Over the last few months and until Election Day, our community will continue to see a massive propaganda campaign to gain the voters’ approval for a very bad development agreement between Santa Clarita and Metro.
The city has spent or committed more than $1.5 million so far this year. A sweetheart deal with Edwards Outdoor Advertising was made on March 25 at the midnight hour to remove their billboards (those that small local businesses utilized), less than one hour after the city had approved the development agreement that placed the responsibility and cost for that removal on Metro. This noteworthy and foolish decision will cost the taxpayers $1.3 million out of the general fund. The city attorney, Joe Montes, fails to mention this in his “impartial analysis.”
After the referendum signed by 18,000 citizens against the ordinance was certified by the county clerk, the City Council in a 3-1 vote decided to “fight on” by authorizing a special election on Nov. 4. The expense to the city for the election is more than $200,000. This is the money we know about and is easily accounted for in council meeting records.
The money that is more difficult to track and account for is that for the two committees which were formed to support the development agreement. To gather the information, we must travel to City Hall, put in a records request and pay for photocopies. The addresses are redacted from online documents, and many pages with vital information are not placed online. A small group has dedicated its personal time, talent and personal finances to analyze the details needed to make an informed decision.
After the referendum effort began, a committee was formed by Metro’s consultant, Allvision, for the purpose of defeating the referendum by sending out blockers to hinder the legitimate petition gathering efforts. This committee was named Citizens for Billboard Reduction and sponsored by Allvision. Allvision is the consultant to Metro on the deal and stands to make millions of dollars when implemented. All of the “citizens” who funded this committee are individuals or companies on the East Coast – most likely clients or friends of Allvision. Robert Horowitz of New York spent $60,000, Ocean Outdoor $40,000, and Granite LLC $20,000. The funds were sent to PCI Consulting in Ventura County for the benefit of the Allvision committee.
It is interesting to note that the officers of the Allvision committee (Bradley Hertz and Jim Sutton) are partners in the Sutton Law Firm based in San Francisco. The principal officer listed on Form 460 is Robert Horowitz of New York. What real interest do these men and firms have in billboard reduction in Santa Clarita? None, but they know the amount of money to be spread around later is large.
In response to complaints by local citizens of disruptive and often illegal tactics used by blockers against petitioners, the Metro board ordered Allvision to suspend its activities on April 24, an order it refused to obey. In a quarterly filing, this committee disclosed that it had spent the entire $120,000, and the Sutton Law Firm is still owed more than $35,000 as a creditor. The committee has not yet been terminated.
Perhaps because Allvision was ordered to suspend its activities, a new committee was formed to support Measure S after the referendum was certified. Surprisingly, to those of us who pay attention, the Yes on S Committee (a Coalition of Community Leaders) lists its official address as that of the Sutton Law Firm in San Francisco. Bradley Hertz is listed as the assistant treasurer – the same group of lawyers who served on the committee sponsored by Allvision.
In the interest of accuracy, local resident Gloria Donnelly is listed on the official Form 410 as the treasurer and principal officer. Her street address has been traced to a post office box in Canyon Country, although the form says “No P.O. Box.” Compliance with disclosure laws is not of great importance to these folks.
The money to fund the new Committee Yes on S came from two sources. Robert Horowitz of New York funded $49,000 and a new player, Commodore Management of Owing Mills, Md., matched that figure for a grand total of $98,000. This is the money that pays for the slick mailers, newspaper inserts, phone calls, Internet banner ads and phone banks being used to persuade the low-information voters to believe this is a great deal.
The truth is that Allvision knows there is a better deal for the city, and it has pulled out all the stops to grab on to the revenue stream that would flow to it for 30 years. In fact, the actual development agreement covers a 50-year span with a five-year development period.
Those of us who oppose the development agreement are not “billboard preservationists” as the mockers contend. We believe the city should have negotiated directly with all of the asset owners (billboard companies) and held public information meetings prior to announcing the deal to gauge the desire of residents for the placement of digital billboards.
There is no reason for the city to have included Metro and Allvision in the negotiations or revenue stream. We don’t want Metro’s land; we want their tenant billboard owners who own static signs inside and outside of the Metro right-of-way. It was nonsensical and perhaps illegal not to have included the billboard owners in the negotiation. We may find it to be a very expensive mistake if the voters approve Measure S.
Citizens of Santa Clarita, despite what you hear from public officials like Bob Kellar, there is a better deal for our community. Allvision knows it, and that is why it convinced its friends on the East Coast to fund the effort to buy your vote.
The No on S Committee urges you to vote “no” on Nov. 4 so that we can get a better deal after public input and to mitigate the tremendous risk associated with moving forward with the Metro Development Agreement.
I am Steve Petzold (Petz), and I approve this message on behalf of the No on Measure S Committee #1370783 . If you have additional questions or concerns, I may be contacted at 661-609-1739 or Petz2@aol.com. Our web site is www.NoonScv.org.
Steve Petzold is a Santa Clarita resident.
Like this:
Like Loading...
Related
REAL NAMES ONLY: All posters must use their real individual or business name. This applies equally to Twitter account holders who use a nickname.
4 Comments
Very insightful ~ Always follow the money trail !!
Well said, Steve. Thank you!
Well said, Steve!
There seems to be a lot of opposition to this measure, but the only argument I have been able to find against it is in regard to how the measure was conceived, not necessarily the measure itself. I don’t really see why getting rid of a bunch of old ugly billboards is a bad thing. If the new billboard do indeed generate nearly $1 million in revenue for the city, that sounds like a good deal. Could their be a better deal? Maybe, but it will take a lot more time and money to get there.