GULF SHORES, Ala. — First, there was the storm surge of Hurricane Ivan in 2004 that wiped out Gulf State Park Resort and Convention Center. That was followed by years of stormy relations between state officials, who wanted to replace what was destroyed with a four-star hotel and convention center, and opponents who said that would be too fancy and expensive for the typical Alabama family.

Now, however, it looks as if a resolution of sorts has been reached. The Alabama House and Senate this week approved a compromise bill by votes of 82-14 and 23-3 respectively that could see a luxury hotel and convention center return to Gulf State Park and with them millions of dollars annually in convention business that Hurricane Ivan diverted to the State of Florida.

The bill now goes to Gov. Bob Riley, who spearheaded the initial luxury hotel idea that met with opposition and lawsuits. Riley is expected to sign the bill.

On Wednesday, the House Government Operations Committee approved a substitute to SB254 by Sen. Larry Dixon, R-Montgomery, that opponents of Riley’s initial plan said improved the original bill.

The substitute bill contained language that would require the concessionaire to have reasonable rates for the public, something that opponents of Riley’s original plan insisted upon.

Charley Grimsley, former commissioner of the Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources and a vocal opponent of the original Riley plan, said this week he will carry the governor back to court if concession rates and charges are not reasonable under the bill, which was approved Thursday by the Senate.

Grimsley, who was one of several individuals and entities to initiate lawsuits against the plan to give Auburn University a long-term lease on beachfront property at Gulf State Park where the luxury hotel would be built, said the substitute bill restored true competitive bidding.

“In the future, any lease or other conveyance of any Gulf State Park beach land would have to be approved by both houses of the Alabama Legislature,” Grimsley said.

“Though not as good as a constitutional amendment, this requirement gives us a public forum and a way of fighting any future ‘good-old-boy’ deals in the Legislature.”