disappointment to me... especially as he enters his last year in office!

[OldCloverdale]

The governor may veto all bills and joint resolutions, except proposed constitutional amendments, passed by the legislature. However, the legislature may override the veto with the majority of both houses. For any act, the governor has the power to suggest executive amendments to be reconsidered by both chambers.

[SpawnOfVulcan]

It's fine that you disagree with me, and I understand what you're trying to say.

What I meant in paragraph that you quoted was that the legislature could have met with him to discuss the bill. Just to see what he thought about it, things he might want or not want, what he would or wouldn't sign, changes that he may or may not make, etc...

While I agree that the system is kind of ridiculous, that he can make changes and all, you have to work the system to get what you want. If that means meeting with the Governor and seeing what he would and would not agree to, I think it's worth doing if you're attempting to get something like this done. I mean, if you can avoid a veto, or changes to the bill, I think it would be a good idea to meet with him. If there are changes you could make to it that would insure that he would sign it when it came to his desk (maybe like the hours you can have open containers, things like that) I think you avoid a lot of confusion. Heck, as unlikely as it would be, he might have an idea or two.

Personally, I think it's much easier to get someone to agree to something or sign something if you simply involve them in the process, and that is something that NEVER happens in American politics these days.

[bystander1]

Originally Posted by OCA REP

I guess we will have to just disagree here. The local deligation should not have to consult the Governor to see what Riley thought was APPROPRIATE for Montgomery, Alabama. It is their responsibility to be in touch with City leaders, etc. and devise legislation to meet their needs. Riley should be above inserting his views into this. He has been a major disappointment to me... especially as he enters his last year in office!

I agree with OCA REP. The local delegation has never had to first get the governor's approval to have a local bill passed. Although not a written rule, if 100% of the local reps agreed on the bill as it is written, the governor has always agreed with a harmonious local delegation and not butted-in on changing local bills because they were non-controversial.

Hey! Guess what? 100% of local reps did agree on this bill!! Even his buddy Larry Dixon agreed with the original bill!

But this guy is not progressive and has been irritated by any city or town that is. And now he's doing his utmost to hold everyone back from progressing.

...what a tool!!

[SpawnOfVulcan]

Originally Posted by bystander1

I agree with OCA REP. The local delegation has never had to first get the governor's approval to have a local bill passed. Although not a written rule, if 100% of the local reps agreed on the bill as it is written, the governor has always agreed with a harmonious local delegation and not butted-in on changing local bills because they were non-controversial.

Hey! Guess what? 100% of local reps did agree on this bill!! Even his buddy Larry Dixon agreed with the original bill!

But this guy is not progressive and has been irritated by any city or town that is. And now he's doing his utmost to hold everyone back from progressing.

...what a tool!!

When did I say that he had to give his approval? I simply said that it would have helped if they had gotten him involved, in order to avoid the mess. The system is broken and the best thing you can do at the moment is work it and do what you can to get the most of what you want, is that such a bad thing?

Pray tell, what's the worst that could have come out of meeting with the Governor? Maybe he might have been more inclined to sign it as it was because he was actually involved in the process???? OMG, heaven forbid that that ever happens!

Instead of getting mad at me for suggesting that the delegation involve the parties that are going to eventually have a say in whether or not this goes into law, why don't you get mad at the legislators that dropped the ball on that?

I guess I'm confused here... what's wrong with getting other opinions and involving the executive in the process before it comes to his desk? I don't think it's such a bad thing.

Again, don't get me wrong, I didn't like the outcome either. The thing is, it's like a bad performance by a football team. If the home doesn't play as well as they could have or should have, they're probably not gonna get the outcome that was desired.

BTW, I just checked the legislatures website and the status says "Pending with executive amendment," so it sounds like the process isn't over yet. Can they override his amendments? How do they work anyways, are they similar to an amendment that the legislature adds to a bill, or are they more like suggestions that are to be voted on by the legislature?