It is clear, following a pair of public forums on the matter last week, that the city's nuisance points system is complicated, confusing, and poorly understood by residents. It is also clear that it is tangled up in the same issues - race, class, and the big one, economics - that provide the undercurrent for much of what goes on in the City of Rochester.

Residents who spoke in favor of the nuisance points system saw it as a defense against irresponsible club and bar owners. The evidence for that is uncertain, however, since few places have been permanently shut down since the system went into effect in 1996. (The Democrat and Chronicle says two establishments have been closed since '96, but the city's law department could not verify that number.) And residents' quality-of-life complaints concerning noise, disorderly patrons, and other issues persist despite the system's existence.

Many bar and club owners say the nuisance points system is unfair and disproportionately targets establishments owned and frequented by minorities. Police deny that charge. A spokesperson for the Rochester Police Department says police treat all bars and clubs - owners and patrons - the same.

"We want the clubs to be successful," says Officer Stephen Scott. "We respond to whatever issues pop up, whether they're on Park Avenue or St. Paul. People's actions dictate our response."

Club and bar owners also say that the points system pits small businesses against the City of Rochester, and punishes bar and club owners for the acts of a few bad customers.

"These people work very hard and can be done in by three jerks with a vendetta," said a club owner at a forum. "Bars should be managed right, but there's got to be a better way."

The city has put a six-month moratorium on the nuisance system, which assigns points to a property for illegal activities such as drug offenses, gambling, and prostitution. Accumulation of points can lead to the city closing the business.

A commission is studying the system to determine how best to fix its flaws. The goal, says City Council member Elaine Spaull, is to foster a thriving nightlife, while making sure that Rochester remains a desirable place to live.

"We want a vibrant downtown," she says. "Yet how many times have you heard the city administration and City Council say if we don't have a critical number of residents downtown, we'll never grow our city?"

Bar and club owners say that the process for assigning points is inconsistent. One police officer might write up an incident one way; another might write it up differently. And the city's Neighborhood Service Centers rely on the police reports to determine when and how they will assign points.

"The city only gets what the police department sends them," says Roger Hill, owner of Club Fabulous on Jefferson Avenue. "It's not like the people at City Hall are down here on the street."

The points system puts blame in the wrong place, Hill says. Bar and club owners, who are investing in the city, shouldn't be held responsible when customers act out, especially when the behavior happens in the parking lot or out on the street.

"Ninety-nine-point-nine percent of the time, the patron wasn't acting like Mary Poppins," said an owner at the forum. "There are two sides to every story."

Hill says that any trouble at his club is a result of its environment, and that's not his fault.

"It's my location. It isn't me," he says. "This is a high drug area. I've been asking for help forever."

The system keeps bar and club owners from calling the police because they're afraid they'll get points.

"We can't afford to call," an owner said. "It's very detrimental to those of us who would like to call the police when there's a prostitute sitting on a bench" outside the club.

The system also creates a David and Goliath scenario, say owners and City Council member Adam McFadden (McFadden sponsored last week's forums), because the club and bar owners are competing with places like the city-owned Blue Cross Arena.

"I've been to hockey matches, I've been to wrestling matches where I, with my own two eyes, have seen people fight," McFadden says. "We don't assess ourselves points for that. It's almost like you're saying, ‘If it happens over here, it's a different thing. But if it happens here, you're going to be held accountable.'"

The question of race is harder to get at. Some owners from the St. Paul Quarter say that their operations and their patrons are treated differently from those in the East End; that police enforcement is much more intense. Some East End owners and operators disagree.

"You're all out of your mind," said East End club owner Ronnie Davis at a forum. "It's the same all over. I've had way more points than anyone in the St. Paul Quarter."

Some bar and club owners want the point system abolished. Several others are advocating for some kind of an advisory board to oversee the distribution of points. Davis sees the board consisting of business and city leaders as well as residents.

Council member Spaull says she voted for the moratorium because she believes the system is applied unequally and inconsistently. The University Avenue coffee shop Starry Nights was assessed points, Spaull says by way of example, for playing music "a little louder than it should have been." But the music was played before 10 p.m., she says, which is when the city's noise ordinance takes effect.

"So there has been a very, I would say, individual enforcement, police officer by police officer," she says. "Nothing that's uniform and standard."

Spaull says the city needs to deconstruct the different issues - noise, underage drinking, racial profiling - determine their sources, and devise complaint-specific solutions. A singular strategy like nuisance points doesn't successfully address all of the problems, she says.

"You don't just automatically assign points and fine people," Spaull says.