New Mexico Route 66 Association wades into, then retreats from sign-preservation issue

The New Mexico Route 66 Association on Sept. 5 posted a statement about the thorny issue of historic neon signs disappearing along the highway, particularly in New Mexico, then deleted the post days later.

The post, which I’d monitored to read the responses, generated more than 150 comments at last count and plenty of dissatisfaction from members and Route 66 enthusiasts.

Grab a big cup of coffee or a sandwich. The rest of this is going to be long.

The controversy over disappearing neon signs along Route 66 in the Land of Enchantment had been simmering for weeks. These are the ones that have been purchased by collectors and spirited away in the past year or so, and it’s probably not a complete list:

• Two Club Cafe signs in Santa Rosa, New Mexico
• Grants Cafe sign in Grants, New Mexico
• Sahara Lounge sign in Santa Rosa
• Cactus RV Park sign in Tucumcari, New Mexico
• Paradise Motel sign in Tucumcari

Several signs reportedly were purchased by Garcia Automotive Group in Albuquerque for restoration to a future neon-sign graveyard in the city, although Garcia’s purchase of the Club Cafe neon signs wasn’t verified. UPDATE: Albuquerque photographer posted photos on Instagram a few days ago of both Club Cafe signs in one of the Garcia storage yards. END UPDATE

The Paradise Motel sign wasn’t bought by Garcia; a collector in Wisconsin purchased that one.

The controversy became inflamed when Route 66 enthusiast Nick Gerlich a few weeks ago posted photos on a now-deleted Facebook post of the neon signs Garcia had collected. He said details of an interview with one of the Garcia principals about the sign collection and the future neon park would be published in the spring 2020 issue of the New Mexico Route 66 Association’s quarterly magazine.

Gerlich issued this statement today:

“I do not regret the original post from July. It helped stimulate a much-needed, albeit painful, conversation that had to occur sooner than later. If people are going to act, they need to do it now, not in six months.”

The burning turmoil turned into an inferno when the Grants Cafe sign and Club Cafe signs disappeared in a short period not long after that. Roadies decried their disappearance from the Route 66 landscape, though the signs stood for businesses that had long been defunct, even for decades. Several of these towns’ residents wondered whether the signs vanishing would hurt tourism there. One person launched a petition drive on Change.org to decry the Garcias’ sign buyouts. More than 400 had signed it as of Monday night.

A few mentioned the possibility of a boycott of Garcia Automotive, but that idea never seemed to gain traction — mostly because a huge majority of Route 66 advocates live well outside the Albuquerque market.

An attempt to reach someone for comment at Garcia Automotive Group was unsuccessful.

Though the NM Route 66 Association’s post is gone, it was shared on the Historic Route 66 group on Facebook. The entire text is here, even if the comments it generated are not:

ANNOUNCEMENT CONCERNING THE PRESERVATION OF HISTORIC ROUTE 66 SIGNS IN NEW MEXICO
The New Mexico Route 66 Association is dedicated to preserving Route 66 historical and cultural assets in New Mexico. Our Association has earned multiple awards for our pioneering work preserving and restoring historic signage in New Mexico and our current staff includes subject matter experts in the field of sign conservation, preservation and restoration. The Association has contacts with professional organizations in the sign industry, independent preservationists and historians, academia, and historic museums and historic societies in New Mexico. This is in addition to our relationships with Route 66 small business enterprises. We also have knowledge of preservation tools such as historic overlay zones and landmarking ordinances that communities can enact to protect and promote their historic and cultural assets.
The Association has recognized discussions on various Facebook pages and other media outlets concerning the preservation of historic signage, particularly in New Mexico, and the emerging threat to these Route 66 icons. The Association has observed that within these important discussions there are errors in fact, misrepresentations, unfounded speculation and personal attacks reduced to name-calling. Certainly the important discussion needs to be conducted with civility, with constructive commentary, and with factual information.
In order to properly facilitate a meaningful discussion, the Association invites the Route 66 community to allow the New Mexico Route 66 Association to serve as a clearinghouse for factual information regarding the current discussions involving sign preservation. You are welcome to post your questions and constructive commentary to this New Mexico Route 66 Association Facebook announcement/post.
NEW MEXICO ROUTE 66 ASSOCIATION
Dedicated to education, promotion, and preservation of New Mexico’s Historic Route 66 Scenic Byway and economic revitalization along its 604 mile stretch throughout the state since 1989.- Est. 1989. A 501-(c)3 Non-Profit.
• 2004 New Mexico Heritage Preservation Award Winner
• National Scenic Byways Best Practices Recognition
• 2003 Preservation Project of the Year: Route 66 Magazine

Though the comments about the post no longer can be perused on the association’s page, here are a few observations and thoughts about it.

The association mishandled the Facebook statement and its reactions to it.

The statement was unsigned. It spent much of it listing its accomplishments — several at least 15 years old — instead of dealing with the issues at hand. After inviting discussion and receiving questions, it took the association about four hours to respond. It eventually stated its authors were association officers. Former president Johnnie Meier and lame-duck president Melissa Lea Beasley, who will be moving to Arizona, revealed themselves as the writers of several responses.

Some of the association responses seemed vague or evasive. It refused to endorse or oppose the neon graveyard in Albuquerque. Several roadies questioned whether they would remain association members. (Disclosure: I am an association member and have no plans to leave at this time.)

After a few more questions — including a couple from yours truly — the association deleted the post. So much for the “meaningful discussion” and being “a clearinghouse for factual information.”

Meier said in a recent speech in Tucumcari the Garcia group was “one of the good guys” in sign preservation.

Meier was a keynote speaker a few weeks ago for a Route 66-themed special event at the Tucumcari Historical Museum. Talking about Route 66 neon signs, he casually mentioned the Garcia group was “one of the good guys” in sign preservation. He elaborated on this when reminded of it on the association’s page, but his response disappeared with the deletion of the post.

Meier didn’t expressly condemn the Garcia group in the Facebook threads, although he stated he forwarded his disapproval for its acquisition of the Grants Cafe sign. If Meier seems a bit ambiguous on the issue, it may be because he’s a collector himself — his Classical Gas Museum in Embudo, New Mexico, contains a number of old neon signs. And though people may not always like it, the collection of signs remains a form of preservation.

Meier also mentioned one of the signs Garcia acquired — from the long-gone Yucca Motel in Tucumcari — was “lying in the weeds” and in obvious danger of being destroyed by weather, vegetation or vandals. UPDATE: A reader pointed out the sign may be from the Yucca Motel in Vaughn, New Mexico, not in Tucumcari, although a Yucca Motel once stood there, as well. END UPDATE

Perhaps Meier simply judges sign acquisitions on a case-by-case basis instead of making blanket pronouncements.

Talk and rancor mean nothing if Route 66 towns don’t start enacting landmarking ordinances and designate historic neon signs as such.

Meier recognized the problem of Route 66 signs disappearing a year ago and has advocated landmarking ordinances as a tool to slow or stop it.

Here’s an excerpt from an article I wrote about landmarking after the Cactus RV Park sign was hauled away last year:

Leslie Naji, a senior planner for Albuquerque’s Landmarks Commission, said about 20 properties in the city hold a landmark designation. If the owner of a landmark-designated property wants to make a major addition or demolish a building, Naji said the commission can deny a demolition permit and impose a one-year period to find an alternative use for the property. Naji said she knows of no property in Albuquerque where a sign is designated as a landmark. But because the National Register can designate an object and not just a property, she said precedent exists for doing so.

One should understand, however, getting such an ordinance enacted by a typical city commission may be a tough sell — particularly in the West, where property rights are sacrosanct. And after all, these sign acquisitions are perfectly legal transactions between two willing parties.

I asked Bill Thomas, chairman of the Route 66 Road Ahead Partnership, whether he had a comment about the sign issue. He replied:

I wish I could give you a simple, straight answer, Ron, but I can’t because the Neon Task Force established by the Route 66 Road Ahead Partnership is still working to finalize a set of policies/principles regarding neon signs.
At present, this Task Force has identified several problems it wishes to address, which are outlined beneath my signature. Once this set of problems is finalized, the Task Force will then identify what it believes are solutions/best practices regarding neon signs along the Mother Road.
From a personal perspective, I believe in working to maintain and restore Route 66 related neon signs in place, using authentic neon, when possible. This, however, is simply my own opinion – not an official statement of Road Ahead policy.
Again, I wish I could provide something more official for you.
FYI – Road Ahead Neon Task Force members currently include: Kaisa Barthuli, Ruth Keenoy, David Bricker [chair of the Road Ahead’s Preservation Working Group], and myself. We are working to expand membership in the Task Force.

Thomas then forwarded this. It’s substantive:

The first job of the Road Ahead’s Neon Task Force is to figure out what problems it needs to work to solve. Following is the set of problems the Road Ahead’s Neon Task Force has identified to date.
1. Location Problems
Substantive Elements of this Problem: There are options related to where neon signs are located after being restored:
— They can remain in place
— They can be moved away from their original location, but still remain on Route 66
— They can be moved off of Route 66, but still remain outside
— They can be moved inside a building; etc.
The problem is a lack of guiding principles to assist in making appropriate decisions regarding the location of restored neon signs.
Education/Awareness Side of this Problem: If guiding principles related to the location of restored neon signs are developed, a related problem is how best to make people aware of these guiding principles and how best to help people understand them.
2. Ownership Identity Problems
Substantive Elements of this Problem: Neon signage along Route 66 can be owned by a variety of individuals/entities, including: absentee landlords, limited liability companies, wary owners, etc.
It is often a problem identifying and tracking down the owner of a neon sign.
3. Preservation Solution Problems
Substantive Elements of this Problem: A variety of options exist for the restoration and preservation of neon signs. Methods can range from returning signs to their original look using authentic neon; to restoring them using LED lighting; to employing an adaptive reuse tactic that saves a sign, but alters it in the process, etc.
The lack of a set of principles to guide the proper restoration and preservation of neon signs is a problem.
Education/Awareness Side of this Problem: If guiding principles related to sign restoration options are developed, the problem of how best to make people aware of these guiding principles and how best to help people understand them need to be addressed.
4. Funding Problems
Substantive Elements of this Problem: Neon sign owners can ignore a sign’s restoration and maintenance needs because such work can be expensive and there are limited sources of funding available to help underwrite such costs. Even when sources of funding exist, their availability is often not well known. 
Some support has been made available in the past, but overall it is a problem that sources of funding to restore and/or maintain neon signs are limited.
Education/Awareness Side of this Problem: Work is needed to make people aware of sources of funding for neon sign restoration and maintenance, even if they are limited.
5. Zoning and Other Ordinance Problems
Substantive Elements of this Problem: Over time, zoning and related ordinances have become more restrictive. This has caused a problem in terms of where neon signs can be located and how they can be maintained.

That’s all I got for now. If you have a comment about the situation, it will be welcome as long as it’s not spam or libelous. And I promise I won’t delete the post. If it disappears, it’ll be because of periodic hosting problems that affect the entire website, not just one post.

UPDATE: Meier sent an email today to explain a few things. Here it is in part:

As stated in the forum, it was me that recommended taking down the forum to the Association leadership. I did so not to squash discussion, but for the reason that I thought the tone of the conversation was counterproductive and given that the general public visits our New Mexico 66 Facebook page, I judged that the general public would observe the discussion and be exposed to invective that I thought was not characteristic of the Route 66 community at large. […]
You are correct that I recognize sign removals must be judged on a case-by-case basis. There are a lot of variables, and one thing I recognize is that along Route 66 across the country, each seller will have reasons.  If a seller is experiencing financial hardship due to having a non-functioning business burdened by property taxes, or other hardship issues,  preservationists need to be sensitive to the seller’s situation. […]
Now, I do take issue with using the phrase “neon graveyard” for what should be obvious reasons.   
The issue of endorsing or not endorsing the Glorieta Station Museum complex is misunderstood. The simple facts are that all the facts are not in, the plans are evolving. For example, my discussions with the Garcias include the idea of the museum essentially being interim caretakers of certain signs. It should be understood that Garcia acquisitions were intended to be preemptive purchases to avoid the signs being absorbed into private collections out-of-state. Now that the pre-emptive purchases have been made, now what? Could a sensible protocol be put in place that allows the signs to be returned to the communities? The answer is yes. So, I am hopeful that in working with the Garcias, we arrive at a point where we can endorse the neon museum component of the larger Glorieta Museum complex. In my personal interactions with the Garcias, they want to do right for New Mexico. The issue evolving is how do we correctly manage the preemptive initiative to keep our signs in New Mexico.

(Image of one of the Club Cafe signs being removed in Santa Rosa, New Mexico, courtesy of Richard Delgado)