I was finding myself confused when describing the anti-billboard-ordinance folks.

I’ve figured out what they really should be called. It is so simple.

If they get what they want, more than 60 existing billboards will remain in place. Sure, there won’t be a few new electronic billboards – three, to be exact – but more than 60 existing billboards will be saved from demolition.

Therefore, those folks should be called the “Save Old Billboards Society,” or the “SOBS.”

It fits so well with all the whining and crying they do.

Really. Are they ever happy about anything the city of Santa Clarita does? Most of all, they seem to think they could have done a better job in negotiating the “billboard deal.” They think it was negotiated in a dark and smoke-filled back room of City Hall so that certain City Council members could get a financial gain for themselves or for their election campaigns.

I just don’t buy the “We didn’t get the best deal” argument. We’ll know by hindsight, eventually. We sent a solid team of city staff to negotiate, and this agreement is what they hammered out – over three years – with limited council participation.

It is the sort of thing city staff does for us. Our council members cannot be working like that on every contract or negotiation of the city. I happen to think the whole council is great, but I also know they cannot replace the staff, and that they have a life outside of council work. That is what we pay the professional staff to do.

The purpose of the City Council’s billboard ordinance is to remove all of the unsightly billboards along the train tracks on Railroad, Bouquet and Soledad canyon roads. On Tuesday the council is expected to decide what to do about the billboard companies’ petition to stop the removal.

The city staff and council do a pretty good job, but they are not infallible.  Every negotiation is a search for the best deal for all involved. If this is a bad deal, so be it – but it would have to be a very bad deal (like the old trash contract was) to reach the level of, well, “trash talk,” so quickly.

All in all, we, as a city, do a great job with what we’ve got.

I really wish I could learn to write this in a third-person way. One of the SOBS likes to write that way in his postings about this subject – and most other subjects, too. I think he is still concerned about the car-carrier trucks unloading cars in the center of Creekside (Auto Row). He thinks it is dangerous. Don’t know why he thinks that. A check with the sheriff indicates there hasn’t been a single accident with an auto carrier moving cars on and off of trailers at that location. There also isn’t a single report of anyone hitting anything parked in that center-divider area.

So I can’t find a single reason for anyone to think it was a “back-room deal.”

I’m then asked, “What about the deal with Edwards? They threw that local billboard company under the bus.”

What about the deal with Edwards to remove about 42 billboards? First of all, it wouldn’t have happened without the discussions with Metrolink and Allvision.

Second, it was a negotiation, and Edwards and the city agreed on a dollar amount. If I remember correctly, that deal, too, was accomplished by city staff in the “back rooms” of City Hall. It was then brought to City Council for a vote, because that is how it works.

The billboard deal did not have our City Council in the driver’s seat. That space was occupied by Metrolink. They started talking to Allvision before the city had a clue about it. And, just so the SOBS have another conspiracy theory to research, what was the role of Los Angeles County in this whole deal? Just another question.

So to look at the whole picture again, let me see if I’ve got this nearly correct:

1) City staff negotiated a deal, and the City Council voted to approve that deal.

2) A few people in the city – ones who didn’t want two of the City Council members re-elected – started to cry about the unfairness of the deal and how it benefited those who were running for re-election, and the electronic signs were an eyesore, and…

3) Someplace and sometime along the way, a petition was raised that asked the public if they wanted the deal to be changed. Most of the folks who signed were told it would keep the electronic billboards from being installed. Few folks realized it would also stop the city from removing more than 60 old billboards that have “de-beautified” our city for decades.

4) Various members of City Council have been called all kinds of things that are mostly lies – well, all lies.

5) Next Tuesday, we will see what happens once again.

So, SOBS, what if the City Council votes to let the whole matter go to a vote of the people at large? Are you prepared to spend a lot of time and money in that fight? Your time may very well be limited in many ways. You might even have to stop your insulting posts of Facebook. Oh, no! And if you spend much in the campaign fight to stop the deal and Save Old Billboards, maybe, just maybe, you will be able to see how your position is costing the city.

Naw. Your minds are made up. Logic cannot prevail with you. Maybe you can come up with a better parking plan for Creekside that seems to be too large of a non-problem for the city staff and council.

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].