Anti-CHL or confused business?

Flatland2D · Post by **Flatland2D** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 9:03 am

Last weekend I ate at a place called Cilantro's in Blanco, TX. I've been there before and never noticed any signage, but last time I saw a 51% sign and an old 29ee sign (though it looked brand new). I'm thinking one of two things happened. They found out they really are a 51% place and posted the 29ee out of ignorance, or they are really anti-CHL and are trying to "cover their bases". What might you guys think? It's a mexican food restaurant with a bar section, but I can't imagine they make more on liquor than they do food.

I'm thinking about writing the TABC on this one. If they make them pull the sign (51%) down, and it seems they're just anti-CHL, I'll write them and say I won't be eating their again. If they really are 51% though, I'll honor that, but I can't say I'd choose to eat there still. When you inform the TABC of a questionable 51% sign, do they ever tell you their findings, or do you have to stop by occaisionally and see if the sign gets removed?

I'm moving to Blanco at the end of the summer and really don't want to rule out a restaurant in a small town with an already limited number of food choices. Plus it really is a nice place overlooking the Blanco River.

P.S. It's been a while since my last post here. I've since hit the one year mark!

stevie_d_64 · Post by **stevie_d_64** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 9:14 am

I would probably push the TABC button, but taking issue with the overall 29ee signage has recently been biting us back pretty hard...

My recomendation would be to see if the 51% is valid, and let them take it from there, and let sleeping dogs lie on the other issue...

I'll support the folks who would take issue with that aspect of the business and not go there anymore, if its that important to you...

But why give them an excuse (if they are "anti", as you say) to get it right???

Its been one of my theories that businesses that post restrictive signange in Texas, may not really be restricting, if the signs are not posted in accordance to the law, and that technicalities of incorrect verbage and size of the signs may be because the actual "on-site" management know the real issue, and may not have a real problem with CHL folks in their businesses...They may actually be placating the upper eschelon bosses up the food chain in posting signage, but it not be in total "technical" compliance to the letter of the law...

But then again the opposite may be true, and they may not be as aware of the technical deficiencies in their signage...

And this is where I would not say too much to the management directly, but just use your outstanding reasoning skills and determine if the business is worth you maintaining a patronage to them or not...

But thats just my opinion...

Flatland2D · Post by **Flatland2D** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 9:24 am

That's some good insight, stevie.

I might write TABC and just leave it at that. I know a few other CHLer's in Blanco and may ask them what they know about the owners. That's the great thing about small towns. Everyone knows everyone.

Flatland2D · Post by **Flatland2D** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 9:31 am

stevie_d_64 wrote:I would probably push the TABC button, but taking issue with the overall 29ee signage has recently been biting us back pretty hard...

I've been out of the loop for a while. What do you mean about taking issue with the signs biting back hard? Are they finally realizing they need 30.06 to be enforceable?

Zero_G · Post by **Zero_G** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 9:33 am

If they have their liquor license visible to the public (as they should), you can see if it says "SIGN=RED" or "SIGN=BLUE". Since they're a restaurant and not just a bar, I'm betting it would say "SIGN=BLUE", i.e, not a 51% establishment. That would give you more info to go to the TABC with, though you've probably got enough to ask the question as it stands.

Keith

seamusTX · Post by **seamusTX** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 10:29 am

I've been to Blanco. It's a very small town. A business there can't afford to alienate customers. If you aproach the owners in a reasonable way, they will probably respond appropriately.

Maybe you can get the Blanco County Sportsman's Club to meet there.

- Jim

fiftycal · Post by **fiftycal** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 4:58 pm

Why not just keep it simple. Go to http://www.tabc.state.tx.us/enforce/CompInv.htm

and ask them. If the posting is wrong they will correct it. No muss, no fuss. I might be in Blanco someday and "need" to eat there.

Dougmyers5 · Post by **Dougmyers5** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 5:23 pm

Leave the gun in the car and eat, put it back on when you come out.

Flatland2D · Post by **Flatland2D** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 7:58 pm

I sent TABC an e-mail from the link fiftycal posted. I'll post back when they tell me the findings.

Here's the signs. I didn't even notice the 51% sign wasn't even in English.

pbandjelly · Post by **pbandjelly** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:31 am

it's only 51% if you drink Corona. cause it's an import, of course!

dpatterson · Post by **dpatterson** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 12:18 pm

Flatland2D wrote: I'm moving to Blanco at the end of the summer and really don't want to rule out a restaurant in a small town with an already limited number of food choices. Plus it really is a nice place overlooking the Blanco River.

Does this place have a new pavillion outside by the river? And is it just South of Blanco?

Scratch that... I know the place. Its actually called Blanco Riverside Bar and Grill now. My Brother's Father in Law is the owner. I know that he is not Anti-Gun. He does have a partner that I do not know so that could be where its coming from. Also, from the sound of it the 51% sign is improperly posted but they have not been open very long.

DP

Flatland2D · Post by **Flatland2D** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 1:42 pm

Yeah I think that's the same place. They were called Cilantro's when they were in the middle of town, and they are now Blanco Riverside Bar and Grill.

That's good to know the owner isn't anti-gun. Maybe they really are a 51% location, or maybe the new partner is up to something. I'd like to find out which it is, because if the signs don't legally need to be there then maybe he'd remove them.

dpatterson · Post by **dpatterson** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 1:46 pm

My Brother was there when TABC was and they had the Blue sign up and were told to take it down and replace it with the 51%. I have not been there yet so I do not know.

Most places that I have seen that serve any kind of dinner menu food are not going to be 51%. But they do get alot of bikers thru there so maybe they do? : )

As far as the No Guns sign, it does not mean anything to a CHL so maybe thats the way they get around that. Make the Austin Anti's happy with a "No Guns Sign" that has no affect on us.

DP

dpatterson · Post by **dpatterson** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 1:53 pm

Flatland2D wrote:Yeah I think that's the same place. They were called Cilantro's when they were in the middle of town, and they are now Blanco Riverside Bar and Grill.

That's good to know the owner isn't anti-gun. Maybe they really are a 51% location, or maybe the new partner is up to something. I'd like to find out which it is, because if the signs don't legally need to be there then maybe he'd remove them.

I think they hired the Chef from the place in Town to come run the new place on the River. I heard he is a very good cook...

Flatland2D · Post by **Flatland2D** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 2:05 pm

I guess they really could be a 51% place then. I just have a hard time believing that in a typical restaurant. But if the TABC says so, I'm not going to doubt that.

I'd still like to hear back from the TABC about this, as I really hope they are not 51% (or not anymore). I'll just leave the 29ee sign as it is. Though if the owner isn't anti-gun I can't imagine why they'd have it. Blanco (and other small towns) don't have to please the big cities, and I think certain qualities (like being gun friendly) are expected of them.

It is a really good place to eat though and would recommend it to anyone passing through who doesn't care about the 51% sign.

TexasCHLforum.com

Anti-CHL or confused business?

Anti-CHL or confused business?

Re: Anti-CHL or confused business?