The owner of a Ponsonby apartment next to a primary school says she had no idea her tenants would be running an unlicensed brothel.Jackie's tips for getting rid of brothels that are next to schools.
The woman received threatening and abusive phone calls after her name and home phone number were printed on a flyer circulated to residents warning of the brothel.
She has since contacted the police and a security firm.
Since late last year Firecats Escorts has been operating from the Brown St apartment in a complex that borders Richmond Rd Primary School.
The council has opted not to use its powers to shut the brothel while it processes a resource consent application.
The apartment's owner said she did not lease the property out "under its current activities".
When pressed as to whether she would terminate the tenancy, she would not comment except to say she "was going through the appropriate channels".
Brothels are considered "entertainment facilities" and can operate near the school because the area is zoned for mixed business use.
However, because Firecats is within 30m of a residential zone, it is required to apply for consent, which it did late last month.
Yesterday Brown St residents spoken to by the Herald said the brothel had changed activity on the street and called on the council to shut it down.
Scott and Bridget Blanks, who can see the brothel from their front porch, said its customers parked their cars in front of the school as early as 9.30am.
Mr Blanks, the founder-owner of the Classic Comedy Club, was able to joke about the neighbourhood's addition.
"Every suburban street should have a brothel. You don't have a problem getting a good tradesman - you can just leave a note on their windscreens.
"You can get a taxi at the drop of a hat."
He said he was not opposed to brothels but there was a place for them, and that was not in an apartment block next to a primary school and on a mostly residential street.
"I think it's only a two-bedroom apartment ... there appears to occasionally be men waiting in cars and standing on the footpath ... I thought 'God, is there going to be a queue'?"
Another neighbour opposed to Firecats said there had been a brothel operating from the same apartment building about three years ago.
He was unsure if the same apartment had been used.
Principals' Federation president Paul Drummond said there needed to be zoning regulation that would restrict how close brothels could be to schools or preschools.
"Brothels might normally be associated with a night time industry. But modern brothels in communities don't take respect of school bells."
Secondary Principals' Association president Patrick Walsh said in the past year he had spoken to principals from about four schools with brothels nearby.
Mr Walsh said in some cases children had come across used syringes and condoms near schools, necessitating clean-ups by gloved teachers.
Last year a brothel that opened across the street from Henderson Intermediate School shut down after protest from parents and teachers.
But Prostitutes Collective national co-ordinator Catherine Healy said for the most part brothels were understated and did not attract a lot of activity.
"It's fanciful for people to complain about brothels being near schools contributing to offensive behaviour, because you can't even see the behaviour for a start - it's all behind closed doors."
ENTERTAINING
* Firecats Escorts has been operating from an apartment in a complex that borders Richmond Rd Primary School.
* Brothels are considered "entertainment facilities" and can operate near the school because the area is zoned for mixed business use.
* Because Firecats is within 30m of a residential zone, it is required to apply for resource consent.
Tip number 1 - Get parents and staff from the school to stand outside the brothel in 24 hour rostered shifts. Take photos of the men and their vehicles as they arrive. The repulsive men that frequent these places are so ashamed of their behaviour, and so horrified at the prospect of their wives and partners finding out that they have absolutely no control over their genitals that they will quickly retreat back to one of the inner city sleaze dungeons - where the only people they risk damaging with their lack of self control are the women that they use - and themselves. Let the politicians fight that one out.
Tip number 2 - repeat tip number one until parents, students, and neighbourhood gets desired result.
Tip number 3 (for the landlord) - Advise the "tenants" that you are getting the apartment checked for P. I can guarantee that with a brothel operating in your property - your walls are caked in P residue. The fear of their drug use becoming known will have them moving on in no time.
Shame the clients. No clients = not brothel.
Hinder drug use. No drug use = no hookers.
This worked to put that hideous man who had set up a brothel in a house adjacent to the drop off zone at a Henderson Intermediate a couple of years ago - out of business. That brothel was gone in less than 3 months.
Who needs the council to deal with these matters?



6 comments:
you really surprise me, with ya comments...
to me your "blaming the clients", and not the root of the problem, the brothel...
given that prostitution is a legal business, and its clients are entilted to use that business, (if they choose), just like a plumber, etc... to call them "The repulsive men that frequent these places are so ashamed of their behaviour", is a lil over the top... so tip 1 really is out of place,
so while I agree the place should be shut down, to me it doesnt have a place within a school area or home, I'd rather "attack" the cause, the landlord/council, not the legit clients...
:), just my thoughts :)
Fair enough.
It these men are not ashamed of their behaviour then they won't mind people knowing that they are frequenting this brothel.
Right?
Get real. Even THEY know their behaviour is repulsive - using women who are in bad places and worse off than them in order to satisfy their sexual desires - is not something that any man is ever proud of which is why they feel the need to be so secretive.
Just because it is decriminalised - doesn't make it right.
I know that i would not want my daughters wandering past a brothel with men waiting outside on their way to or from school and i don't think there are many parents that would.
This issue is just more proof of just how shonky the prostitution laws in NZ are - and what's worse - despite what the media would like us to believe the whole industry is MORE dangerous now than it ever was.
So yes - in my view - any man that uses the services of a prositute - and enables an industry that does nothing but further damage the women that are unfortunate enough to become involved in it - is repulsive.
I realise that my view is extreme but i make no apologies for that. That lifestyle kills women every day - and i was very nearly one of them.
Hi Jackie, I'd be interested in learning why you believe the industry is more dangerous now (post-law change) than it was before?
Hey Mike,
SOMEWHERE back in my three and a half thousand posts where i splash my opinions all over my little corner of the www - i have written a lengthy post answering that very question for you.
I will try to find it for you - and failing that i will write those opinions again.
Right now though - i'm off to quiz night. :)
Here you go Mike...
Amazingly enough - i found the post that i did last year explaining why i thought the industry is more dangerous now than it was prior to decriminalisation.
http://wonderfulnow.blogspot.co.nz/2010/07/being-is-enough.html
Basically - let's face it - despite what the media would have us believe it was never the police, or fear of them that made it unsafe - it was the men that frequent the hookers and that has not changed.
It has gotten worse.
Thanks Jackie, that's a good piece. So basically, while it has provided workers with a great deal more transparency, a chance to operate "above ground" if you like, it has also heightened the risks they open themselves up to. Hmmm .. interesting perspective. But I also wonder about whether those protection mechanisms (security, drivers etc) aren't in fact just another vehicle for control of the workers. eg were the workers any safer if the security/owner was a complete tosser? Where could they turn for help in that case etc. The fact remains that it will never just go away, and I suspect the legislation will need to be modified further in years to come as more issues (such as zoning/this one) gradually come to light. Part of the problem is that for the general public, safety would be a paramount factor (in not doing it), but for those involved in the industry I suspect it is a peripheral consideration. Dunno, a toughie, and I could have a completely skewed view of it.
Post a Comment