|
Clearlake City Council’s obstinate stance to move ahead with a new shopping mall across from Wal-mart, featuring Lowe's hardware as an anchor client, demonstrates to what extent the council has written off the merchants and taxpayers of Clearlake.
They say this proposal will help the city by bringing in sales tax dollars. This belief that big business always equals big bucks is simple-minded and adolescent (it acknowledges only income and denies the cost spent to get there).
For instance, the council wants to invest $7 million of the city’s own money to subsidize the development, which means the city would pay a percent of every wrench or hammer bought at the new store. Or your fast food might cost a dollar less because the city helped pay the mall tenants’ rent. That is not free market.
In the second place, the mitigated negative declaration report by the Sierra Club, including data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and sales projections by Lowe's itself, shows that Lowe's expects to take over an existing market – a market that is already 100-percent serviced – eating away two-thirds of the profits of already established businesses, many of whom will go out of business. The study concludes: “there is virtually no market support whatsoever for a new major home improvement business.”
Follow the logic. Clearlake customers already have all the hardware they need. And who in surrounding communities will drive to Clearlake to shop at Lowe's? No one. Why not provide something not currently available like a Macy’s, Sears, Penney's, Best Buy or Ikea? My favorite would be a Big 5 to enhance vacationing.
The stores mentioned above might also encourage shopping in the older sections of Clearlake. Imagine what $2 million worth of sidewalks, a few paint jobs and a trolley would do for Lakeshore Drive! This could be a thriving tourist area of confections, crafts, and customized products that would draw out-of-towners to Lake County.
Clearlake should invest redevelopment funds to fix walkways on Lakeshore and repair the potholed side streets that lower property values for everyone in the area. As for new construction, city council members should not bribe new business, but let market forces govern. If developers want a mall – let them pay for it. Odds are we’d get a better anchor store … would Lowe's come to a saturated market if it weren’t being paid millions to do so?
Keep in mind that “redevelopment” (as in the redevelopment money the city wants to give away) means to improve already existing neighborhoods … not pioneer new areas that cause traffic, environmental and economic problems.
Economically, individual employees will suffer. Lowes propose's three times as many part-time jobs as it does full time – 131 to 44. Instead of organizing full-time employees into split shifts, Lowe's will keep everyone unpredictably scheduled, underpaid and without adequate benefits.
I’m hoping that local businesses get together and hire a lawyer to investigate suing the city for conflict of interest, favoritism and misappropriation of funds.
Three of the five council members live in the area that is projected to have higher property values near a new shopping mall. At the Jan. 14 council meeting, these three members drew cards to see which one would pretend they didn’t have a conflict of interest so that a quorum could vote for the shopping center.
As for favoritism, how far back did the city have the property and redevelopment funds available, but failed to make this known? The city council did not offer redevelopment money to Mendo Mill when the company invested millions in expansion and complied with paying for developments properly belonging to the city, like improving the street. It is as if the city used Mendo Mill as a guinea pig, building a clientele that could be offered to Lowe's on a silver platter.
And is it not misappropriation of funds to bullheadedly give the new enterprise money when the council has been warned by the impact report that vacancies and blight will surely result in other areas of Clearlake? And that many existing businesses will go under?
Council members, three of five of you have a conflict of interest. Before you are sued and cost the taxpayers of Clearlake a bundle, back out and save face.
Janis Paris lives in Clearlake Oaks.
Trackback(0)
 |
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed
I also agree that downtown Clearlake needs to be rehabed.
Elections are coming. People need to understand the tea party movement is about getting the elected public servants that do not listen to the majority of the people out of office.
If the majority of people feel the same way about lowes than change the politicians out. Someone get out there in Clearlake and say I am running against Lowes and see if you win.
Come on, lets do it the right way and not depend on these special interest groups like the developer or Sierra Club to dictate things we do not want done.