SMA Seperate Rate Public Forum Q and A
6.30pm January 31, 2011 Masonic Hall Semaphore Road
First Speaker: Jo Hemmings, SMA Chairperson and proprietor of SOS Shoes on Semaphore
SMA background: In the last 4 years the SMA has received a grant from Portenf for 50k each year in order to fund all of the following: Employment of a part time coordinator, all marketing, website creation and maintenance, Street Fair and events, etc. Council informed SMA that funding will cease in July 2011. SMA undertook research to find systems of self funding that would work in our area. Levy stands out as a system that brings all businesses together. SMA sent out packages to all owners for information and with the intent that all would get involved in the discussion by filling out surveys. Surveys only will be viewed by 2 people, so are confidential and secure. Cath Duncan is a professional facilitator who has been asked to lead proceedings.
Second Speaker: Cath Duncan, professional facilitator and former Chair of PACC
A levy for a second rate is only enforceable by council and that is not the aim or purpose of SMA for this forum. It is a forum of information sharing and discussion. There are concerns about the role of the SMA, presentation to outline intentions of SMA through Strategic Plan, Values and Goals, Priorities. Presentation follows:
Informal written Pros and Cons group participation for comparison and information
Third Speaker: Tricia Flowers, SMA Coordinator
Trica follows her presentation outlining specific information about what the rates mean in detail for business and property owners of Semaphore road. A concern is that SMA has not been able to achieve enough to date?
Q: Why aren’t we discussing a Business registration fee instead of a levy? It is a different model but all businesses would pay the same. The Levy requiring a percent of payment based of block may be irrelevant. Fairness based on size is a big concern.
A: Thanked for the comment and encouraged to fill out survey to put idea of business registration fee forward as another approach.
Marketing examples provided and also mentions of Street Fair, but emphasis that this funding is not about funding one day or just Marketing for Semaphore road.
Q: Why is the brand about Semaphore and not Semaphore Road. Semaphore is a large area.
A: SMA has sought to be inclusive and encompasses surrounding businesses as well that are off the road.
Short Break
Business Example by Jo Hemmings:
Levy system benefits her small business. She pays for advertising at approx. $1830 pa for both Specific and general advertising. With Levy she would pay $560 in year 1 and $850 by year 3. Levy would replace potentially $1400of general advertising for her shop. Her shop is one example only and shows a marketing benefit.
Question and Answer
Q: Against Levy, states that levy would have to be passed down to tenants. If the council rates increase, how much does that increase the levy and how much total would be gathered? What happens to the rest of the money collected? Does SMA agree to fully disclose all communications including the negative about the Levy?
A: SMA has been functioning on 50k which has not been enough to do what is needed or expected. Levy funds collected are all streamed via council to the SMA, which will disclose all uses of funds. SMA will fully disclose communications positive and negative.
Q: Will SMA provide all communications in writing of the information they will send to council regarding this forum and also financials?
A: Yes, SMA can provide copies in writing to all regarding communications with council and also financial statements. Postage and mailing is expensive and more of a burden financially, SMA requests email addresses to communicate and also will post information on the website.
Q: Was it fair to assume that all who did not fill out survey agreed with the Levy?
A:The SMA needed to have an answer from all the owners/proprietors on this issue. In the past the SMA did not receive feedback and Council made it clear that the SMA would have to have clear feedback to proceed.
Q: What happens to the levy if council increases rates each year, by whose authority will levy change? Is there an “escape clause”?
A: Proposal would last only 3 yrs. Would have to be revisited and discussed or changed at AGM with council or by changing business plan. Council don’t get any of the money, not in their interest to change or increase. Proposal requires trader/owner discussion and participation
Q: (statement) Against the levy, but council the problem for having dropped Semaphore, and Council should be lobbied by the SMA/Traders to continue to support the road and fix over riding issues with parking, etc. Calls for traders to rally together against Council, not the SMA
Q: Why isn’t there a council representative here?
A: Helen and Bruce are present, but they are our elected reps in council who fight for Semaphore. Council members were invited to the forum by the SMA but declined to attend.
Q: What will the levy do for the East end? The far east end of the road is a mess structurally and there are much fewer businesses which are not benefitted by the SMA proposals, so why should they have to pay the levy? Why did council stop funding?
A: The SMA wishes to as Council for more involvement, to work for more results on the street. Funding originally only intended to be short term.
Q: Everyone is doing it tough, and parking is very difficult for every trader. However, this trader supports the levy in some form, just not unconditionally. There needs to be transparency. The SMA is doing a great job with very limited budget. With time and resources, the SMA could achieve great things for the road. If there is no investment via the traders, all the effort along the whole street could be lost. Supports fine tuning the amounts contributed. What happens to Street Fair if there is no levy and no council funding?
A: Using base level grant figures, Street Fair would fall upon all the traders to do all the volunteer hours done by the SMA subcommittee’s and there would not be funding for coordinator.
Q: How many people support this proposal? Because the sending of a letter that demands a response is unethical in this trader’s opinion.
A: Again, it was essential that SMA got a response from traders, the SMA planned to follow up directly with traders who did not send in any reply to make sure what their opinions were about the proposal. This was not a system that was going forward, this was the first step in getting responses from traders about a particular proposal.
Q: Parking is a disaster, why isn’t something being done? Why isn’t council asking the traders what they need in terms of parking and services?
A: In the last 18 months, the SMA has put forth 2 separate proposals for parking solutions to council. All ideas including one’s for use of vacant land on semaphore have been taken to council.
Q: Why hasn’t council done anything about parking?
A: This levy won’t be money going to council for them to use to fix Semaphore issues. This money will go through council only and be entirely to fund the SMA
Q: Why does this levy have to go through council?
A: It is the only way to make it mandatory and enforce payment.
Q: The traders need a body to lobby council but not a levy, as that is only money and not a solution to the problems on the road. The fair may promote the street but most traders lose money on that day.
A: The levy would be used to fund a variety of different projects for the variety of needs on the street. Marketing and street fair are only small components of the many projects the SMA would use the funding for. The levy is an opportunity for stability and to move the street forward with projects that include solutions for parking etc. not just marketing.
Q: If a trader has two premises but only one is the business, will they be hit twice with the levy? That can’t be fair, any rate expense increase would be untenable and there should be a flat rate.
A: Each property is rated differently, but the levy is based on the business with a return only.
Q: What is the result of this forum if 90% of the traders are against a levy, where is a plan for parking? Why would the SMA send a letter asking for money first without providing any results?
A: The SMA is not asking for money. There are steps to follow for a consultation and this was the first step. Feedback from all the traders was urgent to move the entire process forward.
Speakers: Cath Duncan /Tricia Flowers
· The SMA is seeking feedback because this is a requirement of council
· After this meeting we’ll be speaking to those traders who haven’t already provided feedback
· Our response to council will go on website
· Traders will have access to SMA members to discuss further, traders may wish to become a member and/or run for committee at next AGM
· Conversation doesn’t stop tonight! Get involved and be engaged in the process.
· Reminded the audience that the proposed levy would be paid to /administered by council but would be returned to the SMA to apply.
· The SMA has tried to engage – we want the traders to commit to the process, want to move forward
Further statements from attendees:
· The SMA should send a letter to traders requesting their “yes/no” answer - whether they agree with levy
· No one will want to be a member of SMA after we have to pay council levy
· The council will take their administration fees out of the levy before any of it comes back to Semaphore
· Asked why the levy had to be paid through Council – why not paid direct to SMA?
Final Speakers: Cath Duncan / Jo Hemmings -
· Explained that the SMA does not have the authority to mandate that traders pay a levy. The only way the SMA can affect a compulsory levy system is to do it via the council.
· The SMA will take the feedback we receive and collate it to provide to council
|
