But the surprisingly important information to come out of the meeting was his description of the disciplinary powers of the SLA which include prosecuting establishments with violations to ABC laws, non-compliance with local fire/health/safety laws, 106A violations (reports filed by police dept. on disorderly conduct, serving to minors, noise complaints, etc… – these are the follow-ups to 311 calls), and non-compliance with the ‘methods of operation’ set forth in the original application.

Why do I think the method of operation (hereinafter referred to – for my amusement – as MOP) is important? Because the factors laid out in the MOP (hours of operation, food service, (music?)) are factors that have a huge influence on the quality of life effect of an establishment. And because the license, once granted, is contingent upon MOP being followed. Changing these factors mid-stream is a prosecutable offense by the SLA.

So, as I see it, a community board may give or deny their recommendation to approve a license based on the ‘methods of operation’. It can become a bartering tool for a community board that wants to ensure that establishments that receive applications are held to reasonable strictures that allow for the least friction possible between the residents and the establishments. A community board may suggest certain changes to a MOP before granting approval. And a community board may withhold approval and point out specific areas of concern in the MOP.

And a bar that is behaving irresponsibly? Chances are they may no longer be following the blueprints they laid out in the MOP, and that is a prosecutable offense.

It’s our secret weapon, and I like calling it MOP. MOP! MOP! (I’m picturing Road Runner).