Grove Hill goes wet in first of several wet/dry elections

Grove Hill goes wet in first of several wet/dry elections

By Kristen Lindsey

Citizens of Grove Hill voted to allow the sale and distribution of alcohol after a 346–214 vote Nov. 3, making it the first town to do so since a new law passed the state Legislature May 15.

Sponsored by Rep. Jimmy Martin, D-Clanton, House Bill (HB) 175 reduced the population requirement for holding a wet/dry referendum from 7,000 to 1,000 except in Blount, Clay and Randolph counties. It went into effect May 15 after state legislators overrode Gov. Bob Riley’s veto on the bill.

Even though all of the 900 or so registered voters did not turn out to vote in the state’s first wet/dry referendum, it was still one of the largest turnouts Grove Hill has had for an election, according to Lee Merck, pastor of Grove Hill Baptist Church in Clarke Baptist Association.

“I was disappointed in the vote … but all in all I was not surprised by it,” he said. “What it has shown us is that there is … a lack of reverence for [God’s] Word.”

Merck and Grove Hill Baptist were the main leaders in the campaign to keep Grove Hill, population around 1,400, dry. The church put up a billboard and provided yard signs that said “vote no to alcohol.” The church also sent out several mail-outs and held prayer meetings.

Clarke Association also helped. At its annual meeting Oct. 13, the association passed a resolution opposing “the sale of all alcoholic beverages in the city” that ran in The Clarke County Democrat.

“Everything we have done we have tried to do out of love and concern for the people of Grove Hill,” Merck said.

“We have tried to help our community understand that we are against it because we are for life.

“We have not seen it as a battle of flesh and blood, but as a spiritual battle,” he noted.

But Gil Gilmore, a Grove Hill attorney and a supporter of Grove Hill becoming wet, disagreed.

“I don’t see it as a moral issue,” he said. “We aren’t promoting anyone to drink. We are just saying that if people are going to drink alcohol then they should be able to buy it legally [here].”

Jim Herod, a citizen of Grove Hill, agreed. “Having Grove Hill allowed to sell alcoholic beverages doesn’t change what people do. What it does is keeps the money in this town,” said Herod, who was treasurer of a political action committee called Citizens for Grove Hill, which promoted legalizing alcohol in Grove Hill, and was one of the early signers of the petition that pushed for a wet/dry referendum.

Both men claim the towns directly north and south of Grove Hill sell alcohol legally. Therefore citizens are spending their money in those towns instead of Grove Hill.

But Merck thinks the reasons people voted for Grove Hill to go wet boils down to the love of money and the desire for pleasure.

“Many people justify it to make themselves feel better about what they’ve done. But the fact of the matter is they like what alcohol has done for them,” he said. “They think it’s going to put money in their pockets and bring pleasure to their lives.”

Joe Godfrey, executive director of Alabama Citizens Action Program, said this is just another win for the alcohol industry. “My concern is that the alcohol industry is on a never-ending crusade to do away with any dry county and dry cities,” he said. “All they care about is making more money. I see this as another step in their attempt to take control of our culture.”

Godfrey confirmed that several towns will face a wet/dry referendum as a result of HB 175. Carbon Hill — population around 2,000 — will hold a wet/dry referendum Dec. 8, and at least five others are coming.

As for churches who will face something similar in other towns, Merck said he hopes believers everywhere will stand for truth.

“There has been a lot of stress and anxiety for taking a stand in a culture in which we live,” he said. “I’d encourage them to do it in love and not make it personal. I’d encourage the churches to lead the way. The church needs to be the salt and the light.”

Chris Baker, director of missions for Clarke Association, agreed the responsibility for change lies with the churches.
“If the church stands up … a big difference can be made.”