East Valley Tribune

May 19, 2013 | 05:33 pm
East Valley Tribune Facebook East Valley Tribune Twitter East Valley Tribune Mobile Version East Valley Tribune Facebook
Best of East Valley 2013

Do tattoo shops make indelible marks on a city?

Tribune contributing columnist Mark Scarp shares his opinion on issues in the East Valley.

Welcome to the discussion.

3 comments:

  • downtownresident posted at 8:50 am on Sun, Sep 25, 2011.

    downtownresident Posts: 768

    Just put them next to the half way houses already in downtown. Or maybe even right on Main Street, next to the Nevermore weirdness. We already have hundreds of zombies hanging outside the Nile, so we're attracting a great demographic to downtown. Just the right place for a tattoo parlor. I hear they have tons of disposable income to spread around. We might even want to throw in a medical pot facility or two and a Spanish church.
    That'll put us on the map for sure.

     
  • loubator posted at 12:50 pm on Sun, Sep 25, 2011.

    loubator Posts: 95

    One does not "wear" a tattoo. You can wear a hat or a t-shirt, and they can be removed and put aside for another time. A tattoo is all but permanently inked onto one's skin, and the removal of a tattoo is expensive and painful. When my three sons were young teens, they would constantly threaten to get "inked" as soon as they turned 18. My oldest two are 21 and 19, and neither of them have "body art". While they were growing up, I explained to them that by having visible tattoos, they were limiting their employment potential. At the company I work for, I am involved in the hiring process. I will not hire anyone with neck tats, teardrops, sleeve, back of the hand; any of the messy, visible stuff. There are too many qualified people out there, and the need to hire a "human canvas" is unnecessary. Quite frankly, those people can go work at the skate shop at the mall. Most companies have standards to maintain, and when clients visit my company, we don't want them thinking that they have walked in to a prison workshop. So, the tattoo parlors can stay where they belong, across from the railroad tracks, next to the strip club. When Ryan Coleman grows up and has to get a real job to support himself and his family, I hope the the skate shop at the mall pays more than $8.50 an hour. Next time, spend $30 on an overpriced ball cap to wear backwards on your head. It can always be removed when it comes time for a job interview!

     
  • snipes posted at 12:14 pm on Mon, Sep 26, 2011.

    snipes Posts: 141

    Reporter Mark Scarp couldn't be more uninformed. It's as if he's writing this column based on what *others* have told him, rather than doing his own reporting or verifying the facts. How lazy.

    From the start nobody *ever* said that Tattoo Parlors have no right to exist and certainly no one every infringed on the Colemans' First Amendment rights. Mesa has several tattoo parlors already.

    The Goldwater Institute can mis-characterize this case as much as they want but the facts remain:

    Tattoo Parlors historically have presented problems to the community and thus many cities, City of Mesa included, have special zoning restrictions, based on location, hours, and keeping questionable businesses from congregating.

    Coleman is a poor business man. By his own account he did extensive remodeling without ever obtaining a permit--the permits required of *any* business. Now he wants to recover damages for that. This includes construction, plumbing, fire safety, and signage. He stated that the building owner told him tha the didn't need a permit. Perhaps Coleman should sue the building owner for feeding him false information.

    Coleman had ample opportunity to impress the neighborhood that he could run this business in a responsible manner. Instead, he sent a representative who told Coleman to stay away as his "appearance and manner" would alienate the group. Coleman also wanted to run this business "hands on". Apparently remotely from France where he lives.

    At the City Council meeting on this manner, Coleman--seeing the tide turing against him--got in a snit and while others were called to give comments supporting his cause, he personally went to each and had them withdraw their remarks. So he's pitching a fit about being denied his First Amendment rights to speak, yet folds when his given the opportunity.

    Council members had significant concerts about this fly-by-night operation, and those concerns were only exacerbated when they learned that Coleman's tattooing skill were acquired during the decade that he spent in prison for violent crimes.

    Is it any wonder the the neighborhood was apprehensive? It is totally justifiable that the council denied his special permit. He failed to meet the standard expected of any business.

     

Rules of Conduct

Welcome!
|
Not you?||
LogoutMy Dashboard

Happening Now...