Elected liquor license holders the focus of contentious Highland Park meeting; ‘The community … spoke loudly’

At a contentious Highland Park City Council meeting Monday, supporters of allowing liquor license owners to hold public office railed against city officials for not moving faster on the issue, but any such change won’t be discussed until next year.

Early in the meeting, Mayor Nancy Rotering said she took “very seriously the responsibility of listening to our community.” The decision to put the topic on the 2025 work plan will allow, “thoughtful, deliberate governance” without “rush judgments,” she said.

Unofficial results from an advisory referendum on Nov. 5 showed 82% of voters in support of changing a Prohibition-era ordinance prohibiting liquor license owners from holding public office, an issue that forced Ravina Brewing owner Jeff Hoobler to resign from the City Council earlier this year.

After his election, the ordinance was rediscovered and Hoobler chose to step down rather than give up his liquor license.

Any potential changes to the ordinance were not on Monday’s agenda. Only the mayor or three council members can put an item on the agenda, Councilwoman Annette Lidawer said, and only she and Councilman Andres Tapia were in support of adding the initiative.

Lidawer argued the board has had extensive time to consider the change, and city staff had spent “countless hours” looking into the matter “ethically and morally.” Given the overwhelming public support for changing the ordinance, she said the board should move quickly.

“The community is not divided,” Lidawer said. “They spoke loudly. I will not be a party to suppressing the voice of the voters. I will not ignore the unity and an overwhelming showing of support by Highland Parkers. We heard you, and should respond with change now.”

Councilman Anthony Blumberg disagreed with assertions that the issue had been fully reviewed, and said he personally has some specific questions he wants answered before making a decision.

“While I consider the number of people in the community on one side or another as a determinative factor, I have submitted a number of questions anticipating that we are going to revisit this,” Blumberg said.

Tapia was also critical of putting off a decision, describing it as a “breach of duty” and a “failure to honor (the public’s) vote and will.” It is “common sense” to move forward, he said.

“It’s not just the particulars of the policy, it’s the emotional health of our community,” Tapia said. “Why do we keep dragging the community through this when it’s said, ‘Stop. This is what we want.’”

Public comments were similarly critical, including from City Council candidates Jon Center and Kevin Cullather, and Irwin Bernstein of the group HP FORWARD, which campaigned in support of the referendum.

With Hoobler gone, Bernstein argued there is no reason not to change the ordinance, as there wouldn’t be a perception of changing the law simply to allow a member to remain in office.

“This is not requiring any person to be elected,” Bernstein said. “It’s a request that voters, not the City Council, be allowed to choose who represents them.”

Bernstein went on to accuse council members of serving their personal interests by keeping potential challengers from running for office in the upcoming election.

“The public office is a position of trust,” he said. “The community expects you to act in our best interest, and serve the people, not your personal agendas. You’re concerned someone with a liquor license might be more popular than the candidates you’re supporting.”

Rotering said she respected the input from residents, but noted there was only a handful of meetings left in 2024, and the decision to put the topic on the 2025 work plan, “reflects our commitment to thoughtful, deliberate governance, and to maintaining a balanced approach to addressing the needs of our city,” while avoiding “reactionary” or “piecemeal” decision-making.

“The suggestion to deviate from this plan, and call for an immediate vote on this issue, is not only unnecessary, but it undermines the collaborative, transparent process we rely on to make decisions,” Rotering said.

Related posts