Council unanimously votes to change Highland Park liquor law, but councilmembers criticize timing

Over the past year, a split Highland Park City Council has engaged in often-intense debate over whether it should amend the city’s code to allow for liquor license holders to serve on city boards and commissions.

The debate led to the resignation of a first-term councilmember and liquor license holder and a non-binding November ballot measure that saw overwhelming community support for changing the law.

Three months after that vote, on Monday, Feb. 10, the three councilmembers who previously declined to support the liquor code change — Councilmembers Anthony Blumberg and Kim Stone, and Mayor Nancy Rotering — changed their votes to yes, enabling unanimous support of the amendment to Highland Park’s code.

Liquor license holders are now free to serve as elected and appointed public officials.

Background

The topic first came to the city’s attention following a January 2024 Committee of the Whole meeting when officials discussed Highland Park’s liquor code.

Then-Councilmember Jeff Hoobler, a liquor license holder through what is now known as Steep Ravine Brewing Company, participated in those discussions, drawing ethical concerns from some on the council and in the community.

While exploring these concerns, City Manager Ghida Neukirch said, the City’s legal representatives discovered that Highland Park still had a Prohibition-era law on its books that prohibited liquor license-holders from serving as elected officials.

At the Feb. 12, 2024 meeting, Councilmember Annette Lidawer introduced a motion to amend the law and remove the provision, but it failed on a split 3-3 vote, with Hoobler recusing himself and Rotering, Blumberg and Stone in opposition.

Hoobler then took a leave of absence from the City Council before resigning in April 2024.

During the November election, a citizen-backed initiative to amend the law passed with 81.8% of the vote. Rotering promised that the issue would be revisited in 2025.

Rotering and company’s about-face

All three officials (Rotering, Stone and Blumberg) who had initially opposed amending the code said they changed their positions because their questions surrounding ethics and conflicts of interest were addressed, either in updates to the city’s ethics code from 2024 or in the amended ordinance.

Rotering asked City Attorney Steve Elrod about those questions and concerns during Monday’s council meeting. One of her concerns was that a liquor license holder may add conditions to a vote such as providing funds to a restaurant.

Elrod said those actions are prohibited by the city code.

“I don’t see this as being any more unique than another profession that may be on the City Council (such as) a real estate broker that may be looking to have some interest in a piece of property to which you are granting relief and possibly getting the listing for sale,” he said. “So I wouldn’t call out the liquor industry any different than I would call out other professions.”

He noted that the ethics ordinance has “served the city well” and has only been strengthened in the past year “to create a position of ethics advisor and ethics officer.”

Elrod said the 2024 ethics code updates also allow for a councilmember to bring a concern to the ethics officer.

Highland Park’s code, Elrod added, includes a detailed definition of “recusal,” and if someone recuses themself from a discussion or vote, they are required to leave the room where the discussion is taking place.

Rotering said she was satisfied that her concerns were addressed, a sentiment echoed by both Blumberg and Stone.

“My priority is always to do what’s in the best interest of Highland Park and to ensure that the council acts with high regard for ethics and integrity,” Stone said. “Any changes we make should be done deliberately, and we need to protect our city, our residents, our businesses and any future councilmembers from conflicts of interest that could compromise judgment.”

Councilmember Andrés Tapia, who supported the initial proposal a year ago along with Lidawer and Councilmember Yumi Ross, said while he appreciates deliberation, he questioned why it took so long to bring the amendment up for a vote.

“It did not have to take this long, especially when it was an urgent matter, because there was a sitting councilmember on the dais who was duly elected, and that was not a small matter,” Tapia said. “It should have been dealt with urgency and importance and expedited, and still we would have given it the full consideration that we always give every issue that comes before us.”

He later added that he believes the divide “has damaged the city’s reputation and brand, and we could have nipped it and moved on. And here we are. What are we doing? We’re voting in favor of it. And why couldn’t we have not gotten there a lot sooner?”

Hoobler accuses council of purposefully delaying action

During public comment, Hoobler was the first to speak. While he thanked the council “for finally changing this portion of the archaic law” barring liquor license holders from running, he also questioned the timing of the vote.

Hoobler said Monday’s vote was conducted after ballots for the April election were closed (Jan. 30, or 61 days prior to election, April 1), “effectively barring me from running as a write-in candidate for the Highland Park City Council,” and he accused Rotering of shifting her stance on the matter.

In a followup call, Hoobler told The Record he was considering entering the City Council race as a write-in candidate but believed the code change wouldn’t come in front of the board until after the April election.

“Rather than waiting until after the election … the City Council is now voting on whether to change the law,” he said. “This sudden, expedited vote conveniently allows candidates who had previously blocked the issue from being addressed to now claim they support the law.”

Hoobler also said that it only takes three councilmembers to put an agenda item on the ballot, and questioned why nobody joined Tapia and Lidawer to do so with the liquor code amendment. He alleged it was a political maneuver.

Hoobler received the most votes out of the five candidates in the Highland Park City Council election in April 2023.

Speaking up prior to public comment, Rotering denied that the council purposefully delayed taking action, and instead said they wanted to conduct “due diligence” before voting on the change.

She also said the council had other priorities, including the 2025 budget, before it could discuss the liquor code amendment, which she said she promised the council would revisit this year.

“This is the third meeting of 2025, and it’s the first opportunity for a thorough discussion where all voices can be heard,” Rotering said. “Deliberation and due diligence are not political tactics; they’re the foundation of responsible governance. As with every other matter of city policy, we will approach this issue analytically and ensure that any decision made is one that reflects the will of the people while protecting the principles of good government.”

While some residents echoed Hoobler’s sentiments, others took a more conciliatory approach and called for unity and healing, including Ashbey Beasley.

“This has caused such a divide, such a rift in our community, which is very, very sad,” she said, later adding, “We need to come together and we need to start being neighbors again and being nice to each other. I’m happy that you listened to the people and that you have passed this, but I hope that, moving forward, we can do more community-building to heal what’s happened here, because it’s really unfortunate.”

The Record is a nonprofit, nonpartisan community newsroom that relies on reader support to fuel its independent local journalism.

Subscribe to The Record to fund responsible news coverage for your community.

Already a subscriber? You can make a tax-deductible donation at any time.