Evans: High Springs should let petition process play out before repealing Sunday alcohol sales ordinance

Letter to the editor

High Springs has always been a haven for those escaping the endless sprawl and stress of big-city life. It’s a town rooted in charm, tradition, and a way of living that feels increasingly rare. But change is coming, and not all changes are good. If we aren’t vigilant, our peaceful, small-town oasis could be swallowed up by unchecked development, transforming into a mini-Gainesville before our very eyes—complete with the congestion, commercial overreach, and bureaucratic decision-making that puts profit above people. I have stood before the High Springs City Commission, side by side with others who refuse to let that happen. Because once our town loses its identity, there is no getting it back. Residents—especially those who live within the historic district—deserve a say in how their community evolves. The alternative? Allowing a handful of decision-makers with private agendas to dictate our future, erasing the heart of High Springs in the process. That’s not progress. That’s a travesty.

Our city has engaged in extensive discussions regarding Sunday alcohol sales at city commission meetings, and it was established that, if food items comprise 51% of a business’s total sales, serving alcohol is permitted. This is commonly referred to as the Blue Law. The Brewery moved into the Historical District in 2019 under this agreement. However, they (and their supporters) have challenged this agreement several times. A re-negotiated compromise was made in June of last year, allowing the Brewery to sell alcohol on five Sundays throughout the year to allow for participation in special events or holidays.

Arguments, however, are being made (by many who do not reside here) which insist on repealing the existing ordinance entirely. Many locals maintain that it is important to understand that these kinds of decisions affect not only the businesses, but also the residents in the surrounding neighborhoods. A lively bar scene in any town can be fun – but can also lead to problems. Just because it’s in High Springs does not mean the bar scene will stay as sleepy – or as safe – as the town it serves. Revoking the current Blue Law could potentially set a precedent for a bar or brewery to be set up on every corner. This result would go against High Springs’ Mission Statement for maintaining the integrity of our small-town culture now and in the future. While it may promote some kind of future for High Springs, it won’t be one which preserves the charm and past of our unique community.

On 6/5/25, a joint commission meeting with both the High Springs and the Alachua County Commissioners took place. These joint meetings provide an opportunity for the two governing bodies to discuss common issues. They are NOT to set policy within the High Springs city limits, as decisions made affecting High Springs residents are referred to as “Home Rule Authority.” This authority allows and empowers the community to shape its own identity, rather than being forced into uniformity.  Respecting these decisions is crucial to preserving local autonomy.  

A motion was made at the June 5 joint commission meeting to remove the Brewery item from the agenda. This motion was made because the ordinance affecting the Brewery is a city, rather than a county, ordinance. However, county commissioners were unwilling to remove it. Discussion therefore ensued, and Mayor Grunder began by stating that a very large majority of the High Springs community is in favor of repealing this ordinance. Although he is the Mayor, Mr. Grunder has no standing to speak for the community, when community voices have repeatedly negated his claim that the majority is in favor.

It should be noted that this discussion has been held several times in the recent past. One could argue that repeated re-visitation of a rejected proposal undermines both the democratic process and the will of the residents. Discussing the minutiae of this ordinance – what it offers and limits, what may need to change, that it needs to go entirely – distracts from the real issue of  businesses getting ‘a foot in the door’ of High Springs commerce, then working tirelessly (many times behind the scenes) to change the original agreement to suit what their [unknown] agendas were to begin with, subtly or not so subtly changing the direction of the community. It is imperative that ordinance language is clear, precise, doesn’t create loopholes, and matches the intent of the community’s culture. We don’t want to set precedents wherein others can come in – through vagueness and loopholes – with arguments which lead to changes, which changes can then transform the culture with little or no citizen understanding of or input into the process. We need to be diligent in the words and options offered by the Commission to repeal the existing ordinance, and/or to rework the recent compromise made in 2024, and other manipulation which may lead us away from a concise conclusion to what we want and will allow for our downtown’s future.

Yet Mayor Grunder keeps forcing this issue back onto the agenda. One must wonder why this is happening. Is he trying to wear down opposition… using it as political leverage? Or is he serving only the interests of a select few? Through a procedure known as “passing the gavel,” it seems our appointed Mayor Grunder clearly orchestrated a vote to repeal this ordinance. These types of surreptitious actions erode trust in our officials.

Discussing, much less voting on this issue at the joint commission meeting should never have been allowed to occur. Mayor Grunder was out of line and went as far as to call a fellow commissioner a LIAR!   Grunder knew that one commissioner would not be in attendance, thereby upsetting the balance of representation, yet he and Commissioner Howell INSISTED on breaking from the traditional norm and voting at this meeting. 

I assert that Mayor Grunder should have let the process unfold in the proper procedural manner. If there is a challenge to a rule/law/ordinance, then there is a way to lawfully and ethically address it, rather than to ‘sneak’ it into an inappropriate forum.

Mayor Grunder interfered in due process and openly claimed that others had a vendetta against the brewery. Just because residents embrace peaceful enjoyment of their community does not mean they are against the Brewery itself. It just means that – reasonably enough – not everyone subscribes to the same lifestyle. Posturing this as a ‘them v. us’ contest is immature. This challenge is not against the Brewery itself. This challenge to the ordinance did not have to become contentious, and I contend that Mayor Grunder has played a role in making it so.

The Brewery’s owners describe their business as the ‘hub of the community’; however, this is not the case, as other businesses, which sell food as well as alcohol, attract customers on Sundays when the Brewery, which does not meet the Blue Law stipulations for sales percentages for food and alcohol, is therefore closed. We must keep the big picture of the community in mind, not just a component that is trying to tip the balance in its favor.

The Brewery is currently following the appropriate process of circulating an active petition to bring this issue to the ballot. I absolutely support this effort and feel that it is a constructive and constitutionally supported approach. However, the insistence to add this issue to the recent commission agendas reveals how much the supporters of the repeal are trying to force it through, side-stepping the proper process and leaving the citizens uninformed. I suggest that the petition process follow its course, and the vote go to ballot, if indicated. Spending a lot of time and effort to address the issue before the petition process is completed is a wasteful expenditure of the commission’s and citizens’ time. Following through with the petition process will allow the voters to ultimately make this decision, as it should be. I look forward to having a secure voting process, like the one recently held in Newberry, and letting the residents decide.

It has been announced that this issue is, again, on the June 26 City Commission agenda. I contend that this issue should be tabled until the petition process is complete, to avoid wasting more time and angst over it. When the proper process is completed, we can then revisit the issue from there and determine what the next steps will be.

However, since it is on the agenda, I urge all High Springs residents to attend the June 26, 2025, City Commission meeting at High Springs City Hall, where this issue will be up for discussion. The meeting starts at 6:30 p.m. Please support what you want for the future of your city.

Janet Evans, High Springs

The opinions expressed by letter or opinion writers are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of AlachuaChronicle.com. Assertions of facts in letters are similarly the responsibility of the author. Letters may be submitted to info@alachuachronicle.com and are published at the discretion of the editor.