Commissioner changes course
Whitfield declines to put proposed county alcohol ordinance amendments on ballot
Commissioner Shannon Whitfield abstained Feb. 13 from changing the alcohol ordinance for unincorporated Walker County.
Following objections from citizens and churches that brewed at hearings Jan. 9 and 23, the proposed amendments to remove the 300-foot distance requirement for package sales and sales by the drink were revised to reinstate the 300-foot distance requirement from churches for package sales and to increase the distance requirement from churches and schools for sales by the drink of malt beverages, wine and distilled spirits from zero to 150 feet.
The commissioner’s meeting agenda included a resolution to authorize putting the compromise amendment on the ballot in May to allow voters to decide; however, in a move that brought a standing ovation from the audience, he announced, “My decision that I made early on was that I’m going to let this issue die and leave it (the existing ordinance) as it is.”
The sole commissioner, who does not drink alcohol, said he had been wrestling with the decision for some time because he wanted to make the right decision for Walker County.
He listened thoughtfully for about two hours as a series of opponents urged him not to put the matter on a referendum. Their reasons and concerns included: the damage alcohol and drugs have inflicted on families, fears of drunk-driving fatalities, God’s judgment on the commissioner if he put the matter on a referendum, disrespecting the sanctity of churches by allowing alcohol at their front doors, comparisons of a sole commissioner to
“an elected dictator,” questions about abolishing the Walker County Development Authority and quizzing about why a handful of mostly unnamed people could request changes from which they would benefit financially — changes that would be detrimental to the community and the fragile sobriety of recovering addicts who seek support from churches — when opponents publicly stated their case by attending the public meetings and signing a petition.
Other concerns expressed were that people would vote in favor of the proposed changes without understanding them and that the measure would pass if put on the ballot.
Whitfield recessed the meeting for about 10 minutes after Michael Millians spoke. Whitfield’s eyes welled with tears as Millians expressed his gratitude that Whitfield gave him a job at Whitfield Oil Co. in 2007 after his release from prison when no one else would hire him because he was a convicted felon. Millians, who said he had been a drug addict, said his church is his sanctuary and urged the commissioner not to put the matter on the ballot.
Two teenage boys, one who said he is 18, stated their reasons for standing up against the proposed relaxed regulations. “That was the convincing moment for me,” he said.
“It was doing what was clearly best for our community,” he said.
Whitfield said since the issue came up, he has been
urged to delay action after the November election or to hand off a decision to the five-member board, which will take office in January 2021. He said delaying action would be making a political decision by passing the buck, and he would not “drop a bomb” like this on the newly-elected board.
“That was never an option for me,” he said, adding that he is not intimidated to tackle hard issues head on.
He also denied caving to political pressure to drop the matter. He would not have considered amending the ordinance before an election cycle if he had been concerned about political pressure; he considered the changes for economic development reasons, he said.
“Every day I try to do what’s right for the county and not because of political positioning,” he said.
A handful of opponents turned out for the first public hearing Jan. 9 to deregulate the ordinance to match with state minimum requirements for selling packaged wine and malt beverages, as well as the on-premise consumption of wine, malt beverages and distilled spirits. Seventy people turned out for the second hearing Jan. 23, with about 20 speakers expressing their opposition to the proposed changes.
More than 100 people attended the Feb. 13 meeting.
The proposed changes would have aligned with ordinances in LaFayette and Chickamauga.