Opinion: Do Scottsdale Charros now admit women members?

Some years ago there was considerable public discussion (Scottsdale Republic, etc.) re the Scottsdale Charros having an exclusive contract with the City of Scottsdale for managing Giants Stadium and Spring Training, because they refused to admit women members.

The discussion was not that they had to admit women per se, but rather that as an organization doing business with the city of Scottsdale, they should not discriminate.  At that time, the Republic ran an editorial recommending that the Charros admit women as members, if they were going to continue to be given contracts by the city.

My question today to mayor and council, as well as to the Arizona Republic: Do the Scottsdale Charros now admit women members, given that they still have a contract with the city?  If they do, then I have no further questions, and my congratulations to the city of Scottsdale and the Charros for doing the right thing.

However, if they still do not admit women members, then how is it legal nonetheless ethical, that they continue to get (apparently, no bid) contracts from the city of Scottsdale, to take in otherwise taxpayer monies, by managing city property and city sponsored events, given that they continue to discriminate against women?

I look forward to a reply from the city of Scottsdale.

Mr. Greco is a Scottsdale resident.

You are encouraged to leave relevant comments but engaging in personal attacks, threats, online bullying or commercial spam will not be allowed. All comments should remain within the bounds of fair play and civility. (You can disagree with others courteously, without being disagreeable.) Feel free to express yourself but keep an open mind toward finding value in what others say. To report abuse or spam, click the X in the upper right corner of the comment box.