Who should endorse nightclubs becomes topic during Waukegan City Council meeting
A number of Waukegan's 69 taverns or restaurants with bars offer their customers entertainment in one form or another but none of the establishments are nightclubs as defined by the city's Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) approved in a 6-3 vote of the City Council last July.
Ald. Lynn Florian, 8th Ward, expressed concern at Monday's City Council meeting that Encore Events was about to receive a nightclub endorsement from Mayor Sam Cunningham. The ordinance gives him the sole right to approve an endorsement.
Florian said Encore was denied a nightclub endorsement by the council last year. She and a majority of the colleagues did not think it was appropriate then and she has not changed her mind.
'My (8th Ward) residents overwhelmingly did not want a nightclub there due to the history of the previous nightclub. There was a murder in the parking lot. The fact that it's nestled in a neighborhood and we had approved an assisted living facility on the same property,' Florian said at the meeting.
Cunningham has no intention of giving Encore or any other applicant a nightclub endorsement on its liquor license in Waukegan any time soon until he takes an in-depth look at how the UDO treats nightclubs.
'I'm going to hold off on any nightclub endorsements until we have a better understanding of who can and can't have them,' Cunningham said Tuesday. 'We have a new ordinance out there. We need to know the background of people asking for a nightclub endorsement.'
Both under the former regulations before the UDO was enacted and the current rules, any business serving liquor — nightclub or not — needed a liquor license. Cunningham said the difference is a nightclub imposes a cover charge on all patrons while a tavern offering entertainment does not.
By the time an individual operating a restaurant or bar receives a liquor license, Cunningham said, the person is thoroughly vetted before the City Council votes to approve or reject the application. The police department, as well as those responsible for reviewing business and liquor licenses, must approve.
Before the UDO became law just under a year ago, Cunningham said someone who wanted a nightclub endorsement had to get a conditional use permit. The permit requires additional steps that are no longer necessary.
In addition to getting a liquor license to serve alcoholic beverages, before the UDO, an applicant for a nightclub endorsement was required to make its case to the Waukegan Planning and Zoning Commission for a recommendation before the council took a vote.
Florian said she thinks the City Council should have a say in whether a nightclub endorsement is granted to a business rather than leaving it to the mayor. She thinks a liquor commission, rather than the mayor — state law makes a mayor the liquor commissioner — should make the decisions.
'I believe this is something that should be the decision of the council,' Florian said. ' The alderman of the ward should have a say.'
With the council already approving a liquor license for an individual seeking a nightclub endorsement, Cunningham said he is comfortable taking the information gleaned from the police, the fire department, business licensing, and the liquor staff and deciding whether or not to issue the endorsement.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
Peoria may buy Expo Gardens for major residential development project. Here's what we know
The city of Peoria is exploring purchasing Peoria Exposition Gardens, where the annual Heart of Illinois Fair is held, and turning the 70 acres of property into residentially developed land and saving it from foreclosure. Peoria City Manager Patrick Urich said the city hopes the land could be developed into 110 to 150 homes within the boundaries of Peoria Public Schools. He said that would mean roughly $1.5 to $1.6 million in additional annual property tax revenue. "The property is zoned residential and there are very few locations, in fact this is the only location, inside of the boundaries of Peoria Public Schools where we could have a large scale housing development," Urich said. The Peoria City Council will vote on the proposed purchase, which would cost the city more than $1 million, at its meeting on Tuesday. Peoria would use a state grant designed for land acquisition and housing to acquire the property, Urich said. Councilmember Andre Allen, whose 4th District is home to the Expo Gardens, will support the purchase. "This is a unique opportunity to help ensure a key District 4 property is developed in a way that benefits existing residents and strengthens the neighborhood," Allen told the Journal Star. "I'm excited for what lies ahead and grateful for the many years of memories Expo Gardens has provided the City of Peoria and beyond. Equally important, this effort allows us to bring our state dollars home and support local revitalization." More: 'Embarrassment': Additional $200M needed to fix Peoria sewer overflow issue. Here's why Both Peoria's City Manager Patrick Urich and Expo Gardens President Charles Kennell have signed a letter of intent written by the city that signals their desire to purchase the property. Peoria would purchase the property for $1.1 million and would also release Expo Gardens from roughly $457,000 of liens stemming from unpaid stormwater utility tax fees and other debts owed to the city. This purchase, according to information provided to the council by city staff, would benefit Peoria Public Schools by securing in city hands the "largest developable parcel for residential growth within District 150." Peoria would place the 70 acres of land into its land bank where it would then be marketed for development, if council approves the purchase. Urich said part of the agreement would provide the Exposition Gardens a short-term lease that would likely get it through this year's Heart of Illinois Fair, which is scheduled for July 15-19. A volunteer who answered the phone at the Peoria Exposition Gardens on Thursday said there was no one available to comment about the purchase. More: When does Best Buy open in East Peoria? What to know, including when Peoria store closes This article originally appeared on Journal Star: Peoria may buy Expo Gardens for major residential development project
Chicago Tribune
15 hours ago
- Chicago Tribune
Who should endorse nightclubs becomes topic during Waukegan City Council meeting
A number of Waukegan's 69 taverns or restaurants with bars offer their customers entertainment in one form or another but none of the establishments are nightclubs as defined by the city's Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) approved in a 6-3 vote of the City Council last July. Ald. Lynn Florian, 8th Ward, expressed concern at Monday's City Council meeting that Encore Events was about to receive a nightclub endorsement from Mayor Sam Cunningham. The ordinance gives him the sole right to approve an endorsement. Florian said Encore was denied a nightclub endorsement by the council last year. She and a majority of the colleagues did not think it was appropriate then and she has not changed her mind. 'My (8th Ward) residents overwhelmingly did not want a nightclub there due to the history of the previous nightclub. There was a murder in the parking lot. The fact that it's nestled in a neighborhood and we had approved an assisted living facility on the same property,' Florian said at the meeting. Cunningham has no intention of giving Encore or any other applicant a nightclub endorsement on its liquor license in Waukegan any time soon until he takes an in-depth look at how the UDO treats nightclubs. 'I'm going to hold off on any nightclub endorsements until we have a better understanding of who can and can't have them,' Cunningham said Tuesday. 'We have a new ordinance out there. We need to know the background of people asking for a nightclub endorsement.' Both under the former regulations before the UDO was enacted and the current rules, any business serving liquor — nightclub or not — needed a liquor license. Cunningham said the difference is a nightclub imposes a cover charge on all patrons while a tavern offering entertainment does not. By the time an individual operating a restaurant or bar receives a liquor license, Cunningham said, the person is thoroughly vetted before the City Council votes to approve or reject the application. The police department, as well as those responsible for reviewing business and liquor licenses, must approve. Before the UDO became law just under a year ago, Cunningham said someone who wanted a nightclub endorsement had to get a conditional use permit. The permit requires additional steps that are no longer necessary. In addition to getting a liquor license to serve alcoholic beverages, before the UDO, an applicant for a nightclub endorsement was required to make its case to the Waukegan Planning and Zoning Commission for a recommendation before the council took a vote. Florian said she thinks the City Council should have a say in whether a nightclub endorsement is granted to a business rather than leaving it to the mayor. She thinks a liquor commission, rather than the mayor — state law makes a mayor the liquor commissioner — should make the decisions. 'I believe this is something that should be the decision of the council,' Florian said. ' The alderman of the ward should have a say.' With the council already approving a liquor license for an individual seeking a nightclub endorsement, Cunningham said he is comfortable taking the information gleaned from the police, the fire department, business licensing, and the liquor staff and deciding whether or not to issue the endorsement.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson to veto measure giving police power to set temporary teen curfews
CHICAGO — Mayor Brandon Johnson announced he will issue a rare mayoral veto after aldermen granted Chicago's police superintendent the power Wednesday to declare a teen curfew anytime, anywhere in the city. The highly contentious ordinance faced months of City Council debate before passing in a 27-22 vote. After the vote, Johnson, who had blasted it as 'lazy governance' and unnecessary, said he will issue the first mayoral veto in decades in a bid to kill the ordinance. Johnson called the measure 'counterproductive to the progress that we have made in reducing crime and violence' and said it will elicit costly lawsuits against the city. 'It's important now more than ever that we do not repeat the sins and the failures of the past,' Johnson said. 'I stand against this proposal because we need data-driven, effective strategies to guide our community.' The 27 votes in favor of the ordinance Wednesday were well below the 34 needed to override a mayoral veto. During floor debate, Johnson's handpicked Finance Committee Chair Ald. Pat Dowell pushed back on the mayor's description of the ordinance and his argument that aldermen should focus on investing in youth instead of passing the ordinance. 'I believe we can and should do both. I'm not down here doing lazy governance. I'm down here to actively work and do what is necessary to protect my community,' Dowell said. 'Stopping these potentially chaotic and violent gatherings will help everybody.' The last mayoral veto occurred in 2006, when Mayor Richard M. Daley vetoed an ordinance that would have required 'big box' retailers such as Walmart to pay wages of $10 an hour. Ald. Brian Hopkins, 2nd, first proposed a curfew ordinance last year after a downtown youth gathering ended in violence and began to push it forward again in March after two similar gatherings culminated in high-profile shootings. He would not say after the Wednesday vote how he would respond to a Johnson veto. 'We'll see what he does,' Hopkins said. 'I think we did the right thing.' The Streeterville alderman first planned to target only downtown with an 8 p.m. curfew, two hours earlier than the long-standing citywide teen curfew. He then sought to give both Johnson's deputy mayor for community safety and the police superintendent shared power to declare the pop-up curfews together. All the while, progressive aldermen and civil rights groups blasted the curfew push as an unconstitutional and unfair crackdown harming teens. Ald. Angela Clay, 46th, argued aldermen were ignoring teen voices and underlying disinvestment that leads to chaotic gatherings. 'What we are doing right now is not listening to the young people of this city,' she told aldermen. 'The issue that we are discussing here is a broader conversation that a lot of us are too afraid to have.' Johnson criticized the early versions, but did not always take a clear side until Hopkins pushed forth a version giving Snelling the exclusive power to declare pop-up curfews. 'It has not worked,' Johnson said of curfews Tuesday, pounding the table during a news conference. 'And now we're doing stuff that works, and then they want to come up with another idea that has not worked. What sense does that make?' Snelling, who would be required to consult others on any curfew and issue public warning 30 minutes before implementation, has loomed large over the debate as both supporters and opponents claimed to have his support. Hopkins said Tuesday Snelling had been calling aldermen to urge 'yes' votes. 'Every one of those conversations ends with the superintendent saying, 'I support this ordinance. I urge you to pass it,'' Hopkins said. But Ald. Jason Ervin, 28th, said Snelling told Black Caucus aldermen Tuesday night that he does not need the powers the ordinance grants. Ervin added that he hopes Johnson will veto the measure. Snelling offered a mixed response to the ordinance in court testimony last week. He said he would not use a 'snap curfew' power to declare curfews shortly before they go into effect, but would use a power allowing him to declare curfews days in advance when police are forewarned of such gatherings. The ordinance 'would be used as a deterrent where, if we have that information days before, we would send out notifications to CPS, to parents,' he said. 'This is going to prevent the possibility of violence.' The superintendent added he would never agree to a measure targeting only downtown and said curfew violations are not criminal, meaning they would not result in arrests. But Snelling backed away from the debate Wednesday morning. In a statement to the Tribune, he said police 'have always enforced the law at large gatherings and will continue to do so.' 'The curfew ordinance has become more a matter of politics than public safety. Given that this is a matter that sits within the City Council, I have no further comment,' he added without saying whether he will use the ordinance's powers. Johnson argued later that he and Snelling are aligned in their views on the curfew power. 'There is no space and distance between me and those that I put in charge to run my departments,' he said. A coalition of groups opposing the ordinance called for the city to instead invest in youth jobs, violence prevention programs and safe, engaging activities for young people before the vote. The curfew ordinance could lead to teens being kicked out of parks and beaches, GoodKids MadCity organizer Reynia Jackson said. 'It isn't fair and it isn't equitable,' Jackson said. 'What we need is healing. What we need is prevention.' _____ (Chicago Tribune reporter Sam Charles contributed.) ____
