Council adopts BID policy

Gosford Council has adopted its draft Business District Improvement policy.

Council resolved at its meeting on July 6, to adopt the recommendations of the director of environment and planning to include key performance indicators be negotiated on a case-by-case basis, BID associations must be "grass roots driven" and be formed independently of council by local property owners and businesses.

Council considered submissions made during the public exhibition period that finished on June 5.

Both the Peninsula Chamber of Commerce and the NSW Business Chamber made submissions, according to a council staff report.

"The Peninsula Chamber is concerned there is little prospect of a special rate levy for a BID being successful (given the requirement for widespread support for its introduction), and that therefore the allocation of seed funding may not represent value for money unless council is prepared to continue funding from recurrent budget in succeeding years.

"The chamber further argues that 75 per cent of the owners of commercial properties should be members of the incorporated group (the BID association) at the time seed funding is granted so as to ensure there is a reasonable prospect of sustainable funding being achieved.

"Council is not in a position to and will not provide ongoing funding out of recurrent budget sources.

"The purpose of seed funding is to enable the BID association to develop a program, to build support for the BID and to explore sustainable sources of funding.

"While it is clearly desirable to have as broad support as possible from the start, it may not be practical to set a minimum of 75 per cent support."

In addition, the Peninsula Chamber was concerned that BID programs would impact on council's obligations to deliver services and reduce funding commitments in its recurrent budget.

Council report stated that the intention of the BID policy was not to see a reduction in council services.

The NSW Business Chamber also raised a similar point expressing its concern over allocating seed funding from the Special Tourism and Business Development Levy since all businesses in a defined area would be tourism related.

In response to the NSW chamber's concerns, council stated: "BIDs are not limited to tourism related businesses; any business and commercial property owner within the BID footprint should be eligible to join the BID association.

"However, in some centres and villages, tourism is a key economic activity, and the evidence is that increased tourist activity has flow-on effects through the whole regional economy."

The NSW Business Chamber also argued that chambers of commerce should be eligible for seed funding since they have an existing base of membership and support.

However, council stated that Business Improvement Districts were "single-mindedly focussed" on improving business conditions in their commercial district and were directly answerable to the commercial property owners and businesses in that district, unlike chambers that held a multi-faceted function and role.

"Chambers provide a variety of functions outside this focus, and are also not necessarily restricted to a rigid common geographic footprint," the council report stated.

"The NSW Business Chamber, for example, offers services including training, industrial relations, analysis of state and federal government budgets, OH&S, and lobbies government of business issues."

The Peninsula Chamber of Commerce also argued that the draft policy excluded some commercial precincts in the area, however the report stated that smaller centres were not identified in the Central Coast Regional Strategy as significant centres and it was unlikely these areas would be viable as BIDs.

Three submissions highlighted the concern that insufficient consultation was given on the draft policy, while the Peninsula Chamber recommended council hold a meeting with key business groups and organisations to address issues of concern.

Council stated that it had consulted with the Peninsula Chamber in late 2008 over the Gosford BID and a citywide policy but no agreement was reached.

"The consultation with the Peninsula chamber did not result in complete agreement on a potential BID policy, principally in relation to sources of ongoing funding and geographic coverage," a council report stated.

"The evidence from successful BIDs elsewhere did not support the chamber's position.

"It was decided at that time not to proceed with a citywide BID policy.

"However, given the approach from a group of businesses at Ettalong Beach, it was considered appropriate to place on exhibition the draft policy developed at that time following previous consultation."

Council agenda ENV.37, 6 Jul 2010