The Springfield City Council voted to keep the alcohol ordinance the same after considering amending the ordinance to change the time of sales and consumption on premises.

Walter Keith of Kelly’s Tavern requested that the ordinance be amended to allow for sales until midnight Monday through Thursday and on Saturday, and sales until 1 a.m. on Friday night.

The ordinance allows for sales Monday through Thursday from 11 a.m.-11 p.m. with consumption on premises until midnight. Friday and Saturday sales are permitted until midnight with consumption on premises until 1 a.m.

The proposed amendment would have allowed sales Monday through Wednesday from 11 a.m. until midnight, Thursday and Friday from 11 a.m. until 1 a.m., and Saturday from 11 a.m. until midnight. The amendment would not have allowed consumption for any additional time after the cut off of sales.

Mayor Barton Alderman said the council could consider having a public hearing on the proposed change if they would like.

“I think we already had a vote, a referendum on it, and I think it was overwhelming to give the council to set up the rules,” he said. “I just thought I would throw that out just in case council does feel the need to get public opinion.”

Council member Kenny Usher said he did not think a public hearing was needed and shared his disapproval of the change with the council.

“I still feel we’re sliding a little bit more in the direction of having a bar set up as opposed to a restaurant,” he said. “I think we’re kind of straying away from the intent of the citizens, to have with food in a restaurant type setting, and I’m against modifying the ordinance as proposed. I think we need to maintain what we have. It works, and I don’t think we need to modify it on a whim.”

Council member Jeff Ambrose said he did not believe someone going to a restaurant at midnight would be going there to eat.

Usher said: “That’s right — at that time of night, it’s becoming more of a bar set-up than a restaurant, even if they’re ordering a small cup of fries.”

Alderman reminded the council that the ordinance would apply to all establishments with a liquor license and not just Kelly’s Tavern.

Neidlinger said the change was a wash, and that the percentage requirements take into account that some people will eat and not drink alcohol, while some people will go in to the establishment only to drink.

“I don’t see anything wrong with regulating that one hour that they’re going to buy one hour earlier and sip on it when they can buy it on the hour and enjoy it,” he said.

Council member Charles Hinely asked about taking away the hour of consumption from midnight to 1 a.m. on Sunday morning.

“As a matter of fact what this would mean is there better not be any alcohol on the table after midnight,” Alderman said. “Take out of your mind that we’re even discussing this one establishment. This is an ordinance for anybody that may come in, that we grant, or future council grants a liquor license to.”

Hinely said he could live with cutting the hour from Sunday and giving it on Thursday, but he didn’t like the idea of changing an ordinance that has been adopted so recently.

The council voted against Neidlinger’s motion to accept the proposed changes to the time changes for sales by a 3-2 vote. Usher then offered a motion to end all consumption by midnight on Saturday night.

“Mr. Mayor, I would like to make a motion now to amend the ordinance to end all consumption of alcohol by 12 o’clock Saturday night,” Usher said.

Hinely said the council would in effect penalize the business owner who came to them about changing the ordinance. Bennett said that was the part that concerned him.

“Even if say it’s another issue next time, it’s just business hours, and they come and ask for an extension of business hours, and instead we cut their hours back, so we’ve penalized them for asking,” he said. “I don’t have a preference one way or another — I’m just thinking about relationships with business owners.”

Usher’s motion also failed by a 3-2 vote.

“I would point out that you do have an ordinance in place — there’s nothing that says we do have to change it,” Alderman said.

Hinely said since the council was back where they started, they should leave the ordinance as it is.