EASLEY — An ordinance that would allow downtown diners to drink beer and wine while enjoying meals outside passed on first reading by a narrow margin Monday night.

The ordinance passed 4-3, with Council members Chris Mann, Thomas Wright and Libby Dodson voting against the measure.

Currently, only one restaurant in the downtown area can serve beer and wine outside — or even allow customers to eat at outside tables — because its outside seats fall on private property.

“That was an anomaly that came up,” said Easley City Administrator Fox Simons. “It created an imbalance.”

Other area merchants felt that was unfair, and so approached city officials about the issue, which led to the creation of an ordinance allowing outside eating with beer and wine on tables that are on public sidewalks.

But the ordinance also faced stiff opposition from community leaders, who spoke out against the issue during the public comment portion of the council meeting.

Rev. Scott Willis of Enon Baptist Church said that members of the Piedmont Baptist Association are all for drawing more business to the downtown area, but that the ordinance robs people of a choice

“As a patron, if I walk down the street and there’s a business that sells alcohol, I have a choice as to whether I go into that business, or whether I stay out,” he said, adding that he feels that choice would be taken away.

Willis presented council with the signatures of 417 residents who agree with his stance.

Keith Mincey, Missions Specialist with the Piedmont Baptist Association, agreed.

“We believe in our community, we care about our community, we give to our community,” Mincey said.

Mincey encouraged council “to hold the line” on outside beer and wine, stating that the passage of such an ordinance “opens the door.”

“We have a real concern that as this door is swung open … it moves out onto the sidewalk,” he said, adding that nothing could stop a diner from going out to a downtown festival while inebriated.

“I can’t imagine that allowing consumption of alcohol on the sidewalk is going to save a business or save downtown Easley,” Mincey said.

Rev. Broadus Moody, PBA Director of Missions, also agreed.

“We can’t stop change,” he said. “It’s something that’s going to happen. Much of it we praise God for, the good things.”

Moody asked council to keep Easley great.

“As Satan works, he takes it step by step by step,” Moody said. “I’m fearful that we will take this step, which appears to be a baby step — and maybe even it is — that this step will give a precedent that will lead to other argument in an other day for another time .. that will change the environment.”

Moody said he believed restaurant owners will see revenue fall off in the long run if the ordinance was passed.

Members of council wrestled with some of those concerns themselves as they debated the issue.

Councilman Chris Mann said 95 percent of the feedback he’d heard from constituents was opposition.

“One person suggested we take this sequentially, and approve outdoor dining … and see if outdoor dining works,” he said. “Then, if the need is there, maybe revisit the alcohol portion.

Mann agreed with Moody.

“Once it’s out of the box, it’s hard to get it back in,” he said.

Mann said he was also concerned from a safety and liability standpoint, stating he worried about inebriated diners stumbling into traffic or down Main Street.

Simons said that owners of businesses that serve beer and wine must carry a $ 1 million liquor liability policy that indemnifies that city of Easley.

Councilwoman Kim Valentin said the current situation is unfair.

“I think if one person is already allowed to do it, I think it’s very unfair for other businesses that come in and want to do it and are unable to do it,” she said.

Councilwoman Libby Dodson said Easley should keep its family-friendly image.

Councilman Thomas Wright agreed, adding that council should not consider the issue at this time.

The ordinance could cause people to stop bringing their children downtown, due to fears about what could happen while downtown, Wright continued.

Councilman Brian Garrison said that while he would oppose alcohol at city festivals, he agreed that the current situation is unfair.

Mayor Larry Bagwell said that no one spoke out against the proposed ordinance at two previous public meetings concerning the issue.

“This is a controversial issue,” he said. “We all knew it. But the biggest feedback I’ve heard has come tonight.”

Investors have put a lot of money into the downtown area, and feel the ordinance will allow them to get a better return on their investment.

Bagwell also agreed that the situation is unfair.

“I know it’s on private property,” he said. “Then you get into a situation of ‘What’s private and what’s public?’”

The city itself has also spent a lot of money on downtown efforts, Bagwell said.

“I know you can’t legislate morality,” he said. “But I feel like when someone’s working to save a project, we need to listen to them also.

Councilwoman Kim Valentin moved to amend the ordinance, eliminating the proposed fees that were included in the ordinance.

Simons said the fee would have been $150 dollars for a restaurant 499 square feet and under, and $250 for restaurants 500 square feet and above.

The ordinance, which applies throughout the city, does not allow diners to drink hard liquor outside, Simons said.

State law prohibits allowing customers to consume hard liquor at outdoor tables.

The ordinance also gives more freedom to businesses — even those that don’t serve beer and wine, Simons said.

“Right now, you wouldn’t be able to have a coffee shop (with outdoor seating) — you wouldn’t be able to eat a sandwich or a bagel and read the paper (while sitting outside),” he said. “If it passes, you can.”

Second reading of the ordinance is slated for council’s next meeting, scheduled for March 8.