GULF SHORES, Ala. — A Montgomery judge has blocked the state’s proposal to build a $100 million hotel and convention center at Gulf State Park.

The ruling by Circuit Court Judge Eugene Reese was made known June 27 and ended several years of legal stalemate between the state, which wanted to build a four-star hotel on what most consider the crown jewel of Alabama’s states parks, and those who said such a facility would be cost prohibitive for most Alabama families wanting to use the hotel on vacation.

“I do appreciate the thorough work of the judge and all the evidence he had to consider,” said Albert Lipscomb of Magnolia Springs, a member of the local opposition to Gov. Bob Riley’s plan for Gulf State Park.

“I feel like it was the right decision under the law,” Lipscomb said.

Lipscomb, a former state senator, was a member of the Baldwin County Commission in 2005 when he and a grassroots group, Save Our Alabama Parks (SOAP), voiced concerns over leasing the site of the proposed hotel and convention center to Auburn University for 99 years.

Under Riley’s plan, the West Paces Hotel Group of Atlanta would have managed the 350-room hotel and convention center. West Paces, which manages the Auburn University Hotel and Dixon Conference Center on campus, was founded in 2002 by former Ritz-Carlton Hotel executives.

Reese’s eight-page ruling said the state’s plan to lease the site is a violation of both the state’s Constitution and statutory law.

The Riley plan to replace the 144-room Gulf State Park Lodge that Hurricane Ivan destroyed in 2004 also drew the opposition of such state agencies as the Alabama Education Association and Alabama State Employees Association.

Jim Meadlock, whose company owns the Perdido Beach Resort, filed a lawsuit in which he said the state’s proposal regarding the hotel and convention center was a case of government competing against private enterprise. Also, Charley Grimsley, former commissioner of the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, filed a lawsuit against the state’s proposal.

“We certainly weren’t surprised by the ruling,” said Grimsley on Tuesday during a telephone interview.

“The people of Alabama have been denied an affordable housing facility at the Gulf too long.”

Grimsley feels any appeals by the state are likely to be unsuccessful and expressed the hope the governor will go back to the “drawing board” and come up with a plan that is legal, Constitutional, and something that can be enjoyed by all Alabamians, not just the wealthy.

Grimsley called Gulf State Park the “most prized public asset the people (of Alabama) own.” He referred to Reese’s ruling as a “sternly worded opinion.” In that regard, Grimsley said Alabama’s state parks are designed with affordable vacation opportunities for working people in mind. The state’s plan for the four-star hotel was just the opposite of that intent, Grimsley said.

In a 2005 letter to then Baldwin County District Attorney David Whetstone, Grimsley said “greed erosion,” meaning corporate greed, was a bigger threat to the park than beach erosion. It’s a viewpoint he still holds today.

“This will be a continual battle,” Grimsley said, noting a constitutional amendment is the only way to forever protect the Gulf State Park beach from development.

Those supporting the state’s proposal for the new hotel and convention center pointed out that, besides recouping tourism and convention dollars currently going outside the state, the plan would create hundreds of jobs for lower and middle income Alabamians and an educational opportunity through Auburn. The new hotel and convention center would have an economic impact annually of $65 million, advocates said.

Mark Berson, president of the Alabama Gulf Coast Chamber of Commerce in Gulf Shores, said in 2005 that, while the Chamber hadn’t taken an official position on the Gulf State Park issue, most members seemed to be in favor of the state’s plan. He said the same thing this week in referring to the “business-oriented people” with which he comes in contact as Chamber president.

“I’m relieved we finally have a decision from the judge,” he said, noting that whichever side Reese’s ruling came down on, the Chamber knew the other side would appeal. Now Berson is hoping the Alabama Supreme Court will rule in favor of the state when and if an appeal is filed by the state.

Should the state’s plan for Gulf State Park be implemented, Berson said he doubts the cost of a room at the new hotel would be $300 a night, but certainly more than what was charged at the old Gulf State Park Lodge.

As for Jim Meadlock’s lawsuit stating that the state would be in competition with Perdido Beach Resort, Berson said he believes the state’s plan for a hotel at Gulf State Park would have increased business for everyone as a result of bigger conventions coming to the area.

Case in point: Berson said the Alabama State Bar is holding its annual meeting July 9-12 at the Hilton Sandestin Beach Gulf Resort & Spa in Florida rather than here on the Alabama coast.

Attempts to reach Commissioner Barnett Lawley of the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources proved unsuccessful Tuesday morning. Likewise, an attempt to get a comment from Gov. Riley’s office was unsuccessful.

In early 2005 an Alabama Attorney General’s opinion found no legal impediments to the state’s proposal to give Auburn a long-term lease on the beachfront property at Gulf State Park.

Reese’s order, however, noted among other things that “the average per capita and average family income of Alabamians in the design and cost of lodging facilities at all state parks” must be taken into consideration.

The judge also noted that the state’s proposed hotel and convention center “must be operated and maintained exclusively by employees of the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources in compliance with Amendment 617 of the Alabama Constitution.”

Reese also charges the state with “seeking to circumvent applicable Alabama constitutional and statutory provisions” by means of “an elaborate plan.”