I don’t answer comments if they are dumb. Constructive and critical discussion is appropriate in my mind. I also don’t respond to folks who don’t leave last names on the comments they write.

I’ve got some real concerns about the folks who have pushed the billboard issue to the ballot. They have an utter and complete lack of understanding of how city government must negotiate in real estate, personnel and other types of contracts. I believe it is the Ralph M. Brown open meeting law that has such negotiations held outside of public eyes because speculators have been known to buy land and then sell it to cities and counties at inflated prices.

The billboard issue was and is a real estate contract. Sorry, folks. You’re wrong.

If you tell yourself enough times that green is red, you’ll come to believe green is really red. If you believe that the things you read in Facebook posts are true and accurate, and then continue to state them as “the truth,” you might be part of the problem. I’m concerned that too many folks are believing their own press in absence of actual truth.

The mob mentality that came about on the billboard issue was driven by a few folks who wanted to see some incumbents deposed in the recent City Council election. They used the billboard issue in an attempt to slander and otherwise belittle two council members standing for reelection. It grew from there, and soon the real issue was lost.

“Get a petition. The people will be heard.” “We didn’t have a say.” “Backroom deals all over.” “Campaign funds from billboard companies to the incumbents.” “They blocked my signing.” “They didn’t block my signing.” “Incumbents will make a bundle from this deal.”

BALDERDASH. Show me the proof. Show us ALL the proof and the documentation. Please. Be open and show us.

What do you have that implicates any City Council member, city staff member or anyone else that proves your allegations?

Let’s face it, folks. This is a real hot button issue for some people in this valley. They claim they got more than 18,000 signatures, and indeed they may have. That is good. How many signatures did the folks who started this thing gather, and how many were gathered by the paid petition signature gatherers? So much for the “grass roots” folks who started this, because professionals stepped in and did a job on us all.

And how did they contact those who wanted to get the petitions signed? What back-room deal was cut with them? How much were those concerned citizens paid to let them come in and gather signatures? How about some open communication here?

Many of us who support the billboard ordinance want to see how the opponents were funded. Where did the money come from to gather the petitions?

We want to see how they can prove the proposed electronic billboards are brighter and more harmful in light emissions than the current 60-plus illuminated signs.

If you don’t like electronic signs, just say so. But that isn’t what they are saying. We hear them say the City Council is not able to govern and is on the take.

How do you stop people from running in panic when you’ve yelled “fire” in a crowded theater and there is no fire? I don’t know if you can.

Wouldn’t it be great if the folks who started this would hold themselves to the same level of openness they say they want from the city? I don’t think that is going to happen. They simply want to yell and stir the pot that is made of a thin broth of innuendo, conjecture, conspiracy theory and a hatred of current and reelected council members. They lost Game 1 and are working on Game 2. Maybe they should take the ball and go home.

Regardless of what state law says, maybe the anti-billboard ordinance folks want all negotiations for contracts with the city to be in the public eye all the time. So totally open that anyone could see what was happening. In fact, I think those same folks would want to have all negotiations, public and private, to be open. You’re selling your house for a price that might decrease the value of your neighbors’ homes, and they can block the deal because they think it is bad for them.

It is going to be a costly and unnecessary election. Not only will the city pay a lot, but the sign companies will, too. Friends will be lost and some gained.

And for those Realtors working to stop the ordinance, I wonder how you can do that in good conscience. I guess they have their Facebook lives and their Facebook friends in their Facebook world. The rest of us are paying for their Facebook fantasy.

Which begs the question:

What will they want next?

Open negotiations on all city contracts, conducted in a chat room on Facebook? Let me get the petition now.

Darryl Manzer grew up in the Pico Canyon oil town of Mentryville in the 1960s and attended Hart High School. After a career in the U.S. Navy he returned to live in the Santa Clarita Valley. He can be reached at dmanzer@scvhistory.com and his commentaries are archived at DManzer.com. Watch his walking tour of Mentryville [here].