Jump to content
What I don't understand about the comments here is that many are up in arms that the establishment is so close to a school and residential area and then promptly forgetting that a liquor store is just on the corner of the Post Office property...let's just shut that down as well. I didn't know that Tarango's Night Club was going to operate during school hours; that is new to me.
From my understanding about the filing for the license, this establishment is for those aged 21 and over. How is the 'policing' of this age limit any different at this location than it would be at anywhere else where liquor is served, including the Popular Bar, etc?
The amigos 'peeing' on any property just made me cringe at the stereotyping. Drunk people no matter what their nationality do stupid and inappropriate things, etc., but if you are going to be drunk you are not going to only do it at one establishment. I have been to Mathers Bar on more than one occasion and saw many drunk people and even was there once when Mr. Mathers himself threw someone out of the bar into the parking lot because they had had one too many and they looked plainly 'white' to me.
Seems like a witch hunt to me and a whole lot of judging going on. Why don't we start policing our own children and teaching them right and wrong instead of shutting down or not even allowing an establishment to open because of what our children might or might not do; it is called self control. Why punish everyone for inability of a few who cannot or choose not to control their alcohol intake?
I myself am a parent of two children under the age of fourteen, but I have to say that I am not opposed to a nightclub in town, simply because it is a nightclub. How I see the issue is it is all about economic growth and adds to the tax base of Craig.
So many people in town say they want economic growth, but when it comes in a form of adult entertainment, suddenly their noses are turned up. Why not while we are at it close down Mather's Bar or the People's Bar because of the possible issues of noise and vandalism? I can see why the Loopers would be concerned because their establishment backs to the club and it could be detrimental for their business if noise flows from the establishment, but again this is something that can be regulated, basically a three strikes and you're out.
What I question more than anything is the character of the owner and the issue that he has not been forthright in his past dealing with alcohol and repetitive suspensions of his driver's license, all showing that Mr. Tarango skirts his personal responsibilities and many of these issues continue to crop up for him.
Time to put down the 'pitch forks' and have a emotion free discussion and see if something can be worked out based on the merits of the business and not the fears of what could be.
I have been to many of the negotiations between the City and the VFW and frankly the City has been very upfront in the negotiations with Mr. Neu speaking on behalf of the VFW. Even at the last council meeting, while Mr. Neu, Quartermaster of the VFW was not selected to speak on behalf of the VFW, he ended up getting up and basically taking over the conversation from the Guy Bradshaw, commander-elect of the VFW and allowed his attitude and temper to override the good faith that both the council and the VFW were working towards to see if there were any points that they could find common ground.
The VFW is asking for the moon and seems to want the citizens of Craig to pay for their launch vehicle and the fuel to get there and back. Sit down and figure out what will work and absolutes as to what will not work. Sounds as though both sides have done that and are now at an impasse; 3canines is correct, get a professional mediator involved with the absolute agreement on both sides that whatever the mediator decides, is the legal and final decision moving forward.
Great news! I testified at a PUC hearing on this in Denver and while there were a number of supporters of HB 10-1365, the number waiting to testify after I did was 2:1 of people against HB 10-1365. I believe the PUC already had made up their minds when they had this 2nd hearing, the first being in Grand Junction. I am eager to hear the arguments both pro and con. Please keep us informed!
I absolutely agree with Ms. Chase and DailyReader. I am often surprised as to what the kids wear when it gets warmer, but I am old school when it come to dress codes. I too question the dress code of the teachers, but then again I am old school. With that being said, I have been to numerous concerts up at the high school in the last year and watch a number of young men sitting in the front row so they can look up the director's skirt and at the concert in December, a number of fathers were sitting up front taking pictures not of their kids, but of the Director's outfit.
This last December, there were a number of clearly heard gasps from the audience when the Director walked out onto the high school stage in mid-thigh high heel leather boots, black stockings and a short skirt. I thought the chosen attire was more appropriate for the red light district of a large town then that on the stage of a high school holiday presentation. I have talked to a couple dozen people about the choice of the dress and they too thought it was a poor choice because it took away from the kids on stage. Mind you I think a number of our teachers are very talented including the aforementioned teacher, but they should stick to teaching and not showing off their wares, and in the case above, taking away from the presentation of the hard working kids.
My child has said numerous times that they are embarrassed by what the teacher wears, but doesn't want to say anything out of fear of their chances of not getting any more parts in the plays at the high school; obviously high school is already hard enough, so we sit and say nothing.
@footballmom...so why was the economy heading into the dumps in 2008 with the housing and banking collapse long before the current POTUS was in office, hum! Clearly I remember McCain saying the economy was fundamentally sound on Black Monday, September 15, 2008 and then shortly after wanting to suspend his campaign to just magically fix the economy because he was so far removed from reality. The collapse was a result of bad leadership at many levels in government and EXTREMELY poor oversight in the financial sector.
So please share how this is the fault of the POTUS presently in office? I just love how people use the "change" statement and act indignant when it was pointed out how messed-up the economy was before the 2008 election. We are not bleeding jobs as we were a year or two ago, SLOWLY heading in a positive growth projection. It is naive to believe that any POTUS is responsible for policies and laws; it is the congress that makes those laws that they must pass in order to have the president sign the legislation into law. The only real power for the office only officially lays with war powers and the POTUS didn't even have those powers until Truman. Yes, many POTUS have made out-of-session appointments, so no POTUS has cornered the market on this ridiculous behavior. The finger pointing and labeling on any side is not going to fix the problem; true leadership comes from putting childish games aside and working the problem, not pulling everything apart issue by issue.
Last login: Sunday, June 1, 2014
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2014 Craig Daily Press. All rights reserved.