H 32°, L 7° | Tomorrow: 
H 17°, L 4°
To shore up support for their suit against the University of Wisconsin System Board of Regents, the owners of Brothers Bar and Grill have undertaken a campaign to elicit student support.
In ads placed in student newspapers and The Onion Thursday and a substantial amount of material on its Madison website dedicated to the issue, the owners called for students to “Save Brothers Bar and Grill.”
The Brothers owners recently brought suit against the Board of Regents regarding a disagreement over UW’s acquisition of the bar through the board’s condemnation power. UW plans to use the location for a $43 million School of Music facility.
Students opting to help out with the campaign, according to the website, can call the Board of Regents or sign a petition to the state Legislature in support of a recent proposed bill calling for greater oversight of the Board of Regent’s condemnation power.
“We are looking for any ounce of support we can get,” said Brothers co-owner Eric Fortney, adding this is “truly a David versus Goliath situation.”
UW System spokesperson David Giroux said this is part of a well-orchestrated, well-funded public relations and lobbying campaign that may be costly for taxpayers, university donors and students.
Today’s UW students are smart and they don’t like being manipulated, so we expect they’ll see through this fa�ade,” Giroux said in an e-mail to The Badger Herald.
The owners are also in search of support in the Legislature.
According to the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board, three lobbyists are registered to represent the interest of Brother’s co-owner Marc Fortney for the 2009-10 Legislative session, with their listed interest being legislative oversight of the Board of Regent’s eminent domain.
Eric Fortney said the procedure for acquisition was not properly followed as complete funding for the project has not yet been secured, and a clear reason the facility satisfies a public need has not been brought forth. He said the acquisition also goes back on a previous relocation agreement the owners had with UW where the bar would be located to Frances Street.
Eric Fortney said he does not want anything from the Board of Regents but for them to honor the relocation agreement previously agreed upon.
According to Giroux, the plans for acquiring the bar have been well established and publicized, dating back to its inclusion in the 2005 campus master plan. The State Legislature approved the project in the 2007-09 budget.
The Board of Regents offered $2.1 million for the bar through the condemnation process.
The offer covers the mortgage that is owed for the property, yet falls short of covering the cost of relocation or building another bar, which UW and the Wisconsin Area Research Foundation promised the owners in 2007, according to Eric Fortney. He added it does not take into account the more than $900,000 additional investment in the business.
Giroux said the $2.1 million is more than the property has been assessed by the city of Madison and more than an independent appraisal. The city of Madison appraised the property at $682,000 in 2008, and the private appraisal valued it at $1.1 million.
IP hash: c03193e5
Screw you Brother’s… you want student support?? How about letting international students into your bar with federal IDs and photocopies of their passports from their respective countries rather than making them have to bring their real passports to the bars. Learn to cater to everyone on campus, not a select few..
IP hash: 19ba285f
Oh cry me a river. Non-international students can’t get in with a photocopy of their driver’s license or passport either so why should an international student be able to get in with a photocopy of their passport? If you would bring your real passport you would probably be able to get in.
IP hash: 19ba285f
fucka you dolphin
IP hash: f151ec33
“UW System spokesperson David Giroux said this is part of a well-orchestrated, well-funded public relations and lobbying campaign that may be costly for taxpayers, university donors and students.”
Isn’t being well-orchestrated and funded a good thing? As if this somehow discredits the cause. As for being costly for taxpayers, the blood is on the hands of the university, not Brothers.
“Today�s UW students are smart and they don�t like being manipulated, so we expect they�ll see through this fa�ade”, Giroux said in an e-mail to The Badger Herald.
Manipulated? How condescending. Us students can decide for ourselves who is in the right. If Giroux thinks this is a facade, then produce a good argument.
To use Mr. Giroux’s own tactics: Mr. Giroux is a smart guy, so I expect he’ll see that he’s wrong in short order.
IP hash: e30d0cc1
Brothers is a freakin’ CHAIN of bars. When they took over the space from Joe Hart’s they barely added anything new so it’s not like they even created some sort of unique downtown “institution”. They had a very fair offer and a very viable new location all lined up. What happened? Seems to me like they got greedy and started pulling this crap. The UW has had a long term plan for the campus published for years. The owners knew this day was coming so why weren’t they planning ahead?
IP hash: f151ec33
Fair to whom? It wasn’t fair to Brothers because they don’t want to sell. Being forced to sell what you own when you don’t want to is not fair.
“The owners knew this day was coming so why weren�t they planning ahead? “
That’s like saying someone should have known they would be robbed, so they should just accept it. No they shouldn’t. They shouldn’t be robbed.
IP hash: e30d0cc1
“That�s like saying someone should have known they would be robbed, so they should just accept it. No they shouldn�t. They shouldn�t be robbed.”
No it is not like that at all. Your comparison is not apples to apples. This is commercial land, not some guy’s watch being taken by a mugger. Not to mention it’s commercial land that has been pegged for redevelopment for years and years. The whining owners can cry “robbery” all they want but this sort of thing happens all the time. There are laws that have been on the books for decades addressing this. What do you think happened when the city decided to build Overture? Ask the owner of Dotty’s and all the cool shops that used to be there. People lose their homes and farms for new roads too. That’s how it goes.
The owners have no emotional interest in the Madison location of their chain of bars. All they and their amubulance chasing lawyers want is to play this up so they can get a huge payday.
IP hash: e0abb350
They’re receiving 2.1 million dollars. How is that getting robbed?
IP hash: f151ec33
Because it’s their property and they don’t want to sell.
If someone offers you a million for your car and you say, no I don’t want to sell my car - it means more to me than that million dollars. That is your right.
If the person then forces you to give up your car, it makes no difference if he gives you the million, he has stolen your car. He has forced you to give it up for less than what it’s worth to you.
The fact that the university is willing to give up 2.1 million means that the bar is worth more to them than the 2.1 million. Otherwise they wouldn’t give it up.
Well, it’s worth more than 2.1 million to Brothers too. Otherwise, they would be willing to sell. For the university to force them to sell it for less than what it’s worth to Brothers, is theft. No one has a right to tell Brothers what their bar is worth to them.
IP hash: e30d0cc1
“For the university to force them to sell it for less than what it�s worth to Brothers, is theft.”
Oh please, it’s not like this is some family-owned business that has been there for half a century being left with no chance of future income. It’s a couple guys who own a chain of bars trying to get as much as they possibly can out of this deal.
It’s NOT theft no matter how you spin it. With $2.1 million, they will come out of this with much more money than they put into the place. How many homeowners can say that if they are even able to sell these days?
IP hash: f151ec33
Define theft.
By your logic it only counts as theft if it’s “some family-owned business.” If the same injustice happens to “a couple guys who own a chain of bars,” then we won’t call it theft?
That’s nonsense. Again, define theft.
IP hash: d90cd3a0
When it’s a government taking it then its’s not theft - just ask any government.
IP hash: 5a7b10cd
Theft is when two guys and their money grubbing lawyers try to bilk TAXPAYERS out of a lot more money than is deserved. Where do you think this money is coming from anyway? If the owners end up with more $$$ than they put in and it’s more than the assessed value, especially in this economy, how can it be theft? It is also well within the law for UW to condemn the property. They KNEW this when they bought the place! It is NOT theft!
Painting this as the big bad government (Goliath) vs. the little guy is completely disingenuous, www.brothersbar.com shows that they have 15 locations in 9 states and are offering franchise opportunities. Hardly “David”.
Here is how I know they knew they were buying a building that was going to be condemned. Brothers own website says that, after leasing the building since 1992, they bought it in 2006. That was years AFTER UW published it’s Campus 2020 plans. That plan clearly talks about building the new School of Music on that site. So Brothers KNEW that the building was going to be condemned when they bought it! They could have continued leasing until the building was torn down but they wouldn’t get much out of that deal (like Madhatter’s). However, Brothers made the decision to buy a building that they KNEW would be torn down which shows that they went in with their eyes wide open with the intent of making money from the deal. They just didn’t know in 2006 that the economy was about to collapse.
And for the sake of disclosure, I’m a UW alumni and part-time grad student who doesn’t have connections to the Music dept nor any bar staff or owners. I’ve spent a LOT of time drinking in Brothers over the years. I just feel that UW’s plans are much more important to the community than keeping a generic bar that could easily move elsewhere in that spot. I’m betting that you can’t truthfully say that you have no connection to Brothers, however. Let’s trace your IP and see. ;-) Or is this just about the BH protecting a long-time advertiser?
IP hash: f151ec33
“If the owners end up with more $$$ than they put in and it�s more than the assessed value, especially in this economy, how can it be theft?”
As explained numerous times on this thread, it is theft because it is their property and it is being taken from them against their will. This is what theft means.
The fact they the are getting offered an amount of money that OTHER PEOPLE think is fair is irrelevant. It is not up to other people to decide what Brother’s property is worth to Brothers.
The fact that current law permits this kind of thing and that Brothers possibly knew that the UW had eyes on the property is not an argument for the propriety of the law, nor does it change the fact that UW is taking what rightfully belongs to Brothers by force, which is theft.
(Slavery was once legal and slaves knew their freedom was going to be taken from them. The legality of it didn’t make it right and didn’t change the fact that it was slavery.)
“I just feel that UW�s plans are much more important to the community than keeping a generic bar that could easily move elsewhere in that spot.”
But in a free country - one that respects the rights of individuals - it doesn’t matter what you think is more important. What matters is protecting the freedom of people to pursue their own values, which many be different than yours and the majority.
IP hash: 5a7b10cd
You can stamp your feet and call it theft 100 more times but that still doesn’t make it theft! That’s like Sarah Palin claiming over and over that Obama pals around with terrorists…how’d that lie work out for her?
The slavery reference is quite a lame argument that won’t get you anywhere…try taking Com Arts 262. Seriously, getting a huge payoff for a generic chain bar that can relocate anywhere is just as much a travesty as slavery??? You aren’t going to win any support with that argument!
So how much do you want from the taxpayers as a “fair” price anyway? Double the $2.1 million? Triple? That never seems to get mentioned in the article or on your website.
Just move and quit costing the taxpayers even more money while screwing the Music Dept. out of donations…because who’s going to want to donate to pay you and your lawyers off?
You also conveniently avoided telling us your connection to all this.
IP hash: f151ec33
Stamp my feet? When? I presented an argument for why it is force. If you don’t agree than you need address my actual argument.
BTW, the oil companies and Sarah Palin are paying me to say all this stuff.