If the state Housing and Community Development department approves the request authorizing the agency to pursue the amendment, it would extend the plan's implementation period by 10 years.
As the plan currently stands, it is due to expire on Aug. 8, 2031, 41 years from the effective date of the original ordinance that approved the plan, according to city documents.
City Administrator Dale Neiman told the council Thursday that he wanted to file the request early in the process before the city spends a substantial amount of money on the amendment process. Neiman said he doesn't anticipate any problems getting approval.
City Councilman Roy Simons said he's been told that extending the plan will bring another $14 million into the city's economy, but Simons said in the past 18 years the only projects redevelopment has brought to the city were the new city hall and the senior center.
“What happened to all those millions of dollars?” he asked. “They're gone and we've got nothing to show for it.”
Simons suggested another 10 years would likely only bring more low income housing, and he suggested the city move on without redevelopment and figure out how to make a living for itself.
City resident Rick Mayo said the public doesn't seem enthusiastic about redevelopment because they haven't seen any results.
Mayor Chuck Leonard said Simons and Mayo were right, that redevelopment hasn't done a lot of things that it should. “That's not news to anybody.”
However, Leonard insisted, “We have a future. I don't think this city is going down the drain.”
Leonard said the city is going to be a success, but it can't attract investment by emphasizing failure. “We can't just sit and not do anything.”
Simons wanted to get started on a curb, sidewalk and gutter project along Lakeshore Drive, but fellow Councilman Curt Giambruno said the Lakeshore Drive project has been tried and it's failed. “Lakeshore drive has been bandied around for 15 years that I'm aware of.”
Council member Joyce Overton said she doesn't think anyone put any effort into Lakeshore Drive previously.
She said if the city doesn't do anything with Lakeshore Drive and focuses redevelopment efforts on Highway 53, “we will have a ghost town here.”
Overton said she was all for extending the redevelopment plan, but added, “We need a goal.”
Neiman said the city has been in negotiations for two years with a developer for the airport property on Highway 53.
“Right now we have a viable project, we're just working out the final details,” said Neiman, noting that the project will bring to the city a significant amount of sales tax revenues.
Overton said the city heard the same promises when Wal-Mart came into town. “We ended up with one store to shop at,” she said.
Without work on Lakeshore Drive, the businesses there will die, Overton said, pointing out that the shopping center in that area already is dying at the same time as the city is talking about building a new center.
Neiman responded, “Curbs, gutters and sidewalks, that's not going to generate any new tax increment revenues of any significance.”
Simons said he and a group of other concerned citizens are now trying to do something about Lakeshore Drive, which he said is a safety concern.
City resident Estella Creel said it's taken 13 years for the businesses in the city to build back up due to Wal-Mart, and Lakeshore Drive deserved attention.
“That is your city, that is your downtown area, that is where your main emphasis should be right now,” she said.
The council voted to seek the state's approval on moving forward with the amendment before discussing and approving the grand jury report response city staff had crafted.
One of the main issues the grand jury raised with Clearlake was a proposal that council members give up their $300 per month pay and the full health, vision and dental benefits that they receive.
Regarding the health insurance, Neiman told the council, “It's perfectly legal for you to have it.”
He said city Finance Director Michael Vivrette wrote most of the three-page response's financial aspects, most of which had to do with budgeting corrections.
Chief Allan McClain wrote the police responses, which included informing the grand jury that an asset forfeiture manual and policies the grand jury proposed already have been in place for at least two years.
McClain also noted that the city disagrees with the grand jury's recommendation that the city's temporary holding facility add questions concerning mental health issues to intake classification form. He said the intake procedures meet state law requirements.
Creel questioned council members about why they were taking the benefits.
“If I'm going to do all of this work I'm going to get paid for it,” said Leonard, noting that “$300 a month doesn't amount to anything.”
Vivrette said it currently costs the city about $1,500 a month per council member to cover the vision, dental and health benefits.
“That's the going price for a good city council person,” said Leonard, explaining that the benefits aren't new.
Simons told city staff he can be taken off the insurance because he doesn't use it.
Overton pointed out that the council discussed the benefits during the city's budget hearings earlier this summer.
E-mail Elizabeth Larson at
How to resolve AdBlock issue? 
