Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Massage License Renewal Qspot topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee split on Ping Health Center/Q Spot massage renewal after online‑advertising concerns
Summary
The City of Green Bay committee split on the renewal of a massage establishment license tied to 1315 West Mason (application: Ping Health Center LLC; signage: Q Spot) after a member flagged online advertising and police reported their most recent review had not substantiated explicit services.
Get email alerts on the Massage License Renewal Qspot topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The City of Green Bay Licensing/Inspections Committee on Monday considered the renewal of a massage establishment license for the business listed in the application as Ping Health Center LLC at 1315 West Mason, an operation members said appears to be doing business as “Q Spot.” Committee discussion focused on whether online advertising on a third‑party site raised grounds for denial under the municipal ordinance.
The matter matters because the committee’s recommendation will be forwarded to the Common Council for final action; committee members weighed whether recent online material and an anonymous tip should delay or block the renewal.
Alderman (committee member) said she found the business advertising on the RubMaps website and cited the ordinance language that makes such advertising a ground for denial when it indicates sexualized services outside what state law permits. Lieutenant Mahoney of the police department told the committee officers were aware of the listing and that their officer’s review on May 8 did not find advertising of explicit sexual services and that the department had one unsubstantiated complaint in 2024. Mahoney said the department would follow up if new, substantiated information emerged and could seek revocation based on a subsequent investigation.
Committee members asked whether the business name, LLC name and signage differed; staff noted applications are reviewed based on the submitted paperwork and that signage or doing‑business‑as names can be flagged but are not alone dispositive. One committee member said a discrepancy between the LLC name on the application and a different sign on the building had delayed prior reviews in other cases. The city attorney advised that, absent substantiated new evidence, there was insufficient ground to deny the renewal immediately.
After extended discussion, a motion to approve the renewal was moved and seconded; a subsequent voice tally produced a tie—reported in the record as 2 to 2—resulting in no committee recommendation advancing. Police said they would check CrimeStoppers/anonymous tips and pursue any substantiated lead; the city attorney confirmed the department could return with evidence supporting revocation if warranted.
The committee record notes: if the council or staff receives new substantiated information between now and the council meeting, council can pull the renewal off the consent list for more review. The police indicated they would follow up with CrimeStoppers to determine whether an anonymous tip corresponded to a filed complaint that had not been included in the officer’s May 8 review.

