= more police protection = more property tax.
Ask your favorite active police officer. Brookfield Mayor Jeff Speaker isn’t requiring a study from developers because Director of Community Development doesn’t want a study.
After all, we’ll have a Hooters, too! Why not more hotel rooms?
Speaking of hotels and room taxes, what the heck happened to the “tough mayor” decision to change things at the Convention and Visitor’s bureau? Over $400,000 is in next year’s budget for the service, but they are down a couple of employees. (Everyone except an assistant if I’ve read correctly!)
9 responses so far ↓
1 Kathryn // Oct 13, 2008 at 5:48 pm
We could pave over Wirth park to make room for the vehicles, and the visitors bureau can operate a shuttle.
2 Kathryn // Oct 13, 2008 at 5:49 pm
Ooooo…I like the new banner photo.
3 Wilson828 // Oct 14, 2008 at 7:13 am
Yeah, here we go with the Hooters thing again.
Look having a Hooters will not result in more hotel rooms and then more prostitution.
Where do you get this logic from?
You secretly from New Berlin?
4 Cindy Kilkenny // Oct 14, 2008 at 7:31 am
No cause and effect, Wilson828, on Hooters causing hotel rooms. You implied that, not me. I do advocate that an increase in hotel rooms means an increase in prostitution. You don’t hear about it much, but it’s definitely a part of our community.
I am suggesting both Hooters and more hotel rooms will contribute to the demise of that last little bit of positive image Brookfield had remaining.
5 Randy4sam // Oct 14, 2008 at 7:49 am
Development in Brookfield apparently is quite different than it is here in the Richmond area. If I want to open a donut shoppe here I must locate in a (predetermined) properly zoned site, get the proper permits and start mixing batter. We call it planning and in most cases it takes the emotion from the development process. Apparently in Brookfield the government must assure that that there is adequate demand for my donuts before approval is granted? What kind of capitalism is this? Actually it’s not capitalism at all.
6 Lucky Lady // Oct 14, 2008 at 8:16 am
It’s announced in today’s Journal that Brookfield is getting two more hotels. Which came first, the Hooters or the hotels???
7 Cindy Kilkenny // Oct 14, 2008 at 8:17 am
We used to do that, but now we have these things called Planned Development Districts. Almost anyone contributing to the Mayor’s campaign coffers can get an exemption and build wherever and whatever they want.
In fairness, Hooters is a restaurant going into a place that is zoned for restaurants.
The hotels are exemptions, though.
8 BrkfldDad // Oct 14, 2008 at 8:44 am
CK – I think you misintepreted Randy4sam’s comment. He’s saying, as long as it’s zoned, you can build whatever you want (i.e., a hotel) without proof of demand. That’s the capitalism, your business makes it’s if you are good, not just because there’s demand.
Personally, I wouldn’t mind more hotels in Brookfield, but not the suite types. My visiting business partners/customers pretty much stay at the Sheraton if they stay in the city, and aren’t too thrilled with anything else. Most prefer to stay at the Marriott West.
At least by JS reports, it seems the prostitution/escort problems are normally at the no-frills hotels in the town of Brookfield. Not to say that the city doesn’t have it’s problems too, but they sure don’t seem to make the press.
9 Cindy Kilkenny // Oct 14, 2008 at 9:38 am
No – I agree with him. Hooters is zoned properly, go for it. it doesn’t mean I have to like it being a Hooters. The market will out on that one. Capitalism at its best.
I don’t think the hotels were zoned, though. That would require a special present from the Mayor and the Common Council in the form of a PDD.
We’d need to check the source to confirm, but I’ve heard of prostitution problems everywhere – there was a big story from the Marriott Courtyards once, wasn’t there?