Add Your Scrolling Heading Text Here 16
14 Sed ut perspiciatis unde omnis iste natus error sit voluptatem accusantium doloremque laudantium, totam rem aperiam, eaque ipsa quae ab illo inventore veritatis et quasi architecto beatae vitae dicta sunt explicabo. Nemo enim ipsam voluptatem quia voluptas sit aspernatur aut odit aut fugit, sed quia consequuntur magni dolores eos qui ratione voluptatem sequi nesciunt. Neque porro quisquam est, qui dolorem ipsum quia dolor sit amet, consectetur, addicta sunt explicabo. Nemo enim ipsam voluptatem quia voluptas sit aspernattetur, addicta sunt explicabo. Nemo enim ipsam voluptatem quia voluptas sit aspernatur aut odit aut fugit, sed quia consequuntur magni dolores eos qui ratione voluptatem sequi nesciunt. Neque porro quisquam est, qui dolorem ipsum quia dolor sit amet, cur aut odit aut fugit, sed quia consequuntur magni dolores eos qui ratione voluptatem sequi nesciunt. Neque porro quisquam est, qui dolorem ipsum quia dolor sit amet, consectetur, adipisci velit, sed quia non numquam eius modi tempora incidunt ut labore et dolore magnam aliquam quaerat voluptatem. Ut enim ad minima veniam, quis nostrum exercipisci velit, sed quia non numquam eius modi tempora incidunt ut labore et dolore magnam aliquam quaerat voluptatem. Ut enim ad minima veniam, quis nostrum exercitationem ullam corporis suscipit laboriosam, nisi ut aliquid ex ea commodi consequatur? Quis autem vel eum iure reprehenderit qui in ea voluptate velit esse quam nihil molestiae consequatur, vel illum qui dolorem eum fugiat quo voluptas nulla pariatur? At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere
Separator
Add Your Scrolling Heading Text Here 16
14 Open your page → Edit with Elementor.
Go to where you want the saved section.
Click the gray “+” to add a new Section/Container.
In that empty block that appears, click the folder icon labeled Add Template.
In the library, switch to My Templates → find your saved piece → Insert.
Nemo enim ipsam voluptatem quia voluptas sit aspernatur aut odit aut fugit, sed quia consequuntur magni dolores eos qui ratione voluptatem sequi nesciunt. Neque porro quisquam est, qui dolorem ipsum quia dolor sit amet, consectetur, addicta sunt explicabo. Nemo enim ipsam voluptatem quia voluptas sit aspernattetur, addicta sunt explicabo. Nemo enim ipsam voluptatem quia voluptas sit aspernatur aut odit aut fugit, sed quia consequuntur magni dolores eos qui ratione voluptatem sequi nesciunt. Neque porro quisquam est, qui dolorem ipsum quia dolor sit amet, cur aut odit aut fugit, sed quia consequuntur magni dolores eos qui ratione voluptatem sequi nesciunt. Neque porro quisquam est, qui dolorem ipsum quia dolor sit amet, consectetur, adipisci velit, sed quia non numquam eius modi tempora incidunt ut labore et dolore magnam aliquam quaerat voluptatem. Ut enim ad minima veniam, quis nostrum exercipisci velit, sed quia non numquam eius modi tempora incidunt ut labore et dolore magnam aliquam quaerat voluptatem. Ut enim ad minima veniam, quis nostrum exercitationem ullam corporis suscipit laboriosam, nisi ut aliquid ex ea commodi consequatur? Quis autem vel eum iure reprehenderit qui in ea voluptate velit esse quam nihil molestiae consequatur, vel illum qui dolorem eum fugiat quo voluptas nulla pariatur? At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere
Stop the Liquor Authority from enforcing restrictions on live music and dance.
The Liquor Authority (SLA) currently enforces restrictions on live music and dance through its licensing process, even though nothing in its authorizing legislation requires the SLA to take these activities into consideration when issuing licenses. In other words, the SLA has assumed control over music and dance without legislative approval.
Across the City — following new 2024 zoning changes — thousands of licensees are now located in areas where live music and dancing are permitted by zoning. Yet, for many of them, their existing “method of operation” on file with the SLA does not list music or dancing. Under the SLA’s current rules, this would force thousands of licensees to file requests to modify their methods of operation — a time-consuming and often expensive process, frequently requiring attorneys.
Why is this objectionable?
This system creates unnecessary barriers for licensees while providing no real benefit to the public. Venues already operate under zoning and noise regulations, so there is no reason to tie music and dancing to liquor license conditions.
What change are we asking for?
We are asking the SLA to stop enforcing restrictions on live music and dance where zoning allows them. Because this does not require legislative action, the SLA can act immediately through a change in policy or rulemaking.
To address community concerns, any change could be made effective after a 90-day period, giving community boards time to file requests for reconsideration. Importantly, the burden should fall on the community boards to demonstrate why restrictions are necessary. Community boards are not legally empowered to enforce stipulations they negotiate with applicants, and they should not be treated as if they have such power. This change would restore balance by respecting zoning, reducing red tape, and placing responsibility where it belongs.
Adopt legislation eliminating the power of the Liquor Authority to impose restrictions where allowed by zoning.
If the State Liquor Authority (SLA) does not act on its own to stop enforcing restrictions on live music and dancing, then the Legislature must step in. This requires amending the Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) Law to make it clear that the SLA has no power to impose restrictions on music and dancing where zoning already allows them.
Why is this necessary?
The SLA’s statute does not direct the agency to regulate music and dance, yet the SLA continues to use its licensing process to control them. Unless the SLA voluntarily removes these restrictions, only a legislative amendment can ensure that zoning—not liquor licensing—governs whether music and dancing are permitted.
Who is responsible?
The SLA is a state agency ultimately under the authority of the Governor. The Governor appoints the SLA Commissioners and has the power to direct the agency to change its policies. Within the Governor’s office, responsibility for the SLA lies with James Katz, Deputy Secretary for Economic Development & Workforce (contact via aide Nicole Migliore — nicole.migliore@exec.ny.gov).
Mailing address for James Katz:
Deputy Secretary for Economic Development & Workforce
NY Governor’s Office
State Capitol
Albany, NY 12224
What change are we asking for?
We are asking the Legislature to adopt legislation eliminating the SLA’s authority to impose music and dance restrictions where zoning permits these activities. This will align state law with zoning, reduce unnecessary burdens on licensees, and prevent the SLA from overreaching into cultural and artistic expression.
What is happening now?
Assembly Bill A7210, sponsored by Assembly Member Monique Chandler-Waterman (Assembly District 58 — chandlerwatermanm@nyassembly.gov), has been introduced in Albany. This bill represents a step forward in modifying the powers of the SLA. It has been referred to the Assembly Committee on Economic Development, Job Creation, Commerce & Industry, and a companion bill may be introduced in the Senate. Our petition supports this effort and urges lawmakers to act.
Legislative oversight of the SLA:
Two committees in the Legislature are directly responsible for overseeing the SLA. These are important points of contact for reform:
Senate Investigations & Government Operations Committee — Chair: Senator James Skoufis (skoufis@nysenate.gov)
Assembly Committee on Economic Development, Job Creation, Commerce & Industry — Chair: Assembly Member Al Stirpe (stirpea@nyassembly.gov)
Agency leadership:
The Honorable Lily M. Fan, Chair and Commissioner, New York State Liquor Authority
Alfred E. Smith Building, 80 S. Swan St, Suite 900, Albany, NY 12210
Email: press.office@sla.ny.gov
Take action:
We encourage you to email these legislators—along with Assembly Member Chandler-Waterman, the SLA Chair, and the Governor’s office—to voice your support for Assembly Bill A7210 and for removing the SLA’s power to restrict live music and dancing where zoning already permits it.
.
Repeal the so-called “500-foot rule,” which enables community boards to pressure license applicants.
In New York City, because of its density, the majority of on-premises liquor license establishments are within 500 feet of another existing premise. Under ABC §64(7)(b), the issuance of a new license within 500 feet is prohibited. However, §64(7)(f) allows a license to be issued with the approval of the State Liquor Authority (SLA), provided a hearing or meeting is held.
The statutory language is confusing and often misread by novices. It is not helped by the fact that §64(7)(e), which immediately precedes it, contains a lengthy recitation of special parcels where the Legislature has granted exemptions by special legislation.
How the SLA applies the rule:
In practice, the SLA generally holds a hearing only if there is an objection from the community board, and even then it is discretionary. Hearings are not held in person; they are based on written submissions reviewed by an Administrative Law Judge. If the judge does not find in favor of the application, if the community board or other parties oppose, or if other issues require review, the matter is referred to the Members of the Authority for determination.
The effect of this process is to create delays and opportunities for spurious objections by community boards and individual community members. Even when those objections have no real bearing on zoning or public safety, they can slow approvals and add uncertainty for applicants.
Policy fix: Where the objection under the 500-foot law is based solely (or primarily) on the applicant’s intent to offer live music and/or patron dancing in a zoning-permitted location, the SLA should be able to approve on staff recommendation (Licensing Bureau) without convening a 500-foot hearing, absent independent public-safety or statutory concerns.
Why is this a problem?
Because most NYC establishments fall within 500 feet of another licensed premise, this rule often creates an added hurdle for nearly all applicants. Community boards can use the process to delay applications or extract restrictive stipulations, even when zoning permits the use. The impact is especially harsh where applicants have already invested heavily in leases, construction, and marketing, and urgently need the license to open.
What change are we asking for?
We are asking the Legislature to repeal the 500-foot rule from the ABC Law. Licensing decisions should be based on compliance with zoning and public safety—not on an arbitrary distance rule that forces redundant procedures and burdens applicants unnecessarily.
What would this achieve?
Remove duplicative procedures that overlap with zoning.
Reduce the ability to hold up applications through opposition filings.
Prevent costly delays for applicants already committed to opening.
Modernize the ABC Law to reflect NYC’s density and current planning/noise frameworks.
Oversight and responsibility:
Repeal requires legislative action. Oversight lies with the committees that supervise SLA matters:
Senate Investigations & Government Operations Committee — Chair: Senator James Skoufis (skoufis@nysenate.gov)
Assembly Committee on Economic Development, Job Creation, Commerce & Industry — Chair: Assembly Member Al Stirpe (stirpea@nyassembly.gov)
Agency leadership (SLA contact):
The Honorable Lily M. Fan, Chair and Commissioner, New York State Liquor Authority
Alfred E. Smith Building, 80 S. Swan St, Suite 900, Albany, NY 12210
Email: press.office@sla.ny.gov
Take action:
Email the committee chairs and the SLA Chair to urge repeal of the 500-foot rule—and in the interim, to adopt the staff-level approval policy where objections are solely about live music and dancing in zoning-permitted areas.
References:
New York Alcoholic Beverage Control Law §64(7)(b) and §64(7)(f).
New York State Liquor Authority guidance on the 500-foot law.
Have the City Council limit community boards from blocking live music and dancing.
City officials sometimes say they lack authority to regulate community boards (CBs) and that only a City Charter amendment could alter their role. That position is overstated. CBs are advisory bodies, not enforcement agencies. They lack standing to sue and cannot enforce “stipulations.”¹
Accordingly, in their advisory capacity CBs have no legal authority to coerce applicants into stipulations that purport to restrict future modifications of a venue’s method of operation absent CB approval. Such conditions exceed their statutory role and amount to an improper delegation of regulatory power. The City Council is the proper legislative body to prohibit inclusion or enforcement of such provisions.
The Council has previously characterized its post-Cabaret-Law role narrowly. In Resolution 1728 (2021)—which urged zoning changes to expand venues where dancing and live music are permitted—the Council claimed it had already “done all it could” when it repealed the Cabaret Law by passing Introduction 1652-A (2017). That framing was self-serving. The Council knew the State Liquor Authority (SLA) retained licensing jurisdiction and enforcement of license conditions under the Alcoholic Beverage Control Law.² Disclaiming further responsibility was a political choice to defer to CB practice, not a legal limit on Council power.
At the same time, the Council routinely acts as if it retains supervisory authority over CBs. In 2025 it introduced Int. 1315-2025 (Communications & Transparency Requirements), widely supported and co-sponsored, requiring CBs to publish monthly newsletters and provide real-time videoconferencing.³ This demonstrates that the Council considers itself empowered to prescribe operational requirements for boards.
CBs are not autonomous: Borough Presidents appoint half of each board’s members,⁴ and Council Members nominate the other half.⁵ This appointment structure underscores that boards operate within a framework of oversight and political accountability—not as independent decision-making entities.
What change are we asking for?
Have the City Council limit community boards from blocking live music and dancing by adopting local legislation and rules that:
Reaffirm that CB recommendations are advisory only and cannot be used to condition support on “no dancing,” “no amplified instruments,” genre limits, or other content-based provisions when zoning allows music and dancing.
Prohibit CB-imposed stipulations (or “no-modification without CB consent” clauses) from being included in City submissions or treated as binding.
Direct City agencies not to enforce CB stipulations that exceed or conflict with zoning, noise, fire/life-safety, or other applicable laws.
Standardize the City’s response to SLA notices so comments are tied to enumerated, content-neutral health/safety/compliance factors—not the mere presence of live music or dancing.
Why this matters:
These steps stop CBs from functioning as de-facto gatekeepers over lawful cultural activity, reduce costly delays and last-minute “stipulation” negotiations, and align City practice with zoning, noise, and safety laws—while preserving CBs’ legitimate advisory role.
Notes (citations you provided):
NYC Charter §2800(d): community boards “shall be advisory bodies.”
N.Y. Alcoholic Beverage Control Law §§17, 64, 106 (SLA licensing and enforcement authority).
NYC Council, Int. 1315-2025 (Communications & Transparency Requirements) — see NYC Council Legistar.
NYC Charter §2800(a): Borough President appoints one-half of CB members.
Id.: remaining members nominated by the Council Members representing the district.
Require the Liquor Authority to remove references to dancing and live music from license applications, so it’s clear these are not criteria for approval.
License applicants are required to complete a form that specifically asks whether there will be live music or dancing on the premises.
The problem is that the form suggests—improperly—that music or dancing are relevant factors in whether a license should be granted. More troubling, it asks for inappropriate details such as whether the music is “rock bands, acoustic, jazz,” which facially conflict with First Amendment protections. Additionally, requiring applicants to disclose whether instruments are acoustic or electric is irrelevant, since venues are already required to comply with local noise regulations. Many musicians rely on amplified instruments as a matter of artistic choice, so treating amplification as suspect is itself a further First Amendment violation.
If an applicant selects No, then their approved method of operation will not include music or patron dancing. That means they cannot later offer live music or allow dancing without going back to the State Liquor Authority to request a change.
Why is this objectionable?
Because these questions effectively give the State Liquor Authority control over music and dance—even when zoning already allows them. This extends state control into areas of cultural and artistic expression, which should not be a condition of obtaining a liquor license.
What change are we asking for?
We are asking the SLA—at a minimum, even without legislative change—to remove these questions from the license application and to clarify, in a rule, that silence as to live music and dancing does not mean that they are prohibited. After all, nobody expects a restaurant to list “desserts” in its method of operation in order to serve a slice of cake.
Item #1 Intitial State is set under Content-Interactions as to whether open or closed.
Content of Item 1 Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.