Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fire Alarm System Requirement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Brookfield board denies appeal to waive fire alarm requirement at Burleigh Road property
Summary
The Board (City of Brookfield) denied an appeal June 30, 2026, by property owner Ron Philleo seeking a modification to the city code that requires a fire alarm system at 12555–12557 W. Burleigh Road; the motion to deny carried 3-0 after testimony from city fire and zoning officials.
Get email alerts on the Fire Alarm System Requirement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Board (City of Brookfield) denied an appeal on June 30, 2026, from property owner Ron Philleo seeking a modification to the municipal code that requires a fire alarm system at 12555–12557 W. Burleigh Road. The motion to deny the appeal, made by Director of Community Development Dan Ertl and seconded by Director of Finance and Administration Robert Scott, carried 3-0.
City Attorney Jenna Merten swore in witnesses before testimony began. Philleo appeared in person with Gina Marszalkowski and architect Dan Beyer; Assistant Fire Chief Kory Sukow and Zoning & Inspections Administrator Justin Drew represented the City. Philleo and his representatives presented evidence and placed Exhibit 1 into the record; the Board received Exhibit 1.
Assistant Fire Chief Kory Sukow and Zoning & Inspections Administrator Justin Drew testified that the municipal code requires a fire alarm system at the property and described the basis for that requirement. Both city witnesses were cross‑examined by Philleo; Assistant Chief Sukow also cross‑examined the property owner earlier in the hearing. The Board asked questions of both the property owner and city staff during the evidentiary exchange.
After testimony and closing arguments from Philleo and Assistant Chief Sukow, the Board deliberated and concluded the code requirement for a fire alarm system applied to the Burleigh Road property. The Board also reviewed the factors listed in Section 8.08.230.C and determined that Philleo’s request for a modification did not meet the criteria for relief under that provision.
Director Ertl moved to deny the appeal; Director Scott seconded. The motion carried 3-0. No further actions or conditions were recorded in the minutes. The meeting adjourned at 2:57 p.m.
