The idea for open container-based “entertainment districts” is currently dead in the water after the city council voted unanimously to table all further discussion of the current concept.
The vote was held during the council meeting on November 8, 2022.
Despite the unanimous vote, city councilwoman Evelyn “Mimi” Woodson (District 7) continued to erroneously rant and rave for several minutes in an attempt to keep her now-dead legislation alive. Her behavior caused other officials to call for a point of order to insist that Woodson contain herself and follow proper procedure.
The conversation began with a brief presentation by deputy city manager Pam Hodge. Hodge explained that there had been more discussion surrounding the proposed entertainment district, which had resulted in even more revisions to the city’s constantly changing plans.
It was evident that the more the city delved into the details of how such an entertainment district would need to be formed and enforced, the more difficult and ridiculous the requirements needed to be.
Hodge continued by presenting a set of new options for the geographical boundaries for the Uptown district. Four different options now included a hodgepodge spider web of streets — including the single western side of First Avenue, but not the eastern side to avoid conflicts with local churches.
The presentation made it quite obvious that the nitty-gritty details of how the district would need to be formed would also make the district practically impossible to enforce.
At this point, councilwoman Evelyn “Mimi” Woodson began her attempts to persuade council to ignore the pitfalls of her proposed legislation in hopes of a more reactionary approach. Woodson stated the district should be approved as-written, despite the many foreseeable problems and unanswered questions as to how the districts would actually function.
We believe this goes without saying, but it is in fact the duty of a governing body to perform the opposite of what Woodson suggested. Council is bound by law to take action in a responsible manner that specifically avoids foreseeable consequences.
“The council has the right,” Woodson said, “to pull the entertainment district out of Uptown or make any changes at any time. Any time we create an ordinance, we can amend that ordinance at any time ... if the churches get upset and come back and say ‘I don’t want our churches in this entertainment area’ then we can come back and amend it to remove the churches.”
Woodson failed to realize that churches within the Uptown area have already said they do not want to be within the proposed district, though Woodson carried on suggesting Council can simply amend the poorly-planned ordinance after it was passed.
Woodson then blatantly revealed how she was working toward a predetermined end regardless of the opinion of the council.
“So the question today is, one: do we want an entertainment district, and the answer is going to be yes … second is, what options are we going to choose for the Uptown area,” Woodson said.
Ironically, both of Woodson’s arrogant statements within her “question” would later be unanimously voted against — but we will get to that a bit later.
Woodson continued by explaining how Ed Wolverton, the President & CEO of Uptown Columbus, Inc., had recently sent every member of the city council an email expressing their sincere concerns about the establishment of the open container entertainment district within the Uptown area. Woodson merely brushed Uptown’s concerns aside:
“Ed sent us an email, to all the council members and to the mayor, saying about their concerns about the extra traffic, trash, and things like that, and about possibly the city partnering up with them for those concerns as an entity.”
Mind you, just two weeks ago, Woodson publicly scolded and bullied Ed Wolverton & Uptown Columbus, Inc. for not complying with her own political agenda, inciting the public to harass the private organization until it complied with her wishes.
Woodson then suggested the council remove the Uptown district from the ordinance altogether so that the “concept” of an entertainment district could be passed without first sorting out the details of how it would actually function.
Other council members were quick to speak out against Woodson’s repeatedly irresponsible attempts to rush the ordinance through without sorting out the details.
Councilwoman Charmaine Crabb (District 5) was the first to point out Woodson’s irresponsible approach, suggesting a more proactive and responsible one instead:
“After the letter I got from Ed Wolverton,” Crabb began, “I have some major concerns about approving an entertainment district for Uptown at this time — because, there’s a lot of small moving parts that need to be dealt with — and, I’m sorry — I don’t like fixing things after-the-fact. I’d rather get those things kind of squared-away so that everybody knows what their role is, what their responsibilities are, and then we implement that entertainment district. I think it will be much more successful that way … we need to do this properly and in order.”
Mayor Skip Henderson then realized that removing the Uptown district from the ordinance would defeat the purpose of why the ordinance was even suggested in the first place: to allow Pedal Pub to have alcoholic beverages on its open-air vehicles as they drove down functional city streets. Henderson asked deputy city manager Pam Hodge to clarify:
“Ms. Hodge, does ‘option 1’ address the Pedal Pub?” Henderson asked.
Hodge replied, “If there is no Uptown entertainment district, the Pedal Pub can operate, but not with alcohol.”
It was at this point in the conversation that it appeared to become clear to most council members that the finer details of attempting to create an “entertainment district” have ironically resulted in not being able to do what they sought to do in the first place.
Woodson then attempted to butt in again, but was told that she would have to wait her turn.
Councilman John House (District 10) was then recognized after queuing-in to respond electronically, though Woodson continued to speak over him out-of-turn anyway.
“Can you also show option 2, because that’s when the businesses came to the meeting and talked about it,” said Woodson as she rudely spoke over Councilman House as he tried to speak. Other council members continued to listen to House and ignored Woodson’s behavior.
“I’m not sure we’re ready to pass an ordinance that also includes approving an Uptown district and a Highside Market district,” House began. “I’m for the idea and I think it’s a great concept, but I don’t think the details are sorted out yet as the ordinance is written.”
Councilwoman Judy Thomas (District 9) then voiced her concerns, reminding the council that Cascade Hills Church had purchased the old Rialto theatre and is turning it into a ministry outreach center — right in the middle of the proposed Uptown entertainment district.
Woodson — who represents the district the new ministry center has been under construction within for months — bursted out in shock. She had no idea the church was going to be located within the district, despite WTVM running an article on the subject weeks ago.
Woodson’s response to the news appeared to serve as a textbook example of how her own reactionary approach of “pass now, details later” — which she had advocated for just minutes earlier — doesn’t work.
Woodson then ironically went on another emotionally-driven rant for several minutes.
In what could quite possibly be described as the most unbecoming behavior of a councilmember in recent memory, Woodson bad-mouthed Cascade Hills Church for moving into the Uptown area. She loudly griped on and on about having Christians move into the Uptown area.
“Now you intend to add religion to an area that’s supposed to be an entertainment district? That’s a bigger problem than this becoming an entertainment district … Now you adding a big different entity to it … I think the merchants should be upset!”
Woodson continued to carry on by proclaiming that Pedal Pub was somehow a “victim” for just wanting to operate a business in Columbus. While the single business intended to have the city change its laws to accommodate its business model, Woodson continued the “poor old me” routine in her usual fashion.
We’ve added clarifying text (set in parentheses) in an effort to show the ridiculousness of Woodson’s claims:
“All he (Pedal Pub) wanted to do was open a business in Columbus, Georgia (that violated current laws) and we’re making it difficult (by not immediately changing our laws and ignoring parliamentary procedure) for him to just be a business person (whose business model does not comply with the law). It's a shame. He’s obviously gone to Phenix City and he’s got everything done (because that’s a different state with different laws and the business model complies with those separate laws).”
Woodson then disgustingly scapegoated religion as an additional blight against her failed legislation, ignoring the freedom of any establishment owner to move their operations wherever they wish of their own free volition. Woodson used slight profanity and stated the Lord’s name in vain to make her point:
“And now we’re adding Christianity to a location that’s supposed to be drinking and dancing? I’m sitting here like, Lord, Jes*s Chr**t! What is this? So I don’t know what my colleagues feel but I don’t think we should keep delaying this because of Uptown! I think if we can just make an amendment to the ordinance to remove Uptown from it, and those supporters can get mad at me. I’m sorry, but you just fr*ggen threw a church into the picture, and we were just discussing about (avoiding) the church on First Avenue! My G*d, I’m just, my blood pressure! Everything is just going in my brain, like — what the h*ck! Whoever sold the property (to the church), what the h*ck were they thinking?!?”
Perhaps Woodson should consider that the people who live in Columbus are in fact free to buy and sell their property however they see fit, and it's too bad for her if their private wishes and freedom to conduct their own private lives doesn’t fit with her own political agenda — and if Woodson chooses not to consider that, perhaps she should at least consider keeping her mouth shut during a very public meeting.
Nonetheless, Woodson then continued to dictate what the entirety of city council should do, grasping at whatever straws she could to keep her failed and incomplete legislation alive. Woodson went back to playing the “merchants are a victim” card in an embarrassing last-ditch effort. Her continued rant caused Mayor Henderson to interrupt her in an attempt to reel in her continuous emotional outburst:
“We, ah,” Henderson interjected.
Woodson spoke over him anyway: “We gonna do an entertainment district but we gonna move Uptown. I’m gonna make a motion that we approve the entertainment district because we shouldnt penalize other people for all the craziness that's going on in Uptown.”
A few minutes of discussion later, the city manager clarified that the removal of Uptown from the entertainment district ordinance would in fact prohibit Pedal Pub from having alcohol on its vehicles.
Woodson then said that isn’t fair, ignoring the fact that the entire proposal to create these entertainment districts stemmed from a single business who sought to change the city’s laws. Woodson then argued with councilwoman Charmaine Crabb, using an illogical real estate analogy in an improper fashion in an attempt to “make her point”:
“You're in real estate, right? And they told you that you could do your business but you could only do it (their) way. How would you feel then? Because that’s basically what we’re telling him.” Woodson confusingly said as she continued to grasp at straws, searching for anything she could word-vomit out of her mouth in an erroneous attempt to formulate an argument.
Apparently Councilor Woodson did not realize that, yes, that is exactly how laws work; businesses must comply with them and they cannot be changed for slight, transient, and subjective reasons to suit the interests of a single business — because that is how laws work.
Councilman Glenn Davis (District 2) then queued up his microphone to respond to Woodson’s remarks about the church.
“Well, first of all, I’m just gonna say this and clear it up. I do take offense to the conversation about the church. That’s my church, and my church does great things in this community.”
Davis continued by explaining how selectively omitting one entity over another for inclusion within the entertainment district ordinance creates a competitive disadvantage, as it affords the opportunity to have an entertainment district to some while others are excluded altogether through legislation.
“If you piecemeal this thing together, then people are going to be left out and there’s businesses that are going to be left out — and you are putting them in a competitive disadvantage.”
In response to Davis’ comments, Woodson asked a rather out-of-lane question without asking to be recognized, appearing to ask for her own personal vote from the council for her own information; a serious faux pas for parliamentary procedure:
“What’s the consensus of Council? How many people are willing to support the entertainment district as-is?” Woodson asked out-of-turn, again.
Mayor Henderson then reeled Woodson back in again:
“Well,” Henderson said, “We’ll find that out when we call the question (for the proper procedural vote). We’ve got a few more that want to comment,” Henderson explained to Woodson in what could be described as a father having to explain their child’s inappropriate behavior.
After a few minutes of clarification on matters already discussed, city manager Isaiah Hugley offered his opinion on how Pedal Pub’s request to permit alcohol on its tours had really snowballed out-of-control into this humongous push for various entertainment districts being created through city ordinance:
“I don’t know Pedal Pub, I don’t know the gentleman that came to council, but I believe he approached us — and not about an entertainment district, but about Pedal Pub. When he approached the city about Pedal Pub, it grew into an entertainment district conversation for Uptown. And then it grew even larger for an entertainment system in various locations across the city.”
Deputy city manager clarified again that the only reason Pedal Pub is able to operate with alcohol in Phenix City is because the Alabama city’s laws allow for the vehicle to operate within Phenix City’s entertainment district. Her comments made it apparent — again— that the Pedal Pub vehicles will not be able to permit alcohol on their vehicles without the creation of an Uptown entertainment district.
Audible sidebar conversations erupted from the council’s seats as Hodge completed her remarks. Mayor Henderson then calmly called the council back into order.
Woodson was then recognized to speak without her rudely speaking over others.
Woodson first provided a poorly-formed compelled apology to councilman Davis for speaking ill of his church. Unfortunately, Woodson’s words and actions were recorded for the public to view at their leisure.
Secondly, Woodson spoke to Davis’ very valid point of how selectively excluding certain businesses from the ordinance creates — by definition — a competitive disadvantage.
Woodsons remarks made it quite apparent that she did not understand what a competitive disadvantage was. She instead spoke for several minutes on how competition is important between businesses, making a fool of herself by not recognizing that a competitive disadvantage means that her ordinance would not apply the rules equally to all parties involved and would result in a lack of the very thinking she was attempting to advocate for.
In a final plea to pass any part of her proposed ordinance whatsoever, Woodson conceded to council and asked them to pass the mere concept of an entertainment district without providing for any specific individual geographic districts at all — be it Uptown, Highside Market, or otherwise. Despite her colleagues having already stated that they did not wish to piecemeal the legislation nor to have to fix it later in a reactive manner, Woodson asked the council to do exactly that anyway.
After a few minutes of back-and-forth to determine where the motion stood procedurally, councilwoman Judy Thomas made a motion to completely table all discussion and issues about entertainment districts.
Thomas’ motion passed unanimously. Woodson’s ordinance died, then and there.
Immediately following the city attorney stating the ordinance had officially been tabled, Woodson continued to ramble on about it, despite parliamentary procedure and the official vote that had just killed her half-baked plan.
Councilwoman Thomas then reminded the council that she had just made a motion to table the item, that it had been passed, and that the subject should no longer be discussed.
“The motion that passed said we will table this issue,” Thomas said.
Councilwoman Crabb — among others— continued conversation regarding Pedal Pub. Those bits of conversation led to Woodson speaking out-of-order, bringing up the already-tabled ordinance again.
Councilwoman Judy Thomas was again quick to put Woodson back in her place, insisting procedure be followed and the council move on from the already-tabled ordinance.
“Excuse me, Mr. Mayor!” Thomas yelled over Woodson’s out-of-order speech. “We passed a motion to table this. That means to cut off the conversation and move on to the next item on the agenda.”
Thomas was absolutely correct.
Woodson then attempted to speak over Thomas, but Thomas wasn’t having it. Thomas then insisted that Woodson cease her remarks and follow proper procedure — which is exactly what the council should have done in the first place once the ordinance was tabled. Woodson, nonetheless, made an erroneous claim about her “right” as a councilmember to… yada, yada… and on she went…
“Well this isn’t a conversation, this is the right of a councilmember asking to —”
“No, No,” said Henderson and Thomas almost simultaneously. Woodson finally silenced herself.
“We have voted to table the issue,” Thomas said.
“There’s still some requests being made … for clarification of what she wants brought back … I think that’s acceptable,” Henderson incorrectly stated.
“Not according to parliamentary procedure,” Thomas corrected.
Tabled does in fact mean tabled. The issue can no longer be discussed by the governing body until it is reorganized, re-written, restarted, and formally brought back during a separate session. It is no longer discussed. Done. Finito.
“Ok,” Henderson responded.
And that was that.
The Muckraker would like to thank councilwoman Judy Thomas for having the integrity to enforce proper parliamentary procedure in accordance with Robert’s Rules; they exist for a reason. Good on you, Judy.
Hear, Hear.
Facts are stubborn things — and we’ll keep publishing them, whether city officials like them or not.
-30-
© 2022 Muscogee Muckraker. All rights reserved.
