Tuscaloosa Discussion Thread - Page 3

Evan · #41 Posted **Jul 28, 2009, 11:22 AM**

Man, for what it's worth, I'm so jealous of Tuscaloosa. You guys are getting all these cool new developments and getting your riverfront spiffed up, while we are sitting up here in these mountains going nowhere.

Hey, can we borrow Walt for a few years? We'll loan you our mayor AND pay you to take him.

DruidCity · #42 Posted **Jul 28, 2009, 1:47 PM**

Quote:

So, qualifying for municipal elections ended yesterday. Nobody entered the race to run against Walt Maddox for mayor, so he unofficially gets another four years. Only 3 councilors out of 7 total will face opposition on August 25th.

It is unusual to have so many run unopposed.
I'm glad that my councilperson (Cynthia Almond) is one of them, since she's my distant cousin.

SpawnOfVulcan · #43 Posted **Jul 28, 2009, 6:05 PM**

Well, Druid City, that's probably because everyone feels that the city officials have been doing a pretty good job so far. Hopefully it continues...

Evan, yea, Tuscaloosa is lucky, but trust me Gadsden is doin pretty good compared to a lot of other cities. The river front expansion that was done a few years back across the street from Riverview Medical Center looks great, and the new developments along Meighan a few years back really made the area look better. Don't worry, Gadsden will probably get some stuff goin once the recession calms down.

ttownfeen · #44 Posted **Jul 28, 2009, 7:54 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evan

Hey, can we borrow Walt for a few years? We'll loan you our mayor AND pay you to take him.

I doubt Walt will be forever content to remain mayor of Tuscaloosa. Look for him to run for higher office after this next term ends in 2013.

Evan · #45 Posted **Jul 28, 2009, 9:14 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ttownfeen

I doubt Walt will be forever content to remain mayor of Tuscaloosa. Look for him to run for higher office after this next term ends in 2013.

Oh, I don't doubt that, he seems to be a spunky little fucker. I like him because he's young, energetic, and he doesn't seem to be afraid to try something outside the norm for this state. I know he isn't perfect, I read about both his pro's and con's, but I like the guy.

I would not be afraid to put my faith in him on a statewide level.

SpawnOfVulcan · #46 Posted **Jul 31, 2009, 8:45 AM**

The Tuscaloosa Metro area had one of the lowest foreclosure rates in the country during the first half of the year. Tuscaloosa was ranked 200th out of 203 metros.

http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/articl...news/907309942

ttownfeen · #47 Posted **Oct 9, 2009, 1:54 AM**

Some big development on the Bryce property story.

Department of Mental Health rejects UA's Bryce offer

Basically, the state wants $84.2 million for the 175-acre Bryce property to cover the costs of building of new hospital building and moving 2/3 of the existing patients over there. The new hospital would be on another property the Department of Mental Health owns in Tuscaloosa (Partlow). The other 1/3 of patients would be moved to community facilities across the state.

The property was appraised for $50 million. UA this week offered $60 dollars for the property with some money to go for enviromental cleanup and preservation of the historical main building at Bryce.

</summary>

How classy of Bob Riley to make threats about moving jobs in this economy.

SpawnOfVulcan · #48 Posted **Oct 9, 2009, 2:46 AM**

I think the University was just trying to test them to see how low they would really go. If the state decides to move the patients to the Carraway Hospital property in Birmingham, then there's a big chance that, that number the state wants would go down.

We just have to wait and see.

DruidCity · #49 Posted **Oct 9, 2009, 2:56 AM**

Quote:

How classy of Bob Riley to make threats about moving jobs in this economy.

It sure is interesting that Riley supported giving Auburn $10 million of state money for a research park, yet appears hell-bent to screw Bama over on its attempt to acquire a comparable amount of land:
http://www.ocm.auburn.edu/news_relea...rksupport.html

Dyingyak · #50 Posted **Oct 9, 2009, 2:33 PM**

Considering the appraised cost of the land whatever environmental impacts need to be addressed $60-70 million seems like a fairly responsible offer. Of course a higher offer would help expedite the sale, but I wouldn't be surprised to see UA get it for much more than they offered.

Wouldn't mind seeing some of the patients and jobs transferred to Carraway, sure is sad to look out the window and see that facility sitting there unused.

Riley pledged that $10 million to Auburn over 5 years ago...

ttownfeen · #51 Posted **Oct 9, 2009, 4:28 PM**

Updated story with more details

Area politician are understandably not so keen on the prospect of moving 650 jobs out of Tuscaloosa County. It was apparently the owners of Carraway Hospital that proposed this idea to Governor Riley.

SpawnOfVulcan · #52 Posted **Oct 9, 2009, 9:24 PM**

I think the benefits that could come from UA taking over the Bryce Property more than outweigh the costs. The amount of jobs moved out of Bryce would probably be more than made up for by the numerous jobs that would be created with the University's utilization of the property.

The possibility of a museum, extra classrooms, more office space, plus the addition of even more history to the campus would make this a win win. Carraway gets saved from meeting the same fate that Bryce is, and Bryce gets saved while allowing the University to have more space to expand.

Bogue · #53 Posted **Oct 10, 2009, 12:32 PM**

I agree w/ badrock. The amount of jobs won/loss is probably going to be either a net positive or a wash (depending on what the UA puts there and how long it takes for them to do so).

I also agree w/ dyingyak that it's sort of sad seing a functional hospital sitting empty.

I'm a fan of the UA purchasing this property and I understand Witt wanting it and not wanting to pay a huge amount of the money he's stewarding for the UA to get it. That said, I hope they do up the price a bit. If the paperwork is legit and the state's mental health folks would take a $24M hit I dunno' that it would be a moral "win" for the UA to get it. There's an awful lot of folk in this state which need mental health care at a safe, clean, and progressive mental health facility.

DruidCity · #54 Posted **Oct 10, 2009, 2:36 PM**

My biggest issue with this whole deal is the state's lack of responsibility in the matter.

I understand the mental health system's standpoint, and need for a quality, modern facility. I understand UA's need of that land for expansion.

That said, two big sticking points to me are the environmental cleanup and the historic preservation. These should be the responsibility of the state, not the university OR the mental health system. The state allowed the property to decay to its current condition over many generations.
If that grand building were located anywhere else in the state, or served any population other than the mentally ill, the state would've maintained it in better condition, and that should be a source of shame for the entire state.
It should not be UA's sole cross to bear to cover the state's gross negligence in this matter.

ttownfeen · #55 Posted **Oct 10, 2009, 5:29 PM**

I interested in knowing what the distribution of employees by category is at Bryce. How many doctors, nurses, and paramedicals are there. Theoretically, administrative, clerical and support staff jobs could be recovered by UA (though I don't see how that's a guarantee), but I don't see those medical positions being so easily replaced. Furthermore, allowing UA to fill in the vaccuum created by the departure of the state mental facility would make the city that much more beholden to UA. UA has much too much power for the good of the greater area as it stands.

Finally, losing the state mental hospital to Birmingham would be yet another blow the city's prestige. The state mental hospital has been in Tuscaloosa since it's founding. We let the state health science university be moved to Birmingham and UAB; we must not let the same fate fall on Bryce.

SpawnOfVulcan · #56 Posted **Oct 11, 2009, 10:02 PM**

I think that having a facility that looks as bad as Bryce does right now is a bad reflection on the state anyways. Honestly, I don't think that losing the facility will hurt that city all that much. It already puts a bit of a black eye on the University when out of state potential students visit and don't understand the relationship between the University and the hospital. They see run down buildings and a fenced off property with run down, cracking roads, leading to outdated buildings. That definitely does not help the school in the way of the students, and more importantly, the parents

I understand what you mean with the prestige detail, and in most cases I would agree. However, the state simply doesn't have the resources, or initiative, to take care of the facilities, and if they don't the University needs to take it one because it does have the resources.

Besides, I'm honestly more concerned with treating the patients better and giving them better lives, which I'm convinced would have more potential to occur if the main facility were in Birmingham. Frankly, Birmingham has much better doctors, a larger population, a larger jobs sector to provide opportunities for rehab. Not to mention that the facility moving to Birmingham would create an enormous opportunity to help educational and research efforts at UAB; and by helping those two things out, you could in turn aid the mental health facility.

ttownfeen · #57 Posted **Oct 11, 2009, 11:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alabadrock

I think that having a facility that looks as bad as Bryce does right now is a bad reflection on the state anyways. Honestly, I don't think that losing the facility will hurt that city all that much. It already puts a bit of a black eye on the University when out of state potential students visit and don't understand the relationship between the University and the hospital. They see run down buildings and a fenced off property with run down, cracking roads, leading to outdated buildings. That definitely does not help the school in the way of the students, and more importantly, the parents

Those poor babies.

Quote:

I understand what you mean with the prestige detail, and in most cases I would agree. However, the state simply doesn't have the resources, or initiative, to take care of the facilities, and if they don't the University needs to take it one because it does have the resources.

Besides, I'm honestly more concerned with treating the patients better and giving them better lives, which I'm convinced would have more potential to occur if the main facility were in Birmingham. Frankly, Birmingham has much better doctors, a larger population, a larger jobs sector to provide opportunities for rehab. Not to mention that the facility moving to Birmingham would create an enormous opportunity to help educational and research efforts at UAB; and by helping those two things out, you could in turn aid the mental health facility.

I seriously doubt another 600 patient hospital is going to benefit Birmingham as much as loosing one would hurt Tuscaloosa. I also seriously doubt there would be any change in patient care. Also, how is it so bad here? You don't think they actually use the main building do you? It just sits there for historical purposes. The patients are in other facilities on the Bryce campus. Have you ever been inside the campus?

SpawnOfVulcan · #58 Posted **Oct 12, 2009, 1:14 AM**

Yes, I have been inside the campus, I live less than a mile from it... I didn't think, and nor did I imply, that the patients were being held in the main building. I know, that is mostly for administration.

The campus, just looking at it, it seems like like it can't be all that efficient. If there is a specific doctor needed in a certain building, and he or she is not already there, they've gotta walk or drive a certain distance to get there.

It just seems like it would help overall if you were to consolidate all of these things into one building.

Also, I never made the argument that Birmingham would benefit more than Tuscaloosa would be hurt. I argued that both UAB and the patients could stand to benefit from this.

And honestly, who cares which city it benefits or which city it hurts, we should be more concerned with how this helps or hurts the patients. After all, is that the purpose of the Mental Health Department? You know, helping the patients? Their job is not to aid or disrupt economic growth.

Bottom line is, a study should be done to see what is in the best interest of the patients. That may be to stay at Bryce, I dunno, I'm not an expert. Either way, if the state finds it is better to stay at Bryce, then it needs to give it the resources it needs. Restoring the dome, some windows, a roof, etc... are not the only things that need to be done to that campus.

ttownfeen · #59 Posted **Oct 12, 2009, 2:06 AM**

The thing is before this Carraway idea was brought up, the assumption was that a new facility would be built on the campus of Partlow hospital. This would bring all the DMH facilities in Tuscaloosa onto one campus.

We can assume that all proposals lead to same end for the patients under the care of the DMH - consolidation under one facility with some patients transferred to community care - and we aren't here to discuss mental health policy, so I'm just thinking in terms of the end results for Tuscaloosa. In that regard, it would be better for Tuscaloosa for the the hospital to stay here, while it would be good for UAB and Birmingham if the hospital moved there.

SpawnOfVulcan · #60 Posted **Oct 12, 2009, 5:48 AM**

Hmmm, I hadn't thought of the Partlow detail. If they were to do that, I'd be all in favor of it.