On the evening of Dec. 20 Clearlake Mayor Joyce Overton presided over a town hall meeting that was lively and well-attended, but dominated by misunderstandings and mistaken premises.

Although billed as “informational,” the presentation (by Ft Bragg developer Jim Burns with the assistance of a consultant from Rancho Mirage) consisted primarily of a sales pitch for tapping into the Clearlake Redevelopment Agency's remaining $7 million to subsidize the police department – even though that money is desperately needed to revitalize the community's economic base, and even though, as pointed out by former city councilman Roy Simons and former planning commissioner Rick Mayo, such use of RDA funding is highly questionable from a legal perspective.

The misunderstandings started with the capacity crowd, most of whom were wearing brand new “Support Clearlake Police” T-shirts and had apparently turned out on this blustery evening on the assumption that the meeting would revolve around a proposal to disband the police department and turn its functions over to the county sheriff – a notion that may or may not have merit, but was not on the agenda.

The presentation then continued the theme, starting with the delusion that Clearlake is Oakland (an error pounced upon by many of those present), and that a high tech combination of remotely controlled cameras and an interactive Web site could put an end to a supposed crime wave.

Underlying these assertions was the assumption that the police department is underfunded despite dedicated Measure P sales tax support, a generous budget that consumes more than half of all municipal expenditures, high salaries for top officers and abundant overtime payments.

Most basic of all, the argument rested on the fundamentally flawed premise that because economic deprivation tends to be associated with a comparatively high crime rate it therefore follows that reducing criminal activities will result in prosperity, and consequent attainment of redevelopment agency core objectives of reduced blight and increased property taxes. This flight of logical fancy precisely reverses the actual chain of causation.

It might help to draw a lesson from the ecological concept of “limiting factors,” which examines an impoverished habitat to determine just which element is most lacking.

For example, if birds are scarce because of a shortage of nesting places, there's no point in increasing the food supply; if forage is unavailable, providing extra water won't help a depressed population rebound.

To improve the prospects for a given species, it's necessary to determine the specific limiting factor which prevents it from thriving, and to concentrate resources and efforts on expanding that limitation.

As Clearlake's residents have pointed out over and over again, the single element that hinders prosperity the most is antiquated, dilapidated or nonexistent infrastructure – dirt roads, potholes, lack of streetlights and sidewalks, inadequate parking, etc.

This impairment is particularly devastating in the Lakeshore Drive business district, where it is impeding the development of the visitor-based economy that offers the city's best chance for a brighter future.

In Clearlake, infrastructure is the limiting factor, and improving infrastructure is by far the most appropriate use of the redevelopment agency's precious resources.

Local voters reaffirmed this message resoundingly in the Nov. 2 city council election, and are surely expecting the newly formed council to act upon it.

Victoria Brandon lives in Lower Lake, Calif.