I am currently serving as a member of the Advisory Committee to the Clearlake Redevelopment Agency.

I must emphasize at the outset that I am not addressing the issue of the redevelopment plan amendment in my capacity as a member of the advisory committee. The advisory committee has taken no formal action with respect to the plan amendment. I am simply addressing it in my capacity as a concerned member of the public who is, hopefully, somewhat better informed than the average citizen with respect to the issues involved with the plan amendment.

The only argument in opposition to the plan amendment, to my knowledge, is that the existing plan has failed to accomplish major initiatives during its prior 20 years of existence.

Based on my review of the redevelopment agency’s history and current affairs I share in this criticism, to a degree.

I have previously presented the board with my view that the current proposal to expend a sum potentially in excess of $7 million in borrowed redevelopment project funds to subsidize the Lowe’s project at the airport site is extremely ill-advised, especially because such expenditure is likely to preclude any other redevelopment projects of any.

I continue to urge the council to exercise any and every possible opportunity to reconsider and reduce or eliminate this proposed expenditure.

In my view, a substantial portion of the redevelopment project funds should be redirected to a public benefit project that will directly benefit and enhance the Clear Lake waterfront area that ought to serve as the town center. A plan to develop the waterfront was the central recommendation of the Clearlake Vision Task Force (a volunteer body on which I also served).

However, I disagree with claims to the effect that “nothing has been accomplished” by redevelopment in Clearlake.

Such sweeping statements overlook significant and lasting accomplishments, particularly, the present city hall complex, and the acquisition of some prime real estate parcels, such as Highlands Park and the Austin property, and even the airport property (I am still hopeful that the development of this property will ultimately be modified to result in a transaction that is not a money-losing proposition for the Agency) that are sound longterm investments by the agency in my view, given proper stewardship.

I do not concur with the view that past failures or mistakes in judgment inevitably condemn the city of Clearlake and its redevelopment agency to a similarly blighted future.

There is reason to hope that with an improving economy, real progress will come to the city of Clearlake and that an extended community redevelopment plan can be a part of the success story.

We need the plan amendment in place in order to have the opportunity for this to occur. The plan amendment costs relatively little, and provides a substantial potential upside for the community in terms of the ability to finance needed projects.

For these reasons, I urge the Clearlake City Council to adopt the plan amendment.

Robert R. Riggs lives in Clearlake.