RANKIN INLET - At 31 per cent, voter turnout fell well short of the 60 per cent needed in a plebiscite this past week to reverse liquor laws in Rankin Inlet.

Even though most voters who participated voted in favour of changes, no changes will be made to the sale of alcohol in the community.

On the question of whether voters wanted to allow the sale of beer in Rankin, 217 (52 per cent) said Yes and 197 (48 per cent) said No.

Rankin voters were also asked if they wanted to authorize the Liquor Licensing Board to grant dining-room licenses so patrons could order alcohol with their meals. A total of 220 (53 per cent) voted in favour, while 195 (47 per cent) voted against, defeating the option.

Only 418 voters cast their ballots in the plebiscite. A Yes vote of 60 per cent was required to change current regulations.

The local branch of the Royal Canadian Legion was seen as leading the push for change concerning alcoholic beverages in Rankin.

Legion president Paul Waye said members accept the outcome, but the cost of doing business will remain high for the Legion due to the result, and that means less money to spend in the community.

Waye said because the No vote means the Legion cannot get a full license, it will continue to spend big bucks on special-occasion permits every time it hosts a social function.

He said he's disappointed the public didn't vote for change this time.

"The liquor commission did everything it could to get information out on the plebiscite, but I'm not sure people listened," said Waye.

"There were only 35 or 40 people at the public meeting, in a community with 1,400 on its voting list, and that's very disappointing."

Waye said if more people really cared about the liquor regulations in Rankin, they would have voted.

He said the low turnout poses the question: if people aren't affected by the outcome one way or the other, why would they care?

"As Legion president, I was looking at this purely from a business perspective.

"If we save $12,000 a year, that's more things we can do in the community."

Waye said there's a reason No supporters do a better job at getting their message out.

He said if 20 more people had voted Yes, it would have been a different story.

"People who support change are scared to be vocally in favour of it because there's people in the community who would be really upset with them for doing that," said Waye.

"It's always OK to be vocal publicly against it, but never for it.

"At the town meeting, a person stood up and demanded to find out who had signed the petition. That's why people who support change are afraid to voice that publicly, because of the fear of persecution."